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.
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
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:
- 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.
- To evaluate HCW performance and adherence to the newly implemented guidelines and use of RDTs.
- 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.
- 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.
- To evaluate factors influencing the acceptability of RDTs by HCWs.
- To evaluate factors influencing the acceptability of RDTs by patients.
- 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.
Sensitivity and specificity of malaria diagnosis 6 weeks after the introduction of malaria rapid diagnostic tests
Secondary outcomes (4)
Adherence to malaria case management guidelines by health care workers
Cost effectiveness of malaria case management guidelines using malaria rapid diagnostic tests
Acceptability of malaria rapid diagnostic tests to health care workers
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.
- First posted13 Jun 2006 (estimated)
- Study startJul 2006
- Primary completionSep 2006
- Study completionSep 2006
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for MalariaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
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
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
- Sponsor type
- US federal agency
- Collaborators
- Kenya Medical Research Institute, Kenya Division of Malaria Control, KEMRI-Wellcome Trust Collaborative Research Program
- Investigators
- Mary Hamel, MD, Principal investigator, Centers for Disease Control and PreventionAlexandre Macedo De Oliveira, MD, Principal investigator, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
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
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 9 Mar 2010. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- 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
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00336388
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CDC-NCID-4701
- Conditions
- Malaria
- Keywords
- Malaria
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 3,600 participants
- Lead sponsor
- Centers for Disease Control and PreventionUS federal agency
- Collaborators
- Kenya Medical Research Institute, Kenya Division of Malaria Control, KEMRI-Wellcome Trust Collaborative Research Program
- Study start
- Jul 2006
- Primary completion
- Sep 2006 (actual)
- Study completion
- Sep 2006 (actual)
- First posted
- 13 Jun 2006 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
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.
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:
- 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.
- To evaluate HCW performance and adherence to the newly implemented guidelines and use of RDTs.
- 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.
- 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.
- To evaluate factors influencing the acceptability of RDTs by HCWs.
- To evaluate factors influencing the acceptability of RDTs by patients.
- 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.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 5 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- All ill persons >5 years old attending health facilities in Bondo and Kericho Districts, Kenya
Key exclusion criteria (0 listed)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Paracheck Device | Device | – |
Primary outcome
Sensitivity and specificity of malaria diagnosis 6 weeks after the introduction of malaria rapid diagnostic tests
4 secondary outcomes
Adherence to malaria case management guidelines by health care workers
Cost effectiveness of malaria case management guidelines using malaria rapid diagnostic tests
Acceptability of malaria rapid diagnostic tests to health care workers
Acceptability of malaria rapid diagnostic tests to patients
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 9 Mar 2010.
- Background: PubMed 11781267Moody 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.
Related trials for Malaria
Active, not recruitingObservational study
Trajectories and Mechanisms of Recovery From Malaria: An Observational Study
Malaria
Not yet recruiting
Positron Emission Tomography and Organ-Specific Changes in Participants Co-Enrolled in NIH Studies of Plasmodium Vivax Controlled Human Malaria Infection
Healthy Volunteer, Malaria
Recruiting
The Effects of Iron Treatment on Vaccine Immunogenicity in Kenyan Infants With Iron Deficiency
Iron Deficiencies
RecruitingObservational study
Host and Parasite Factors That Influence Susceptibility to Malaria Infection and Disease During Pregnancy and Early Childhood in Ouelessebougou and Bamako, Mali
Malaria
RecruitingPhase 1
Safety, Tolerability and Efficacy of PfSPZ-LARC2 Vaccine Against CHMI in Malaria-Naïve Adults
Malaria Falciparum
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Mary Hamel, MD principal investigator
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Alexandre Macedo De Oliveira, MD principal investigator
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
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.