Comparing Treatments for Childhood Malaria in Nigeria
Author Information
Author(s): Meremikwu Martin, Alaribe Ambrose, Ejemot Regina, Oyo-Ita Angela, Ekenjoku John, Nwachukwu Chukwuemeka, Ordu Donald, Ezedinachi Emmanuel
Primary Institution: Calabar Institute of Tropical Disease Research & Prevention
Hypothesis
Is artemether-lumefantrine more effective than artesunate plus amodiaquine for treating uncomplicated childhood malaria?
Conclusion
Both artemether-lumefantrine and artesunate plus amodiaquine have high and comparable cure rates among under-five children in Calabar, Nigeria.
Supporting Evidence
- 119 children were enrolled in the study, with 111 completing it.
- 87.0% of children treated with artemether-lumefantrine had adequate clinical and parasitological response.
- 82.5% of children treated with artesunate plus amodiaquine had adequate clinical and parasitological response.
- Early treatment failure occurred in 1.8% of the artesunate plus amodiaquine group.
- Late clinical failure was observed in 3.7% of the artemether-lumefantrine group.
- None of the participants experienced serious adverse events.
Takeaway
This study looked at two medicines to treat malaria in kids. Both worked well, but one didn't work much better than the other.
Methodology
Children aged 6 to 59 months with uncomplicated malaria were randomly assigned to receive either artesunate plus amodiaquine or artemether-lumefantrine, followed by clinical and laboratory assessments.
Limitations
The short follow-up period of 14 days may not adequately capture treatment failures.
Participant Demographics
Children aged 6 to 59 months from a rural community in Calabar, Nigeria.
Statistical Information
Confidence Interval
0.22 to 2.22
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website