Can treatment of malaria be restricted to parasitologically confirmed malaria? A school-based study in Benin in children with and without fever

Abstract

Abstract Background 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. Methods 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. Results 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. Conclusions 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.