Dejazmach Zelalem, Alemu Getaneh, Yimer Mulat, Tegegne Banchamlak, Getaneh Abel
Department of Medical Laboratory Science, College of Health Sciences, Woldia University, Woldia, Ethiopia.
Department of Medical Laboratory Science, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Bahir Dar University, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia.
J Parasitol Res. 2021 Oct 23;2021:7919984. doi: 10.1155/2021/7919984. eCollection 2021.
While rapid diagnostic tests are an alternative diagnostic tests for microscopy in the diagnosis of malaria in rural settings, their performance has been inconsistent. Performance of rapid diagnostic tests might be affected by manufacturing process, transportation and storage, parasitemia level, and skill of personnel who perform the tests. Therefore, periodic evaluation of the local field performance of rapid diagnostic tests is mandatory in order to make early corrections in case of decreased performance.
A facility-based cross-sectional study was conducted from January to May 2020 among 257 malaria-suspected patients attending selected health centers in Bahir Dar Zuria district. Capillary blood was collected from each participant and tested for infection by CareStart™ rapid diagnostic test kit and thin and thick blood film microscopy. Data were analyzed using statistical software for social sciences version 20 and MedCalc software version 19.3. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and kappa value were calculated to evaluate the performance of rapid diagnostic tests against microscopy.
Among 257 study participants, 47 (18.3%) were tested positive for infection by at least one of the diagnostic methods. Rapid diagnostic tests revealed 3 false positive and 3 false negative results. The sensitivity and specificity of CareStart Malaria Pf/Pv Combo test were 93.2% and 98.6%, respectively (kappa = 0.918).
CareStart™ rapid diagnostic test has comparable performance with microscopy for malaria diagnosis. We recommend continued use of CareStart Malaria Pf/Pv Combo test at health posts in Ethiopia where microscopy is not available.
虽然快速诊断检测是农村地区疟疾诊断中显微镜检查的替代诊断方法,但其性能一直不稳定。快速诊断检测的性能可能受到生产工艺、运输和储存、寄生虫血症水平以及进行检测的人员技能的影响。因此,必须定期评估快速诊断检测在当地现场的性能,以便在性能下降时尽早进行纠正。
2020年1月至5月,在巴希尔达尔祖里亚区选定的卫生中心对257名疑似疟疾患者进行了一项基于机构的横断面研究。从每个参与者采集毛细血管血,并用CareStart™快速诊断检测试剂盒以及薄血膜和厚血膜显微镜检查检测感染情况。使用社会科学统计软件版本20和MedCalc软件版本19.3对数据进行分析。计算敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值以及kappa值,以评估快速诊断检测相对于显微镜检查的性能。
在257名研究参与者中,47人(18.3%)通过至少一种诊断方法检测出感染呈阳性。快速诊断检测显示3例假阳性和3例假阴性结果。CareStart疟疾Pf/Pv组合检测的敏感性和特异性分别为93.2%和98.6%(kappa = 0.918)。
CareStart™快速诊断检测在疟疾诊断方面与显微镜检查具有相当的性能。我们建议在埃塞俄比亚没有显微镜检查设备的卫生站继续使用CareStart疟疾Pf/Pv组合检测。