73
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Deworming drugs for soil-transmitted intestinal worms in children: effects on nutritional indicators, haemoglobin, and school performance

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends treating all school children at regular intervals with deworming drugs in areas where helminth infection is common. As the intervention is often claimed to have important health, nutrition, and societal effects beyond the removal of worms, we critically evaluated the evidence on benefits.

          Objectives

          To summarize the effects of giving deworming drugs to children to treat soil-transmitted helminths on weight, haemoglobin, and cognition; and the evidence of impact on physical well-being, school attendance, school performance, and mortality.

          Search methods

          We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register (14 April 2015); Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), published in the Cochrane Library (2015, Issue 4); MEDLINE (2000 to 14 April 2015); EMBASE (2000 to 14 April 2015); LILACS (2000 to 14 April 2015); the metaRegister of Controlled Trials ( mRCT); and reference lists, and registers of ongoing and completed trials up to 14 April 2015.

          Selection criteria

          We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing deworming drugs for soil-transmitted helminths with placebo or no treatment in children aged 16 years or less, reporting on weight, haemoglobin, and formal tests of intellectual development. We also sought data on school attendance, school performance, and mortality. We included trials that combined health education with deworming programmes.

          Data collection and analysis

          At least two review authors independently assessed the trials, evaluated risk of bias, and extracted data. We analysed continuous data using the mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Where data were missing, we contacted trial authors. We used outcomes at time of longest follow-up. The evidence quality was assessed using GRADE. This edition of the Cochrane Review adds the DEVTA trial from India, and draws on an independent analytical replication of a trial from Kenya.

          Main results

          We identified 45 trials, including nine cluster-RCTs, that met the inclusion criteria. One trial evaluating mortality included over one million children, and the remaining 44 trials included a total of 67,672 participants. Eight trials were in children known to be infected, and 37 trials were carried out in endemic areas, including areas of high (15 trials), moderate (12 trials), and low prevalence (10 trials).

          Treating children known to be infected

          Treating children known to be infected with a single dose of deworming drugs (selected by screening, or living in areas where all children are infected) may increase weight gain over the next one to six months (627 participants, five trials, low quality evidence). The effect size varied across trials from an additional 0.2 kg gain to 1.3 kg. There is currently insufficient evidence to know whether treatment has additional effects on haemoglobin (247 participants, two trials, very low quality evidence); school attendance (0 trials); cognitive functioning (103 participants, two trials, very low quality evidence), or physical well-being (280 participants, three trials, very low quality evidence).

          Community deworming programmes

          Treating all children living in endemic areas with a dose of deworming drugs probably has little or no effect on average weight gain (MD 0.04 kg less, 95% CI 0.11 kg less to 0.04 kg more; trials 2719 participants, seven trials, moderate quality evidence), even in settings with high prevalence of infection (290 participants, two trials). A single dose also probably has no effect on average haemoglobin (MD 0.06 g/dL, 95% CI -0.05 lower to 0.17 higher; 1005 participants, three trials, moderate quality evidence), or average cognition (1361 participants, two trials, low quality evidence).

          Similiarly, regularly treating all children in endemic areas with deworming drugs, given every three to six months, may have little or no effect on average weight gain (MD 0.08 kg, 95% CI 0.11 kg less to 0.27 kg more; 38,392 participants, 10 trials, low quality evidence). The effects were variable across trials; one trial from a low prevalence setting carried out in 1995 found an increase in weight, but nine trials carried out since then found no effect, including five from moderate and high prevalence areas.

          There is also reasonable evidence that regular treatment probably has no effect on average height (MD 0.02 cm higher, 95% CI 0.14 lower to 0.17 cm higher; 7057 participants, seven trials, moderate quality evidence); average haemoglobin (MD 0.02 g/dL lower; 95% CI 0.08 g/dL lower to 0.04 g/dL higher; 3595 participants, seven trials, low quality evidence); formal tests of cognition (32,486 participants, five trials, moderate quality evidence); exam performance (32,659 participants, two trials, moderate quality evidence); or mortality (1,005,135 participants, three trials, low quality evidence). There is very limited evidence assessing an effect on school attendance and the findings are inconsistent, and at risk of bias (mean attendance 2% higher, 95% CI 4% lower to 8% higher; 20,243 participants, two trials, very low quality evidence).

          In a sensitivity analysis that only included trials with adequate allocation concealment, there was no evidence of any effect for the main outcomes.

          Authors' conclusions

          Treating children known to have worm infection may have some nutritional benefits for the individual. However, in mass treatment of all children in endemic areas, there is now substantial evidence that this does not improve average nutritional status, haemoglobin, cognition, school performance, or survival.

          PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY
          Deworming school children in developing countries

          In this Cochrane Review, Cochrane researchers examined the effects of deworming children in areas where intestinal worm infection is common. After searching for relevant trials up to April 2015, we included 44 trials with a total of 67,672 participants, and an additional trial of one million children.

          What is deworming and why might it be important

          Soil-transmitted worms, including roundworms, hookworms, and whipworms, are common in tropical and subtropical areas, and particularly affect children in low-income areas where there is inadequate sanitation. Heavy worm infection is associated with malnutrition, poor growth, and anaemia in children.

          The World Health Organization currently recommends that school children in endemic areas are regularly treated with drugs which kill these worms. The recommended drugs are effective at eliminating or greatly reducing worm infections, but the question remains whether doing so will reduce anaemia and improve growth, and consequently improve school attendance, school performance, and economic development, as has been claimed.

          What the research says

          In trials that treat only children known to be infected, deworming drugs may increase weight gain ( low quality evidence), but we do not know if there is an effect on cognitive functioning or physical well-being ( very low quality evidence).

          In trials treating all children living in an endemic area, deworming drugs have little or no effect on average weight gain ( moderate quality evidence), haemoglobin ( low quality evidence), or cognition ( moderate quality evidence).

          Regular deworming treatment every three to six months may also have little or no effect on average weight gain ( low quality evidence). The effects were variable across trials: one trial from 1995 in a low prevalence setting found an increase in weight, but nine trials carried out since then from moderate or high prevalence settings showed no effect.

          There is good evidence that regular treatment probably has no effect on average height ( moderate quality evidence), haemoglobin ( low quality evidence), formal tests of cognition ( moderate quality evidence), or exam performance ( moderate quality evidence). We do not know if there is an effect on school attendance ( very low quality evidence).

          Authors conclusions

          Treating children known to have worm infection may improve weight gain but there is limited evidence of other benefits. For routine deworming of school children in endemic areas, there is quite substantial evidence that deworming programmes do not show benefit in terms of average nutritional status, haemoglobin, cognition, school performance, or death.

          Related collections

          Most cited references174

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Disease and Development: Evidence from Hookworm Eradication in the American South.

          This study evaluates the economic consequences of the successful eradication of hookworm disease from the American South. The hookworm-eradication campaign (c. 1910) began soon after (i) the discovery that a variety of health problems among Southerners could be attributed to the disease and (ii) the donation by John D. Rockefeller of a substantial sum to the effort. The Rockefeller Sanitary Commission (RSC) surveyed infection rates in the affected areas (eleven southern states) and found that an average of forty percent of school-aged children were infected with hookworm. The RSC then sponsored treatment and education campaigns across the region. Follow-up studies indicate that this campaign substantially reduced hookworm disease almost immediately. The sudden introduction of this treatment combines with the cross-area differences in pre-treatment infection rates to form the basis of the identification strategy. Areas with higher levels of hookworm infection prior to the RSC experienced greater increases in school enrollment, attendance, and literacy after the intervention. This result is robust to controlling for a variety of alternative factors, including differential trends across areas, changing crop prices, shifts in certain educational and health policies, and the effect of malaria eradication. No significant contemporaneous results are found for adults, who should have benefited less from the intervention owing to their substantially lower (prior) infection rates. A long-term follow-up of affected cohorts indicates a substantial gain in income that coincided with exposure to hookworm eradication. I also find evidence that eradication increased the return to schooling.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Soil-transmitted helminth infections: updating the global picture.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              “Rapid-Impact Interventions”: How a Policy of Integrated Control for Africa's Neglected Tropical Diseases Could Benefit the Poor

              Controlling seven tropical infections in Africa would cost just 40 cents per person per year, and would permanently benefit hundreds of millions of people.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Cochrane Database Syst Rev
                Cochrane Database Syst Rev
                cd
                The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
                John Wiley & Sons, Ltd (Chichester, UK )
                1469-493X
                23 July 2015
                : 7
                : 1-157
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Public Health and Policy, University of Liverpool Liverpool, UK
                [2 ]Enhance Reviews Ltd Wantage, UK
                [3 ]Department of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine Liverpool, UK
                Author notes
                Contact address: David C Taylor-Robinson, Department of Public Health and Policy, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. david.taylor-robinson@ 123456liverpool.ac.uk .

                Editorial group: Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group.

                Publication status and date: Edited (no change to conclusions), published in Issue 7, 2015.

                Review content assessed as up-to-date: 14 April 2015.

                Article
                10.1002/14651858.CD000371.pub6
                4523932
                26202783
                0145a7bc-d051-4b83-9084-0b3cfaefa868
                Copyright © 2015 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
                History
                Categories
                Review

                Comments

                Comment on this article