| Summary: | <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Applying the switch from presumptive treatment of malaria to new policies of anti-malarial prescriptions restricted to parasitologically-confirmed cases is a still unsolved challenge. Pragmatic studies can provide data on consequences of such a switch. In order to assess whether restricting anti-malarials to rapid diagnostic test (RDT)-confirmed cases in children of between five and 15 years of age is consistent with an adequate management of fevers, a school-based study was performed in Allada, Benin.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Children in the index group (with fever and a negative RDT) and the matched control group (without fever and a negative RDT) were not prescribed anti-malarials and actively followed-up during 14 days. Blood smears were collected at each assessment. Self-medication with chloroquine and quinine was assessed with blood spots. Malaria attacks during the follow-up were defined by persistent or recurrent fever concomitant to a positive malaria test.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>484 children were followed-up (242 in each group). At day 3, fever had disappeared in 94% of children from the index group. The incidence of malaria was similar (five cases in the index group and seven cases in the control group) between groups. Self-medication with chloroquine and quinine in this cohort was uncommon.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Applying a policy of restricting anti-malarials to RDT-confirmed cases is consistent with an adequate management of fevers in this population. Further studies on the management of fever in younger children are of upmost importance.</p>
|
|---|
