AzTrials
AzTrials

MalariaNCT00336388

Use of Rapid Diagnostic Tests for Malaria Case Management in Kenya

A study testing Paracheck Device in people with Malaria, run by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention at 1 site in Kenya.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) in the context of a newly implemented malaria case management guidelines using artemisinin-based combination therapy on the malaria prescribing practices of health care workers in Kenya. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 5 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Malaria
What is being tested?
Paracheck Device
Type of treatment
Medical device
How many people
3,600 participants
Where
1 siteKenya
Study dates
Jul 2006to Sep 2006
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 5 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Child, Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • All ill persons >5 years old attending health facilities in Bondo and Kericho Districts, Kenya

Who cannot join

None listed.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Kenya1 site
  • Bondo and Kericho District Health Facilities

    Kisumu, Nyanza Province

Other trials in Kenya

About this study

Official title: Introduction of Malaria Rapid Diagnostic Tests, Artemisinin-based Combination Therapy, and Malaria Case Management Guidelines at Health Facilities in Kenya: A Cluster Randomized Trial to Evaluate Adherence and Acceptance by Health Care Workers, Impact on Antimalarial Prescription Practices, and Patient Perceptions

The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) in the context of a newly implemented malaria case management guidelines using artemisinin-based combination therapy on the malaria prescribing practices of health care workers in Kenya.

Read the detailed description

Malaria causes an estimated 300-500 million infections and over 1 million deaths per year, predominantly in children <5 years old in sub-Saharan Africa. In most parts of malaria endemic sub-Saharan Africa, clinical or presumptive diagnosis, often based on the presence of fever, is the primary means of diagnosing malaria. Clinical diagnosis is sensitive but poorly specific, leading to substantial over-diagnosis. Personnel and supplies to perform microscopic examination of blood smears of persons suspected of having malaria (the current gold standard for diagnosis of malaria) are not available at most health facilities. Over-diagnosis and subsequent over-treatment of patients as a result of clinical diagnosis can lead to increased drug pressure that may facilitate the development of drug resistance in P. falciparum, the malaria parasite responsible for most associated morbidity and mortality in sub-Saharan Africa. This may also increase costs, particularly with the shift from inexpensive antimalarials (such as chloroquine and sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine) to newer, more expensive artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) (such as artemether plus lumefantrine, also known as Coartem®). Over-diagnosis also exposes patients to the unnecessary risk of adverse drug events and, among some patients, leaves the real cause of illness untreated.

Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) use immunochromatographic methods to detect antigens derived from malaria parasites in lysed blood. RDTs have generally been reported to achieve field sensitivities and specificities of >90% in the detection of Plasmodium falciparum at densities above 100 parasites/μL blood. RDTs are easy to use and interpret, do not require electricity or special equipment, and can be shipped and stored at ambient conditions.

We hypothesize the use of RDTs should improve malaria diagnosis compared to the use of clinical diagnosis alone. Having access to a test that quickly confirms or excludes the presence of malaria parasites will enable the health care worker (HCW) to determine whether antimalarials are appropriate. If test results are used in this manner, the number of unneeded antimalarial prescriptions should diminish, thus reducing the potential for the development of drug resistance. However, whether and how HCWs will actually use RDT results is unknown. Prior research has demonstrated that results of microscopy are often ignored, and that HCWs often rely on their clinical impressions to diagnose malaria and prescribe treatment.

This study seeks to the describe behaviors and perceptions associated with the use of RDTs for diagnosis of malaria among patients >5 years of age at health facilities in Bondo and Kericho Districts of Kenya, areas of low and high malaria transmission. The specific objectives are:

  1. To evaluate the impact of RDTs introduced in the context of newly implemented malaria case management guidelines using ACTs compared to new malaria case management guidelines using ACTs and clinical diagnosis on malaria diagnosis and prescribing practices by HCWs caring for patients >5 years of age.
  2. To evaluate HCW performance and adherence to the newly implemented guidelines and use of RDTs.
  3. To analyze the costs to a health facility of treating a patient with a fever with two management strategies (RDTs + ACTs compared to clinical diagnosis + ACTs) if treatment guidelines are correctly followed and based on actual HCW adherence to the new guidelines.
  4. To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of RDTs in the hands of HCWs at health facilities in Kenya compared to expert microscopy and compared to RDTs performance in hands of trained study laboratory technicians.
  5. To evaluate factors influencing the acceptability of RDTs by HCWs.
  6. To evaluate factors influencing the acceptability of RDTs by patients.
  7. To evaluate the programmatic implications of RDT introduction.

This trial will generate important public health information regarding the use of RDTs in malaria case management. The study findings will be used to guide provider training, the development of community Information, Education and Communication strategies, and other interventions. These data will be valuable to other countries in sub-Saharan Africa preparing for the introduction of new drug treatment policies and considering methods to improve malaria diagnosis.

Conditions
Malaria
Being tested
Paracheck Device
Keywords
Malaria
Medical subject headings
Malaria

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Paracheck DeviceDevice

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Sensitivity and specificity of malaria diagnosis 6 weeks after the introduction of malaria rapid diagnostic tests

Secondary outcomes (4)
  1. Adherence to malaria case management guidelines by health care workers

  2. Cost effectiveness of malaria case management guidelines using malaria rapid diagnostic tests

  3. Acceptability of malaria rapid diagnostic tests to health care workers

  4. Acceptability of malaria rapid diagnostic tests to patients

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted13 Jun 2006 (estimated)
  2. Study startJul 2006
  3. Primary completionSep 2006
  4. Study completionSep 2006

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Diagnosis
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
3,600 participants
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT00336388
Sponsor's protocol ID
CDC-NCID-4701
Status last verified
Mar 2010
First submitted
10 Jun 2006
Last updated
9 Mar 2010
Results posted
No

Publications

  • Moody A. Rapid diagnostic tests for malaria parasites. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2002 Jan;15(1):66-78. doi: 10.1128/CMR.15.1.66-78.2002.

    PubMed 11781267

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Paracheck Device in people with Malaria, run by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention at 1 site in Kenya.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 0 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 9 Mar 2010. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Kenya. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Sensitivity and specificity of malaria diagnosis 6 weeks after the introduction of malaria rapid diagnostic tests. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00336388, which also lists 1 linked publication.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 9 Mar 2010.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in