↓ Skip to main content

An operational comparative study of quinine and artesunate for the treatment of severe malaria in hospitals and health centres in the Democratic Republic of Congo: the MATIAS study

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
An operational comparative study of quinine and artesunate for the treatment of severe malaria in hospitals and health centres in the Democratic Republic of Congo: the MATIAS study
Published in
Malaria Journal, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12936-015-0732-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Giovanfrancesco Ferrari, Henry M. Ntuku, Christian Burri, Antoinette K. Tshefu, Stephan Duparc, Pierre Hugo, Didier K. Mitembo, Amanda Ross, Philippe L. Ngwala, Joseph N. Luwawu, Papa N. Musafiri, Symphorien E. Ngoie, Christian Lengeler

Abstract

The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) has the highest number of severe malaria cases in the world. In early 2012, the National Malaria Control Programme (NMCP) changed the policy for treating severe malaria in children and adults from injectable quinine to injectable artesunate. To inform the scaling up of injectable artesunate nationwide, operational research is needed to identify constraints and challenges in the DRC's specific setting. The implementation of injectable quinine treatment in 350 patients aged 2 months or older in eight health facilities from October 2012 to January 2013 and injectable artesunate in 399 patients in the same facilities from April to June 2013 was compared. Since this was an implementation study, concurrent randomized controls were not possible. Four key components were evaluated during each phase: 1) clinical assessment, 2) time and motion, 3) feasibility and acceptability, and 4) financial cost. The time to discharge was lower in the artesunate (median = 2, 90 % central range 1-9) compared to the quinine group (3 (1-9) days; p <0.001). Similarly, the interval between admission and the start of intravenous (IV) treatment (2 (0-15) compared to 3 (0-20) hours; p <0.001) and parasite clearance time (23 (11-49) compared to 24 (10-82) hours; p <0.001) were lower in the artesunate group. The overall staff pre-administration time (13 (6-38) compared to 20 (7-50) minutes; p <0.001) and the personnel time spent on patient management (9 (1-24) compared to 12 (3-52) minutes; p <0.001) were lower in the artesunate group. In hospitals and health centres, the mean (standard deviation, SD) total cost per patient treated for severe malaria with injectable artesunate was USD 51.94 (16.20) and 19.51 (9.58); and USD 60.35 (17.73) and 20.36 (6.80) with injectable quinine. This study demonstrates that injectable artesunate in the DRC is easier to use and it costs less than injectable quinine. These findings provide the basis for practical recommendations for rapid national deployment of injectable artesunate in the DRC.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 82 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 13%
Other 8 10%
Researcher 7 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Other 16 19%
Unknown 30 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 31%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 7%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 34 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 September 2015.
All research outputs
#4,428,314
of 22,807,037 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#1,095
of 5,563 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,614
of 267,111 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#31
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,807,037 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,563 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 267,111 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.