A Phase 4 interventional study of Rapid diagnostic test and Microscopy in Malaria and Bacterial Infections, sponsored by London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. Completed at 1 site in Ghana. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2017-01-12.
Sponsored by London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine · Phase 4, Interventional, and Diagnostic
BACKGROUND There is good evidence from multiple sites, including in Ghana, that malaria is massively over-diagnosed. It could be argued that where microscopy is not available it can be introduced, and elsewhere it can be improved, but high-quality microscopy is not easy to sustain. If substantial over-diagnosis continues in Ghana in an era where an ACT is now the first-line treatment, it will lead to the intervention being substantially more expensive due to over-prescription than it should be, potentially rendering it unsustainable.
The introduction of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) has the potential to provide a way of more accurately directing ACTs to those that need them and may also encourage clinicians to consider alternative diagnoses in test-negative cases, reducing the risk of missing treatable, and potentially fatal, alternative causes of febrile illness. RDTs to direct ACT use also have the possibility to be cost-effective, but only if clinicians prescribe logically on the basis of test results.
Initial data from Tanzania suggests that providing RDTs in the context of formal healthcare settings may have little impact on clinician behaviour, but the health system in Ghana is very different, and both clinician and patient beliefs about malaria are likely to be different.
Additionally, this has not been properly tested in areas with little or no access to microscopy, nor where ACTs are currently available, which may influence clinician behaviour. Many believe this is the most useful setting for RDTs, and may limit over-prescription of anti-malarials but there are no data to support this belief, nor are there data on the cost-effectiveness of this approach. This trial aims to test the impact of RDT use on clinician behaviour directly by means of a randomised trial.
OBJECTIVES Principal Objective To determine by means of a randomized trial the impact of the introduction of Rapid Diagnostic Tests (RDTs) on the appropriate prescription of anti-malarials in the two public healthcare settings found in Ghana.
Specifically,
In both cases RDT is being compared to the standard of care in the health centre.
METHODS The study will be carried out in the Dangme West District in the southern part of Ghana. It will be an individually randomized controlled trial
In both settings data will be collected for the cost-effectiveness studies.
1,299 studies on the registry are indexed under Malaria; 86 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 7,263 is above the median of 220 across 1,027 interventional studies indexed under Malaria.
Browse Malaria studies →London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine is the lead sponsor of 296 studies on the registry; 15 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Exclusion Criteria:
Microscopy for diagnosis of malaria
Procedure: Microscopy
Clinical diagnosis for malaria
Procedure: Clinical diagnosis for malaria
Rapid Diagnostic Test for Malaria
Procedure: Rapid diagnostic test
Introduction of rapid diagnostic test for malaria
Microscopy for diagnosis of malaria
The use of Clinical diagnosis for the diagnosis of malaria
The proportion of RDT test-negative patients who are prescribed an antimalarial in two settings: where there is microscopy and where diagnosis is on clinical basis
Time frame: Two years
Proportion of RDT test-positive patients who were not prescribed an antimalarial in both settings
Time frame: Two years
Proportion of clinic microscopy slide-negative patients who were prescribed an anti-malarial in the setting with microscopy available
Time frame: Two years
Proportion of patients receiving additional or alternative treatments to antimalarials following a negative RDT result and which treatments these are.
Time frame: Two years
This study is completed, as verified in Jan 2017. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine