Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 170

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Reduction of anti-malarial consumption after rapid diagnostic tests implementation in Dar es Salaam: a before-after and cluster randomized controlled study

Open access
D'Acremont, Valérie, Kahama-Maro, Judith, Swai, Ndeniria, Mtasiwa, Deo, Genton, Blaise, Lengeler, Christian·2011·Malaria Journal

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Presumptive treatment of all febrile patients with anti-malarials leads to massive over-treatment. The aim was to assess the effect of implementing malaria rapid diagnostic tests (mRDTs) on prescription of anti-malarials in urban Tanzania. METHODS: The design was a prospective collection of routine statistics from ledger books and cross-sectional surveys before and after intervention in randomly selected health facilities (HF) in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. The participants were all clinicians and their patients in the above health facilities. The intervention consisted of training and introduction of mRDTs in all three hospitals and in six HF. Three HF without mRDTs were selected as matched controls. The use of routine mRDT and treatment upon result was advised for all patients complaining of fever, including children under five years of age. The main outcome measures were: (1) anti-malarial consumption recorded from routine statistics in ledger books of all HF before and after intervention; (2) anti-malarial prescription recorded during observed consultations in cross-sectional surveys conducted in all HF before and 18 months after mRDT implementation. RESULTS: Based on routine statistics, the amount of artemether-lumefantrine blisters used post-intervention was reduced by 68% (95%CI 57-80) in intervention and 32% (9-54) in control HF. For quinine vials, the reduction was 63% (54-72) in intervention and an increase of 2.49 times (1.62-3.35) in control HF. Before-and-after cross-sectional surveys showed a similar decrease from 75% to 20% in the proportion of patients receiving anti-malarial treatment (Risk ratio 0.23, 95%CI 0.20-0.26). The cluster randomized analysis showed a considerable difference of anti-malarial prescription between intervention HF (22%) and control HF (60%) (Risk ratio 0.30, 95%CI 0.14-0.70). Adherence to test result was excellent since only 7% of negative patients received an anti-malarial. However, antibiotic prescription increased from 49% before to 72% after intervention (Risk ratio 1.47, 95%CI 1.37-1.59). CONCLUSIONS: Programmatic implementation of mRDTs in a moderately endemic area reduced drastically over-treatment with anti-malarials. Properly trained clinicians with adequate support complied with the recommendation of not treating patients with negative results. Implementation of mRDT should be integrated hand-in-hand with training on the management of other causes of fever to prevent irrational use of antibiotics.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1475-2875-10-107

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 170

Metadata

Authors
D'Acremont, V., Kahama-Maro, J., Swai, N., Mtasiwa, D., Genton, B., & Lengeler, C.
Venue
Malaria Journal
Published
2011-04-29
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
107-107
ISSN
1475-2875 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2152808542
Cited by
170
References
0
FWCI
18.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Reduction of anti-malarial consumption after rapid diagnostic tests implementation in Dar es Salaam: a before-after and cluster randomized controlled study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1475-2875-10-107
The paper
D'Acremont, V., Kahama-Maro, J., Swai, N., Mtasiwa, D., Genton, B., & Lengeler, C. (2011). Reduction of anti-malarial consumption after rapid diagnostic tests implementation in Dar es Salaam: a before-after and cluster randomized controlled study. Malaria Journal. https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-10-107

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.