search
Back to results

Parasite-based Diagnosis for Malaria in Uganda: Feasibility and Cost-Effectiveness

Primary Purpose

Fever, Malaria

Status
Unknown status
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Uganda
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Field microscopy and Paracheck Pf®
Sponsored by
Makerere University
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional diagnostic trial for Fever focused on measuring Cost-effectiveness, Diagnosis, Treatment, Malaria

Eligibility Criteria

3 Months - undefined (Child, Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Suspected uncomplicated malaria infection
  • Consent to participate

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Pregnancy (policy recommends quinine for treatment of malaria in pregnancy)

Sites / Locations

  • Bushenyi and Iganga districts - Government Health Cetres level IIIRecruiting

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm 3

Arm Type

Other

Other

No Intervention

Arm Label

Field microscopy

Paracheck Pf® device

Presumptive diagnostic method

Arm Description

Field microscopy is the main method of malaria diagnosis

Paracheck Pf® device (Rapid Diagnostic Test) is the main method for malaria diagnosis

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

diagnostic test validity; unit cost per malaria case diagnosed and treated with Artemether-Lumefantrine; total savings associated with treatment of confirmed malaria cases; compliance with directives for use of rapid test or microscopy

Secondary Outcome Measures

unit cost of non-malaria febrile treatment; therapeutic behaviour in light of pressure to prescribe antimalarials

Full Information

First Posted
November 28, 2007
Last Updated
March 27, 2012
Sponsor
Makerere University
Collaborators
Department for International Development, United Kingdom
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT00565071
Brief Title
Parasite-based Diagnosis for Malaria in Uganda: Feasibility and Cost-Effectiveness
Official Title
Parasite-based Diagnosis for Malaria in Uganda: Feasibility and Cost-Effectiveness
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
March 2012
Overall Recruitment Status
Unknown status
Study Start Date
October 2006 (undefined)
Primary Completion Date
March 2012 (Anticipated)
Study Completion Date
December 2012 (Anticipated)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
Makerere University
Collaborators
Department for International Development, United Kingdom

4. Oversight

Data Monitoring Committee
Yes

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
The purpose of this study is to compare the cost-effectiveness of treating malaria based on three methods of diagnosis (rapid test, microscopy and presumptive diagnosis) among patients attending level three government health centres located in areas of low and high transmission intensities in Uganda. The study hypotheses are: in both low and high transmission areas, cost-effectiveness of malaria treatment with Artemether-Lumefantrine will be improved by the adoption of rapid diagnostic tests when compared with presumptive diagnosis or microscopy; and the difference between the cost-effectiveness of Artemether-Lumefantrine treatment following rapid diagnostic test or microscopy versus presumptive diagnosis will be greatest in low transmission areas.
Detailed Description
The development of drug resistance in malaria parasites lead the Uganda Ministry of Health (MoH) to change the first-line anti-malarial treatment from the cheap Chloroquine/Sulfadoxine-Pyrimethamine combination to a more expensive Artemether-Lumefantrine. The MoH recommends treatment of all fever cases as malaria within 24 hours of illness with first-line drug. Under this policy, patients who do not have malaria but present with febrile illness will receive Coartem® resulting in significant drug wastage. With the increased cost of first-line drugs, this wastage places a substantial and potentially remediable burden on the health budget. As such, there is a need to gauge whether more accurate malaria diagnosis through microscopy and/or rapid diagnostic tests, might improve the cost-effectiveness of the new treatment regimes. Specific objectives To assess the feasibility of rapid test and microscopy in diagnosis of malaria at health centre III. To compare the cost-effectiveness of treating malaria with Artemether- Lumefantrine based on microscopy, rapid test and presumptive diagnosis in different transmission intensities To assess whether introduction of malaria parasite-based diagnosis (rapid test or microscopy) at government Health Centre III improves the overall cost-effectiveness of outpatient management of febrile illness Sample size determination The sample size was determined using standard formula. Estimating the sensitivity of either test to be 90%, Zα =1.96 and after stratifying for age (<5 years and ≥5 years), the calculated sample is 272 per health centre. Therefore, the total number of patients for 6 health centres in two districts = 6 x 272 = 1632. Baseline: Baseline data was collected on the current malaria treatment practices; clinicians' view of malaria diagnosis; concerns towards the new treatment; and health centre staffing. Geographical locations of all visited government health centres was recorded using Germin etrex global positioning system (Germin International Inc., Olathe, USA). At six selected health centres, social and demographic data was collected from 613 patients. Implementation of intervention: The main intervention is comprised of three malaria diagnostic approaches: presumptive diagnosis, field microscopy and rapid test (Paracheck Pf® device - Orchid Biomedical Systems, Goa, India). Each of these approaches was randomly allocated to a health centre. The first-line drug used is Artemether/Lumefantrine (20mg/120mg) (Novartis, Switzerland). Consenting subjects are consecutively enrolled at the point when the attending clinician suspects that they have uncomplicated malaria. Where microscopy is the main diagnostic method, thick and thin blood smears are prepared per patient enrolled. Where rapid test is the main method, all patients are tested. One hundred patients per health centre are randomly selected to provide blood specimens for validation using expert microscopy and PCR as "gold standard." After enrolment, patients are systematically tracked until departure from the health centre. Patients are followed up on the seventh day of treatment to assess their clinical improvement. Those who fail to return on the scheduled date are traced from their homes on the eighth day. Follow-up activities include: documentation of drugs prescribed and or dispensed; clinically assess the patient's status in comparison to Day 0; perform further tests including PCR if the patient does not show improvement; pill counting of drugs remaining - if the patient has not completed the dose; documentation of reasons for not completing dose; and documentation if the patient bought the prescribed drugs that were out of stock on Day 0. Effectiveness is measured as the number of patients commencing treatment with Artemether/Lumefantrine. However, patients are followed up and effectiveness also measured on the 7th day of treatment indicated by their clinical improvement. The feasibility of the diagnostic methods is ongoing from the March 2010 to date.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Fever, Malaria
Keywords
Cost-effectiveness, Diagnosis, Treatment, Malaria

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Diagnostic
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
Non-Randomized
Enrollment
102087 (Anticipated)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Field microscopy
Arm Type
Other
Arm Description
Field microscopy is the main method of malaria diagnosis
Arm Title
Paracheck Pf® device
Arm Type
Other
Arm Description
Paracheck Pf® device (Rapid Diagnostic Test) is the main method for malaria diagnosis
Arm Title
Presumptive diagnostic method
Arm Type
No Intervention
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
Field microscopy and Paracheck Pf®
Intervention Description
Malaria diagnosis based on microscopy and or Paracheck Pf®. Artemether/Lumefantrine (20mg/120mg) is first-line drug in all arms
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
diagnostic test validity; unit cost per malaria case diagnosed and treated with Artemether-Lumefantrine; total savings associated with treatment of confirmed malaria cases; compliance with directives for use of rapid test or microscopy
Time Frame
18 months
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
unit cost of non-malaria febrile treatment; therapeutic behaviour in light of pressure to prescribe antimalarials
Time Frame
18 months

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
3 Months
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: Suspected uncomplicated malaria infection Consent to participate Exclusion Criteria: Pregnancy (policy recommends quinine for treatment of malaria in pregnancy)
Central Contact Person:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Vincent K. Batwala, MPH
Phone
+256 712 074706
Email
vbatwala@yahoo.com, vkbatwala@gmail.com
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Fred Nuwaha, MD, PhD
Phone
+256 782 518324
Email
nuwahaf@yahoo.co.uk
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Fred Nuwaha, MD, PhD
Organizational Affiliation
Department of Disease Control and Environmental Health, Makerere Universtiy School of Public Health
Official's Role
Study Chair
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Bushenyi and Iganga districts - Government Health Cetres level III
City
Bushenyi and Iganga
Country
Uganda
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Vincent K. Batwala, MPH
Phone
+256 712 074706
Email
vbatwala@yahoo.com
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Fred Nuwaha, MD, PhD
Phone
+256 782 518324
Email
nuwahaf@yahoo.co.uk

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Citations:
PubMed Identifier
22905781
Citation
Batwala V, Magnussen P, Mirembe J, Mulogo E, Nuwaha F. Timing of malaria messages for target audience on radio airwaves. Malar J. 2012 Aug 20;11:283. doi: 10.1186/1475-2875-11-283.
Results Reference
derived
PubMed Identifier
22183039
Citation
Batwala V, Magnussen P, Nuwaha F. Antibiotic use among patients with febrile illness in a low malaria endemicity setting in Uganda. Malar J. 2011 Dec 20;10:377. doi: 10.1186/1475-2875-10-377.
Results Reference
derived
PubMed Identifier
22182758
Citation
Batwala V, Magnussen P, Nuwaha F. Comparative feasibility of implementing rapid diagnostic test and microscopy for parasitological diagnosis of malaria in Uganda. Malar J. 2011 Dec 19;10:373. doi: 10.1186/1475-2875-10-373.
Results Reference
derived
PubMed Identifier
22182735
Citation
Batwala V, Magnussen P, Hansen KS, Nuwaha F. Cost-effectiveness of malaria microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests versus presumptive diagnosis: implications for malaria control in Uganda. Malar J. 2011 Dec 19;10:372. doi: 10.1186/1475-2875-10-372.
Results Reference
derived
PubMed Identifier
21126328
Citation
Batwala V, Magnussen P, Nuwaha F. Are rapid diagnostic tests more accurate in diagnosis of plasmodium falciparum malaria compared to microscopy at rural health centres? Malar J. 2010 Dec 2;9:349. doi: 10.1186/1475-2875-9-349.
Results Reference
derived
PubMed Identifier
24037867
Citation
Batwala V, Magnussen P, Nuwaha F. Challenges to implementation of artemisinin combination therapy policy in Uganda. Int Health. 2010 Dec;2(4):262-8. doi: 10.1016/j.inhe.2010.07.002.
Results Reference
derived

Learn more about this trial

Parasite-based Diagnosis for Malaria in Uganda: Feasibility and Cost-Effectiveness

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs