Evaluation of diagnostic accuracy of rapid diagnostic test for malaria diagnosis among febrile children in Calabar, Nigeria

Background: Malaria is an infectious disease caused by a protozoan parasite of the genus Plasmodium. It was estimated that 219 million cases of malaria occur in 87 countries, with an estimated death of 435,000 in 2017 among pregnant women. Other species include P. ovale, P. vivax, and P. malariae is a blood parasite of human and is one of the major public health burdens in developing countries, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa. It is estimated that about 3.5 billion people globally and 450 million people are thought to be ill as a result of such infections, the majority being children. Aims: This study was aimed at comparing RDTs against microscopy in the detection of malaria parasite among pregnant women. Samples were collected and analyzed following cross-sectional comparative study design. It was conducted between Septembers to November 2019. Study Design: This was a cross-sectional, comparative study Place and Duration of Study: This study was conducted among patients attending Specialist Hospital Sokoto, Sokoto State, between March and November, 2019. Methodology: A total of 106 participants were enrolled for the study. Standard parasitological examination was carried out on blood samples using microscopy followed by Rapid Diagnostic test (RDTs). Results: Finding revealed, in this study, CareStart kit had sensitivity of 77.7%, specificity of 100s%. It is expected that any RDT used for malaria diagnosis should have a high sensitivity of 95% and specificity 97% (WHO, 2003); this is in contrast with the RDTs results in this study. The false negative (FN) Carestart and SD-Bioline kits in this study were 10% and 21%, respectively using microscopy as the gold standard due to lack of sensitivity of RDTs at low parsitaemia compared to microscopy. The false positive rate in this study for the Carestart and SD-Bioline kits are 0% and 0% respectively. Out of 106 patients screened, 35% and 24% tested positive for Plasmodiumfalciparum using Carestart and SD-Bioline RDTs respectively, while 45% were positive to malaria by microscopic examination. There was high prevalence of malaria parasite among age group 18-23 which is 42.2%. Conclusion: It can be concluded that using microscopy is more time consuming compared to RDTs due to the fact that the time taken to read the results for RDTs is within five minutes and that of microscopy is higher compared to RDTs. Over all prevalence of malaria by microscopy was 42.5% while the prevalence of malaria by Carestart and SD-bioline was 33% and 22.6% respectively. Conventional microscopy remains the gold standard compared to RDTs according to this study with the level of its sensitivity and specificity which is higher than RDTs.

Download Full-text

Comparative evaluation of two rapid field tests for malaria diagnosis: Partec Rapid Malaria Test® and Binax Now® Malaria Rapid Diagnostic Test

BMC Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1186/1471-2334-11-143 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 11 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 26

Author(s):

Bernard Nkrumah ◽

Samuel EK Acquah ◽

Lukeman Ibrahim ◽

Juergen May ◽

Norbert Brattig ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Diagnostic Test ◽

Rapid Diagnostic Test ◽

Comparative Evaluation ◽

Field Tests ◽

Malaria Diagnosis ◽

Malaria Rapid Diagnostic Test ◽

Malaria Test

Download Full-text

Field evaluation of a rapid diagnostic test (ParascreenTM) for malaria diagnosis in the Peruvian Amazon

Malaria Journal ◽

10.1186/1475-2875-9-154 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 9 (1) ◽

pp. 154 ◽

Cited By ~ 13

Author(s):

Jorge Bendezu ◽

Angel Rosas ◽

Tanilu Grande ◽

Hugo Rodriguez ◽

Alejandro Llanos-Cuentas ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Diagnostic Test ◽

Rapid Diagnostic Test ◽

Malaria Diagnosis ◽

Field Evaluation ◽

Peruvian Amazon

Download Full-text

Diagnostic Accuracy of Clinical Symptoms and Rapid Diagnostic Test in Group A Streptococcal Perianal Infections in Children

Clinical Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/cid/ciu794 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 60 (2) ◽

pp. 267-270 ◽

Cited By ~ 11

Author(s):

R. Cohen ◽

C. Levy ◽

S. Bonacorsi ◽

A. Wollner ◽

M. Koskas ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Diagnostic Accuracy ◽

Diagnostic Test ◽

Rapid Diagnostic Test ◽

Clinical Symptoms ◽

Group A

Download Full-text

Performance of Rapid Diagnostic Test for Malaria Diagnosis at the Different Specialized Hospitals in Wad Medani, Gezira State, Sudan

International Journal of TROPICAL DISEASE & Health ◽

10.9734/ijtdh/2016/22677 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 12 (4) ◽

pp. 1-7

Author(s):

Bakri Nour ◽

Magid Almobark ◽

Albadawi Talha ◽

Elgaili Elgaili ◽

Dafallah Abuidris ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Diagnostic Test ◽

Rapid Diagnostic Test ◽

Malaria Diagnosis

Download Full-text

Perbandingan Efektifitas Rapid Diagnostic Test (RDT) dengan Pemeriksaan Mikroskop pada Penderita Malaria Klinis di Puskesmus Mubune Kecamatan Likupang Barat

Jurnal e-Biomedik ◽

10.35790/ebm.6.2.2018.20955 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 6 (2) ◽

Author(s):

Natanael Ritung ◽

Victor D. Pijoh ◽

Janno B. B. Bernadus

Keyword(s):

Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽

Diagnostic Test ◽

Rapid Diagnostic Test ◽

Microscopic Examination ◽

Predictive Value ◽

Public Health Problem ◽

Malaria Diagnosis ◽

Clinical Malaria ◽

Chain Reaction ◽

Polymerase Chain

Abstract: Malaria is still a public health problem worldwide, especially in economically underdeveloped and undeveloped countries. There are several laboratory diagnostic tests for malaria inter alia microscopic examination (thick and thin stained blood smear), rapid diagnostic test (RDT), and polymerase chain reaction (PCR). This study was aimed to compare the effectivity of RDT with of microscopic examination as the gold standard of malaria diagnosis. This was a diagnostic test study. Blood samples were obtained from 38 people of clinical malaria who lived at Likupang Barat from October 2015 to January 2016. The RDT results were compared with the microscopic examination to obtain the sensitivity and specifity levels. The results showed that of the RDT, the sensitivity was 67%, the specifity was 97%, the positive predictive value was 67%, and the negative predictive value was 97%. Conclusion: Rapid diagnostic test was nearly as effective as the microscopic examination of malaria.Keywords: RDT, microscopic examination, sensitivity, specificityAbstrak: Malaria masih menjadi masalah kesehatan di dunia terutama di negara yang secara ekonomis masih tertinggal dan belum berkembang. Diagnosis laboratorik malaria dapat dilakukan dengan beberapa cara antara lain pemeriksaan mikroskopik yaitu hapusan darah tebal dan hapusan darah tipis, rapid diagnostic test (RDT), dan polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk membandingkan tingkat efektifitas antara RDT dengan pemeriksaan mikroskopik yang merupakan baku emas diagnostik malaria. Jenis penelitian ialah uji diagnostik. Sampel darah diambil dari 38 orang dengan klinis malaria di Likupang Barat sejak Oktober 2015 - Januari 2016. Hasil pemeriksaan RDT dibandingkan dengan hasil pemeriksaan mikrsokopik untuk mengetahui tingkat sensivitas dan spesifisitasnya. Hasil penelitian mendapatkan tingkat sensivitas RDT secara umum sebesar 67%, spesifitas sebesar 97%, nilai duga positif sebesar 67%, dan nilai duga negatif sebesar 97%. Simpulan: Pemeriksaan RDT menunjukkan efektivitas dan akurasi yang hampir sama dengan pemeriksaan mikroskopik.Kata kunci: RDT, pemeriksaan mikroskopis, sensitivitas, spesifitas

Download Full-text

Diagnostic Accuracy of Antibody-based Rapid Diagnostic Test in Detecting Coronavirus Disease 2019: Systematic Review

Archives of Medical Science ◽

10.5114/aoms/135910 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Yanto Tjang ◽

Tiara Gracienta ◽

Ryan Herardi ◽

Frans Santosa ◽

Taufiq Pasiak

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Diagnostic Accuracy ◽

Diagnostic Test ◽

Rapid Diagnostic Test ◽

Predictive Value ◽

Detection Method ◽

Target Antigen ◽

Test Accuracy ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Sensitivity Specificity

IntroductionThe rapid transmission of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) requires a fast, accurate, and affordable detection method. Despite doubts of its diagnostic accuracy, Rapid Diagnostic Test (RDT) is world-widely used in consideration for its practicality. This systematic review aims to determine the diagnostic accuracy of antibody-based RDT in detecting COVID-19.Material and methodsA literature search was carried out on five journal databases using the PRISMA-P 2015 method. We included all studies published up to February 2021. The risk of bias was evaluated using The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist for Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies. Data regarding peer-review status, study design, tests kit information, immunoglobulin class, target antigen, and the number of samples were extracted and tabulated. We estimated the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) with a 95% confidence interval.ResultsThirty-three studies met the eligibility criteria. The pooled data results showed that the combined detection method of IgM or IgG had the highest sensitivity and NPV, which were 73.41% (95% CI: 72.22-74.57) and 75.34% (95% CI: 74.51-76.16), respectively. The single IgG detection method had the highest specificity and PPV of 96.68% (95% CI: 96.25-97.07) and 95.97% (95% CI: 95.47-96.42%), respectively.ConclusionsAntibody-based RDT is not satisfactory as a primary diagnostic test but has utilities as a screening tool.

Download Full-text