Background. Current malaria diagnostic tests, including microscopy and antigen-detecting rapid tests, cannot reliably detect low-density infections. Molecular methods such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR) are highly sensitive but remain too complex for field deployment. A new commercial molecular assay based on loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) was assessed for field use.Methods. Malaria LAMP (Eiken Chemical, Japan) was evaluated for samples from 272 outpatients at a rural Ugandan clinic and compared with expert microscopy, nested PCR, and quantitative PCR (qPCR). Two technicians performed the assay after 3 days of training, using 2 alternative blood sample–preparation methods and visual interpretation of results by fluorescence assay.Results. Compared with 3-well nested PCR, the sensitivity of both LAMP and single-well nested PCR was 90%; the microscopy sensitivity was 51%. For samples with a Plasmodium falciparum qPCR titer of ≥2 parasites/µL, LAMP sensitivity was 97.8% (95% confidence interval, 93.7%–99.5%). Most false-negative LAMP results involved samples with parasitemia levels detectable by 3-well nested PCR but very low or undetectable by qPCR.Conclusions. Malaria LAMP in a remote Ugandan clinic achieved sensitivity similar to that of single-well nested PCR in a United Kingdom reference laboratory. LAMP dramatically lowers the detection threshold achievable in malaria-endemic settings, providing a new tool for diagnosis, surveillance, and screening in elimination strategies.
Background: Parasite-based diagnosis of malaria by microscopy requires laboratory skills that are generally unavailable at peripheral health facilities. Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) require less expertise, but accuracy under operational conditions has not been fully evaluated in Uganda. There are also concerns about RDTs that use the antigen histidinerich protein 2 (HRP2) to detect Plasmodium falciparum, because this antigen can persist after effective treatment, giving false positive test results in the absence of infection. An assessment of the accuracy of Malaria Pf™ immunochromatographic test (ICT) and description of persistent antigenicity of HRP2 RDTs was undertaken in a hyperendemic area of Uganda.
BackgroundEarly and accurate diagnosis of malaria followed by prompt treatment reduces the risk of severe disease in malaria endemic regions. Presumptive treatment of malaria is widely practised where microscopy or rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are not readily available. With the introduction of artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) for treatment of malaria in many low-resource settings, there is need to target treatment to patients with parasitologically confirmed malaria in order to improve quality of care, reduce over consumption of anti-malarials, reduce drug pressure and in turn delay development and spread of drug resistance. This study evaluated the effect of malaria RDTs on health workers' anti-malarial drug (AMD) prescriptions among outpatients at low level health care facilities (LLHCF) within different malaria epidemiological settings in Uganda.MethodsAll health workers (HWs) in 21 selected intervention (where RDTs were deployed) LLHF were invited for training on the use RDTs. All HWs were trained to use RDTs for parasitological diagnosis of all suspected malaria cases irrespective of age. Five LLHCFs with clinical diagnosis (CD only) were included for comparison. Subsequently AMD prescriptions were compared using both a 'pre - post' and 'intervention - control' analysis designs. In-depth interviews of the HWs were conducted to explore any factors that influence AMD prescription practices.ResultsA total of 166,131 out-patient attendances (OPD) were evaluated at 21 intervention LLHCFs. Overall use of RDTs resulted in a 38% point reduction in AMD prescriptions. There was a two-fold reduction (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.55-0.70) in AMD prescription with the greatest reduction in the hypo-endemic setting (RR 0.46 95% CI 0.51-0.53) but no significant change in the urban setting (RR1.01, p-value = 0.820). Over 90% of all eligible OPD patients were offered a test. An average of 30% (range 25%-35%) of the RDT-negative fever patients received AMD prescriptions. When the test result was negative, children under five years of age were two to three times more likely (OR 2.6 p-value <0.001) to receive anti-malarial prescriptions relative to older age group. Of the 63 HWs interviewed 92% believed that a positive RDT result confirmed malaria, while only 49% believed that a negative RDT result excluded malaria infection.ConclusionUse of RDTs resulted in a 2-fold reduction in anti-malarial drug prescription at LLHCFs. The study demonstrated that RDT use is feasible at LLHCFs, and can lead to better targetting of malaria treatment. Nationwide deployment of RDTs in a systematic manner should be prioritised in order to improve fever case management. The process should include plans to educate HWs about the utility of RDTs in order to maximize acceptance and uptake of the diagnostic tools and thereby leading to the benefits of parasitological diagnosis of malaria.
BackgroundWhile feasibility of new health technologies in well-resourced healthcare settings is extensively documented, it is largely unknown in low-resourced settings. Uganda's decision to deploy and scale up malaria rapid diagnostic tests (mRDTs) in public health facilities and at the community level provides a useful entry point for documenting field experience, acceptance, and predictive variables for technology acceptance and use. These findings are important in informing implementation of new health technologies, plans, and budgets in low-resourced national disease control programmes.MethodsA cross-sectional qualitative descriptive study at 21 health centres in Uganda was undertaken in 2007 to elucidate the barriers and facilitators in the introduction of mRDTs as a new diagnostic technology at lower-level health facilities. Pre-tested interview questionnaires were administered through pre-structured patient exit interviews and semi-structured health worker interviews to gain an understanding of the response to this implementation. A conceptual framework on technology acceptance and use was adapted for this study and used to prepare the questionnaires. Thematic analysis was used to generate themes from the data.ResultsA total of 52 of 57 health workers (92%) reported a belief that a positive mRDT result was true, although only 41 of 57 (64%) believed that treatment with anti-malarials was justified for every positive mRDT case. Of the same health workers, only 49% believed that a negative mRDT result was truly negative. Factors linked to these findings were related to mRDT acceptance and use, including the design and characteristics of the device, availability and quality of mRDT ancillary supplies, health worker capacity to investigate febrile cases testing negative with the device and provide appropriate treatment, availability of effective malaria treatments, reliability of the health commodity supply chain, existing national policy recommendations, individual health worker dynamism, and vitality of supervision.ConclusionsmRDTs were found to be acceptable to and used by the target users, provided clear policy guidelines exist, ancillary tools are easy to use and health supplies beyond the diagnostic tools are met. Based on our results, health workers' needs for comprehensive case management should be met, and specific guidance for managing febrile patients with negative test outcomes should be provided alongside the new health technology. The extent, to which the implementation process of mRDT-led, parasite-based diagnosis accommodates end user beliefs, attitudes, perceptions, and satisfaction, as well as technology learnability and suitability, influences the level of acceptance and use of mRDTs. The effectiveness of the health system in providing the enabling environment and the integration of the diagnostic tool into routine service delivery is critical.
Objective To compare the effectiveness of oral quinine with that of artemether-lumefantrine in treating uncomplicated malaria in children.Design Randomised, open label effectiveness study. Setting Outpatient clinic of Uganda's national referral hospital in Kampala. Participants 175 children aged 6 to 59 months with uncomplicated malaria. Interventions Participants were randomised to receive oral quinine or artemether-lumefantrine administered by care givers at home. Main outcome measures Primary outcomes were parasitological cure rates after 28 days of follow-up unadjusted and adjusted by genotyping to distinguish recrudescence from new infections. Secondary outcomes were adherence to study drug, presence of gametocytes, recovery of haemoglobin concentration from baseline at day 28, and safety profiles. Results Using survival analysis the cure rate unadjusted by genotyping was 96% for the artemether-lumefantrine group compared with 64% for the quinine group (hazard ratio 10.7, 95% confidence interval 3.3 to 35.5, P=0.001). In the quinine group 69% (18/26) of parasitological failures were due to recrudescence compared with none in the artemether-lumefantrine group. The mean adherence to artemether-lumefantrine was 94.5% compared with 85
IntroductionSevere malaria is a life-threatening medical emergency and requires prompt and effective treatment to prevent death. There is paucity of published information on current practices of severe malaria case management in sub-Saharan Africa; we evaluated the management practices for severe malaria in Ugandan health facilitiesMethods and FindingsWe did a cross sectional survey, using multi-stage sampling methods, of health facilities in 11 districts in the eastern and mid-western parts of Uganda. The study instruments were adapted from the WHO hospital care assessment tools. Between June and August 2009, 105 health facilities were surveyed and 181 health workers and 868 patients/caretakers interviewed. None of the inpatient facilities had all seven components of a basic care package for the management of severe malaria consistently available during the 3 months prior to the survey. Referral practices were appropriate for <10% (18/196) of the patients. Prompt care at any health facility was reported by 29% (247/868) of patients. Severe malaria was correctly diagnosed in 27% of patients (233).Though the quinine dose and regimen was correct in the majority (611/868, 70.4%) of patients, it was administered in the correct volumes of 5% dextrose in only 18% (147/815). Most patients (80.1%) had several doses of quinine administered in one single 500 ml bottle of 5% dextrose. Medications were purchased by 385 (44%) patients and medical supplies by 478 patients (70.6%).ConclusionsManagement of severe malaria in Ugandan health facilities was sub-optimal. These findings highlight the challenges of correctly managing severe malaria in resource limited settings. Priority areas for improvement include triage and emergency care, referral practises, quality of diagnosis and treatment, availability of medicines and supplies, training and support supervision.
HIV testing is an entry point to comprehensive HIV/AIDS prevention and care. In Uganda, Routine Testing and Counseling for HIV (RTC) is not widely offered as part of standard medical care in acute care settings. This study determined the acceptance of RTC in a medical emergency setting at Mulago national referral hospital. We interviewed 233 adult patients who were offered HIV testing. Overall, 83% were unaware of their HIV serostatus and 88% of these had been to a health unit in the previous six months. Of the 208 eligible for HIV testing, 95% accepted to test. Half the patients were HIV infected and 77% of these were diagnosed during the study. HIV testing was highly acceptable and detected a significant number of undiagnosed HIV infections. We recommend adoption of RTC as standard of care in the medical emergency unit in order to scale HIV diagnosis and linkage to HIV/AIDS care.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.