Cross-sectional study finds low rates of malaria and intestinal helminth coinfection among school-aged children, suggesting effective intervention programs.
There is dual endemicity of malaria and helminthic infections in low- and middle-income countries. Coinfection with both infectious diseases may have compounding negative effects on the health of school-aged children (SAC) in endemic areas. The prevalence of coinfection with malaria and intestinal helminths, including soil-transmitted helminths, Schistosoma mansoni, and Hymenolepis nana, was assessed among SAC in rural northern Uganda. A school-based cross-sectional study was conducted at four randomly selected schools from June 2 to June 10, 2025 in Nwoya District, Uganda. Children aged 5-18 years provided stool and blood samples, and were surveyed to assess demographic, environmental, and health-related factors. Intestinal helminth diagnosis was performed using a modified Kato-Katz method (Odongo-Aginya stain); malaria was detected using Plasmodium falciparum (P. falciparum) histidine-rich protein 2 rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) and blood smears. Overall, 190 SAC with a median age of 13 years were enrolled. Although 75.3% (n = 143) of SAC tested positive for P. falciparum on an RDT, only 13.2% (n = 25) had microscopically detected parasitemia. Intestinal helminth infections were uncommon and involved Ascaris lumbricoides (0.5%; n = 1), Hymenolepis nana (1.6%; n = 3), and Schistosoma mansoni (1.1%; n = 2). All SAC with intestinal helminth infections (3.2%; n = 6) had positive malaria RDT results. The high rate of malaria RDT positivity with negative blood smears may be due to persistent antigenemia post-treatment or false negative blood smear results due to chronic low-grade parasitemia. The low rate of malaria-helminth coinfection among SAC observed in the present study is supported by other recent studies in Uganda and suggests a high efficacy of national mass drug administration programming for the control of intestinal helminths.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
McGowan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: