CompletedNot Applicable

Impact of Malaria Prevention on Health and Education in Kenyan Schoolchildren

Kenya5,177 participantsStarted 2010-01

Plain-language summary

While malaria represents one of the main health problems afflicting schoolchildren, the evidence base for policy development and programme implementation for school-based malaria control remains inadequate. A recent study in western Kenya showed that delivering intermittent preventive treatment (IPT) to schoolchildren improved rates of anaemia and classroom concentration, but did not improve school performance. This study aims to (i) investigate the impact of malaria prevention using a strategy of periodic screening using malaria rapid diagnostic tests and treatment positives using artemether-lumefantrine (AL) on health and education among schoolchildren and (ii) determine the interaction between health and improved literacy instruction. The study hypothesis is that that school-based malaria prevention will reduce rates of anaemia or improve educational outcomes in Kenyan schoolchildren, when compared to comparison schools. In addition, a programme of training for primary school teachers to improve literacy instruction will improve literacy rates and there will be no interaction between the malaria intervention and the education intervention, such that learning will not be improved when teaching is effective and children are healthy. The study will be undertaken in 101 randomly selected primary schools in Kwale District. The malaria intervention consists of screening all children using rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for malaria. Children (with or without clinical malaria symptoms) found to be RDT-positive will be treated with AL according to national guidelines. Screening and treatment will be administered by district public health staff once a school term, observed by the evaluation research team. This intervention has been changed from IPT due to the withdrawal of amodiaquine in Kenya. The education intervention includes a programme of training for primary school teachers to improve literacy instruction. The study is designed to detect a 25% reduction in anaemia and an improvement of 0.2 standard deviations in mathematics and literacy tests. Additional outcomes will also be measured including malaria parasitaemia, classroom attention and school attendance. Cost-effectiveness and community acceptability of the interventions will be assessed. Anaemia and educational outcomes will be assessed before interventions and 12 and 24 months later. Malaria parasitaemia using blood slides will only be assessed at follow-up.

Who can participate

Age range

5 Years – 18 Years

Sex

ALL

See this in plain English?

AI-rewrites the medical criteria so a patient or caregiver can understand them. Always confirm with the trial site.

Inclusion Criteria: * Pupil enrolled at participating schools in classes 1 and 5; * Provision of informed consent from parent or guardian; * Provision of assent by student Exclusion Criteria: * Pupils unwilling to participate in the study; * Known allergy or history of adverse reaction to study medications; * Known or suspected sickle-cell trait

Questions worth asking your doctor

Bring these to your next appointment. They're a starting point for a shared conversation — not a sign you qualify or a recommendation to enrol.

1Based on my diagnosis and history, is this trial worth exploring for me — or is there a standard treatment we should try first?
2What does this trial's phase tell us about how much is already known about its safety and benefit?
3What would taking part actually involve for me — visits, tests, time, and travel?
4What are the known and possible risks or side effects I should weigh, and how would they be monitored?
5If this trial isn't the right fit, what other options or trials would you suggest I look into?

Generated to help you prepare — always confirm anything about your own eligibility and care with the study team and your doctor.

Questions for the trial coordinator

The trial coordinator is the person who runs the study day to day. These cover the practical side — logistics, costs, and what taking part would actually mean for your life. The study team confirms whether you meet the criteria; these are questions to ask, not a sign you qualify.

1What does taking part actually involve week to week — how many visits, where, and how long does each one take?
2What costs are covered by the study, and what might I have to pay for myself, including travel, parking, or time off work?
3What happens during screening, and what happens if the study team confirms I don't meet the criteria after those tests?
4Who pays for the scans, blood work, and other tests the trial requires — the study, my insurance, or me?
5How will being in the trial affect my regular care, and will my own doctor stay informed and involved?
6Can I leave the trial at any point if I change my mind, and what would happen to my care if I do?

A starting point for the conversation — always confirm anything about your own eligibility, costs, and care with the study team and your doctor.

What they're measuring

Anaemia

Timeframe: 2 years

Education achievement assessed by a battery of tests of reading, writing and arithmetic

Timeframe: 2 years

Trial details

NCT IDNCT00878007

SponsorLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine

Sponsor typeOTHER

Study typeINTERVENTIONAL

Primary completion2012-04

View on ClinicalTrials.gov More Anaemia trials