...
首页> 外文期刊>Malaria Journal >Performance of four HRP-2/pLDH combination rapid diagnostic tests and field microscopy as screening tests for malaria in pregnancy in Indonesia: a cross-sectional study
【24h】

Performance of four HRP-2/pLDH combination rapid diagnostic tests and field microscopy as screening tests for malaria in pregnancy in Indonesia: a cross-sectional study

机译:四种HRP-2 / pLDH组合快速诊断测试和现场显微镜作为印度尼西亚妊娠疟疾筛查测试的性能:一项横断面研究

获取原文
           

摘要

Background Malaria in pregnancy poses a major public health problem in Indonesia with an estimated six million pregnancies at risk of Plasmodium falciparum or Plasmodium vivax malaria annually. In 2010, Indonesia introduced a screen and treat policy for the control of malaria in pregnancy at first antenatal visit using microscopy or rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs). A diagnostic study was conducted in Sumba, Indonesia to compare the performance of four different RDTs in predominately asymptomatic pregnant women under field condition. Methods Women were screened for malaria at antenatal visits using field microscopy and four HRP-2/pLDH combination RDTs (Carestart?, First-Response ? , Parascreen ? and SD-Bioline ? ). The test results were compared with expert microscopy and nested PCR. End user experience of the RDTs in the field was assessed by questionnaire. Results Overall 950 were recruited and 98.7 % were asymptomatic. The prevalence of malaria was 3.0–3.4 % by RDTs, and 3.6, 5.0 and 6.6 % by field microscopy, expert microscopy and PCR, respectively. The geometric-mean parasite density was low (P. falciparum = 418, P. vivax = 147 parasites/μL). Compared with PCR, the overall sensitivity of the RDTs and field microscopy to detect any species was 24.6–31.1 %; specificities were >98.4 %. Relative to PCR, First-Response ? had the best diagnostic accuracy (any species): sensitivity = 31.1 %, specificity = 98.9 % and diagnostic odds ratio = 39.0 (DOR). The DOR values for Carestart?, Parascreen ? , SD-Bioline ? , and field microscopy were 23.4, 23.7, 23.5 and 29.2, respectively. The sensitivity of Pan-pLDH bands to detect PCR confirmed P. vivax mono-infection were 8.6–13.0 %. The sensitivity of the HRP-2 band alone to detect PCR confirmed P. falciparum was 10.3–17.9 %. Pan-pLDH detected P. falciparum cases undetected by the HRP-2 band resulting in a better test performance when both bands were combined. First Response ? was preferred by end-users for the overall practicality. Conclusion The diagnostic accuracy to detect malaria among mostly asymptomatic pregnant women and perceived ease of use was slightly better with First-Response ? , but overall, differences between the four RDTs were small and performance comparable to field microscopy. Combination RDTs are a suitable alternative to field microscopy to screen for malaria in pregnancy in rural Indonesia. The clinical relevance of low density malaria infections detected by PCR, but undetected by RDTs or microscopy needs to be determined.
机译:背景技术怀孕期间的疟疾是印度尼西亚的主要公共卫生问题,每年估计有600万例孕妇有恶性疟原虫或间日疟原虫疟疾的风险。 2010年,印度尼西亚引入了筛查和治疗政策,以在首次产前就诊时使用显微镜或快速诊断检测(RDT)控制疟疾。在印度尼西亚的Sumba进行了一项诊断研究,比较了在田间条件下以四种无症状RDT在无症状孕妇中的表现。方法使用现场显微镜和四个HRP-2 / pLDH组合RDT(Carestart?,First-Response?,Parascreen?和SD-Bioline?)筛查妇女产前的疟疾。将测试结果与专家显微镜和巢式PCR进行了比较。通过调查表评估了RDT在现场的最终用户体验。结果共招募950人,无症状的占98.7%。通过RDT,疟疾的患病率为3.0-3.4%,通过现场显微镜,专家显微镜和PCR分别为3.6%,5.0%和6.6%。几何平均寄生虫密度低(恶性疟原虫= 418,间日疟原虫= 147寄生虫/μL)。与PCR相比,RDT和现场显微镜检测任何物种的总灵敏度为24.6–31.1%;特异性> 98.4%。相对于PCR,第一反应?具有最高的诊断准确性(任何物种):灵敏度= 31.1%,特异性= 98.9%,诊断比值比= 39.0(DOR)。 Carestart?,Parascreen?的DOR值,SD-Bioline? ,和现场显微镜分别为23.4、23.7、23.5和29.2。 Pan-pLDH条带检测经PCR确诊的间日疟原虫单一感染的敏感性为8.6-13.0%。仅HRP-2谱带检测PCR确认的恶性疟原虫的敏感性为10.3-17.9%。 Pan-pLDH检测到HRP-2谱带未检测到的恶性疟原虫病例,当两个谱带组合时,检测性能更好。第一反应?最终用户更喜欢整体实用性。结论First-Response?对大多数无症状孕妇的疟疾诊断和易用性的诊断准确性稍好。但总体而言,四个RDT之间的差异很小,并且性能可与现场显微镜媲美。组合RDTs是现场显微镜检查印度尼西亚农村地区孕妇疟疾的合适选择。需要确定通过PCR检测到的低密度疟疾感染的临床相关性,而没有通过RDT或显微镜检测到的相关性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号