Table 2.

Outcome of the campaigns with respect to ITN ownership coverage, by delivery and allocation strategy (N = 13,901)

Location and allocation strategy	% of HH with any net before campaign (95 % CI)	% of HH with any ITN on survey day (95 % CI)	% of HH with one ITN per two people (95 % CI)	% of population with access to an ITN within HH (95 % CI)
Fixed-point delivery, fixed allocation (two ITNs per household)
Kano State, Nigeria	13.2 (6.0–26.6)	69.3 (58.1–78.6)	30.1 (23.4–37.9)	43.9 (35.8–52.3)
Niger State, Nigeria	0.7 (0.3–1.7)	51.7 (40.3–62.9)	16.6 (12.4–21.8)	34.2 (25.9–43.7)
Nasarawa State, Nigeria	13.8 (9.8–19.2)	62.5 (55.1–69.5)	24.8 (20.3–29.9)	41.5 (35.8–47.5)
Ogun State, Nigeria	4.6 (2.7–7.6)	52.6 (42.0–62.9)	22.6 (15.9–30.7)	37.0 (28.2–46.7)
Anambra State, Nigeria	7.6 (5.2–10.8)	64.4 (56.9–71.3)	36.6 (31.0–42.6)	50.0 (43.2–56.8)
Sokoto State, Nigeria	7.2 (4.6–11.3)	64.0 (55.5–71.7)	30.6 (24.7–37.3)	49.0 (42.2–55.8)
Katsina State, Nigeria	3.5 (2.1–5.6)	73.8 (63.2–82.1)	36.5 (30.0–43.6)	56.2 (48.5–63.7)
Enugu State, Nigeria	4.1 (2.8–6.1)	72.3 (63.2–75.3)	35.3 (31.9–38.9)	54.6 (51.4–57.7)
Lagos State, Nigeria	5.9 (3.3–10.4)	46.3 (41.2–51.5)	17.8 (15.2–20.7)	32.2 (32.6–40.1)
Fixed-point delivery, fixed allocation (by household size, maximum three ITNs)
South Sudan	1.7 (0.8–3.6)	87.7 (76.6–93.9)	44.1 (36.2–52.4)	No dataa
Fixed-point delivery, universal coverage allocation (one ITN per two persons or one ITN per sleeping space)
Senegal	39.9 (35.0–45.1)	93.9 (90.3–96.2)	42.3 (37.0–47.8)	75.2 (69.7–80.1)
Uganda	39.8 (33.0–46.9)	91.7 (83.9–95.9)	69.9 (63.2–76.0)	81.3 (74.1–86.9)
House-to-house delivery, universal coverage allocation (one ITN per two persons or one ITN per sleeping space)
Ghana	12.0 (9.5–15.2)	91.2 (88.3–93.5)	51.2 (47.1–55.3)	74.5 (71.1–77.6)
Cross River State, Nigeria	11.3 (8.0–15.9)	61.6 (57.2–65.8)	24.2 (20.4–28.4)	45.9 (41.8–50.1)

CI confidence interval, HH household, ITN insecticide-treated net

^a No household roster data were collected