Singh Neeru, Bharti Praveen K, Kumre N S
a National Institute for Research in Tribal Health (NIRTH) , Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) , Jabalpur , India.
b Community Health Centre , Baihar, Balaghat , India.
Pathog Glob Health. 2016 Jun-Jul;110(4-5):178-84. doi: 10.1080/20477724.2016.1223920. Epub 2016 Sep 1.
Balaghat district in Central India is characterized by perennial malaria transmission. In this study, we have estimated malaria parasite rates by microscopic examination of blood smears by conducting active (ACD) and passive surveillance (PCD) in the villages of Baihar community health center (CHC) during January 2012-December 2012. Comparison of the results of two methods revealed that ACD (active case detection) in villages provides relatively large numbers of malaria positive cases (1408/3601) as compared to PCD (passive case detection) at CHC (139/2743) (OR 12.03, 95% CI, 9.97-14.57, p < 0.0001). Similarly, large numbers of Plasmodium falciparum cases (1194) were found (SFR, 33.2%) in villages, while only 98 P. falciparum cases (SFR, 3.6%) were found at CHC (OR 13.39, 95% CI, 10.80-16.73, p < 0.0001). Likewise, Plasmodium vivax were 211 (SVR, 5.9%) in villages by ACD (OR 4.1, 95% CI, 2.91-5.9, p < 0.0001), while only 41 P. vivax (SVR, 1.5%) were found at CHC. In this cross-sectional study, we discussed the potential role of ACD in strengthening of surveillance for high coverage. For malaria elimination initiative, a surveillance system must be more sensitive than PCD along with effective tools for vector control to target high-risk population who are not visiting the health facility and seed transmission to the surrounding population. The study highlights the substantial difference in the malaria positivity rate by two methods in difficult and hard-to-reach areas and recommendations are made to understand how best to deploy ACD methods in the pursuit of malaria elimination.
印度中部的巴拉加特地区常年有疟疾传播。在本研究中,我们于2012年1月至2012年12月期间,在拜哈尔社区卫生中心(CHC)所在村庄通过主动病例检测(ACD)和被动监测(PCD),对血涂片进行显微镜检查来估算疟原虫感染率。两种方法结果的比较显示,与社区卫生中心的被动病例检测(PCD)(139/2743)相比,村庄中的主动病例检测(ACD)发现的疟疾阳性病例相对较多(1408/3601)(比值比12.03,95%置信区间,9.97 - 14.57,p < 0.0001)。同样,在村庄中发现大量恶性疟原虫病例(1194例)(感染率,33.2%),而在社区卫生中心仅发现98例恶性疟原虫病例(感染率,3.6%)(比值比13.39,95%置信区间,10.80 - 16.73,p < 0.0001)。同样,通过主动病例检测,村庄中间日疟原虫病例为211例(感染率,5.9%)(比值比4.1,95%置信区间,2.91 - 5.9,p < 0.0001),而在社区卫生中心仅发现41例间日疟原虫病例(感染率,1.5%)。在这项横断面研究中,我们讨论了主动病例检测在加强高覆盖率监测方面的潜在作用。对于疟疾消除倡议而言,监测系统必须比被动病例检测更敏感,同时要有有效的病媒控制工具,以针对那些未前往医疗机构的高危人群,并防止向周围人群传播疟疾。该研究突出了在困难和难以到达的地区两种方法在疟疾阳性率方面的显著差异,并就如何在追求消除疟疾的过程中最佳地部署主动病例检测方法提出了建议。