Diagnosis of malaria: A comparison between microscopy and rapid diagnostic test among under-five children at Gusau, Nigeria

Garba, Bilkisu Ilah; Muhammad, Abubakar; Musa, Abdullahi; Edem, Bassey E.; Yusuf, IF; Bello, Nura Kaura; Adeniji, Akeem Oladiran; Kolawole, Taofik

doi:10.4103/2384-5147.184371

Cited by 14 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The overall malaria prevalence in this study using Giemsa microscopy as the gold standard was 43.1%. The study prevalence is comparable to 46.6% reported in Zamfara State [ 15 ], 40.8% in Rivers State [ 16 ], and 40.5% in South-Eastern Nigeria [ 17 ] but lower than 72.5% in Rivers State [ 18 ], 85.7% in Enugu State [ 19 ], and 71.4% in Cross River State [ 20 ]. The study prevalence (43.1%) is higher than 15.0% in Ogun State [ 21 ] and 14.7% in Lagos [ 22 ].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 78%

Evaluating Malaria Prevalence Using Clinical Diagnosis Compared with Microscopy and Rapid Diagnostic Tests in a Tertiary Healthcare Facility in Rivers State, Nigeria

Wogu

Nduka

2018

Journal of Tropical Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The World Health Organization's policy on laboratory test of all suspected malaria cases before treatment has not yielded significant effects in several rural areas of Sub-Saharan Africa due to inadequate diagnostic infrastructure, leading to high morbidity and mortality rates. A cross-sectional randomized study was conducted to evaluate the validity of clinical malaria diagnosis through comparison with microscopy and rapid diagnostic test kits (RDTs) using 1000 consenting outpatients of a tertiary hospital in Nigeria. Physicians conducted clinical diagnosis, and blood samples were collected through venous procedure and analyzed for malaria parasites using Giemsa microscopy and RDT kits. Microscopy was considered the diagnostic “gold standard” and all data obtained were statistically analyzed using Chi-square test with a P value <0.05 considered significant. Malaria prevalence values of 20.1%, 43.1%, and 29.7% were obtained for clinical diagnosis, microscopy, and RDTs, respectively (P < 0.05). Values of 47.2%, 95.9%, and 77.8% were obtained for sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy, respectively, in clinical diagnosis, while RDTs had sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy values of 73.7%, 97.3%, and 88.3%, respectively, when compared to microscopy (P < 0.05). Clinical diagnosed malaria cases should be confirmed with a parasite-based laboratory diagnosis and more qualitative research is needed to explore why clinicians still use clinical diagnosis despite reported cases of its ineffectiveness.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 78%

Evaluating Malaria Prevalence Using Clinical Diagnosis Compared with Microscopy and Rapid Diagnostic Tests in a Tertiary Healthcare Facility in Rivers State, Nigeria

Wogu

Nduka

2018

Journal of Tropical Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…13,14,15 The low sensitivity of this study is in agreement with the research conducted by Oyeyemi et al in Ijebu Ode, western part of Nigeria, who reported a sensitivity and specificity of 42.5% and 87.1%, respectively. 5 Garba et al 16 at Gusau, Nigeria, who worked on comparison of microscopy and rapid diagnostic test in under five children, got a sensitivity of 9.1%. However, the sensitivity of 29% in this study is far below that obtained by researchers like Ezeudu at the children's outpatient clinic and children's emergency room of Nnamdi Azikiwe University Teaching Hospital (NAUTH) Nnewi, Nigeria, who reported a sensitivity and specificity of 80% and 93.8%, respectively.…”

Section: Determination Of Sensitivity and Specificity Of Malaria Rapid Diagnostic Testmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensitivity and specificity of malaria rapid diagnostic test (mRDT CareStatTM) compared with microscopy amongst under five children attending a primary care clinic in southern Nigeria

Ogunfowokan

Nwajei

2020

Afr. j. prim. health care fam. med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Malaria diagnosis using microscopy is currently the gold standard. However, malaria rapid diagnostic tests (mRDTs) were developed to simplify the diagnosis in regions without access to functional microscopy.Aim: The objective of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of mRDT CareStatTM with microscopy.Setting: This study was conducted in the paediatric primary care clinic of the Federal Medical Centre, Asaba, Nigeria.Methods: A cross-sectional study for diagnostic accuracy was conducted from May 2016 to October 2016. Ninety-eight participants were involved to obtain a precision of 5%, sensitivity of mRDT CareStatTM of 95% from published work and 95% level of confidence after adjusting for 20% non-response rate or missing data. Consecutive participants were tested using both microscopy and mRDT. The results were analysed using EPI Info Version 7.Results: A total of 98 children aged 3–59 months were enrolled. Malaria prevalence was found to be 53% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 46% – 60%), whilst sensitivity and specificity were 29% (95% CI = 20% – 38%) and 89% (95% CI = 83% – 95%), respectively. The positive and negative predictive values were 75% (95% CI = 66.4% – 83.6%) and 53% (95% CI = 46% – 60%), respectively.Conclusion: Agreement between malaria parasitaemia using microscopy and mRDT positivity increased with increase in the parasite density. The mRDT might be negative when malaria parasite density using microscopy is low.

show abstract

“…Malaria presents a diagnostic challenge in most tropical countries including Rwanda. Microscopy remains the gold standard for diagnosing malaria, but it is labor-intensive and depends upon the skill of the examiner [6]. Malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) have been developed as an easy, convenient alternative to microscopy, a high-degree of disease spectrum for quick intervention in order to avert danger associated with delayed diagnosis [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic Performance between Histidine-Rich Protein 2 (HRP-2), a Rapid Malaria Diagnostic Test and Microscopic-Based Staining Techniques for Diagnosis of Malaria

Niyibizi

Gatera

2020

Journal of Tropical Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Malaria presents a diagnostic challenge in most tropical countries such as Rwanda. Microscopy remains the gold standard for diagnosing malaria, but it is labor intensive and depends upon the skill of the examiner. Malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) have been developed as an easy, convenient alternative to microscopy. is cross-sectional study was conducted at Rukara Health Center which is located in Eastern Province, Kayonza district, Rwanda. One hundred and fifty suspected cases of malaria, who attended Rukara Health Centre, during the period, from 21 st June to 30th July 2018, were included in this study. HRP-2 RDTs (CareStart ™ Malaria HRP-2 (Access Bio, Inc., Somerset, New Jersey, USA)), for malaria were performed. ick smears were prepared and Giemsa-stained as recommended; then slides were observed under microscopy and reported quantitatively; RDTs were reported qualitatively (positive or negative). Both RDTs and thick smear results were recorded on data collection sheet. is study included a total of 150 study participants, 87 (58%) females and 63 (42%) males. e patients included in the study did not receive any antimalarial drug. e mean age of the study participants was 31.6 ± 12.4 with the majority of participants being between 25 and 44 years and the minority being above 65 years. e sensitivity of RDT (HRP-2) was calculated and found to be 95.0%, whereas the sensitivity of Giemsa microscopy was 100%. e specificity of RDT (HRP-2) was calculated and found to be 59.2%, whereas the specificity of Giemsa microscopy was 100%. Negative and positive predictive values of RDT are 85.4% and 82.7%, respectively. Negative and positive predictive values of Giemsa microscopy were both 100%. According to the results of the current study, the sensitivity, specificity, and both positive and negative predictive values of Giemsa microscopy are higher than those of histidine-rich protein 2-based rapid diagnostic test for malaria. e results obtained in histidine-rich protein 2-based rapid diagnostic test for malaria parasites should be confirmed with tests with high specificity. Further studies should determine the most appropriate type of rapid diagnostic test of malaria diagnosis to be used in combination with Giemsa microscopy. In addition, sensitivity and specificity of RDT (HRP-2) and Giemsa microscopy should be assessed against molecular biology techniques.

show abstract

Diagnosis of malaria: A comparison between microscopy and rapid diagnostic test among under-five children at Gusau, Nigeria

Cited by 14 publications

References 0 publications

Evaluating Malaria Prevalence Using Clinical Diagnosis Compared with Microscopy and Rapid Diagnostic Tests in a Tertiary Healthcare Facility in Rivers State, Nigeria

Evaluating Malaria Prevalence Using Clinical Diagnosis Compared with Microscopy and Rapid Diagnostic Tests in a Tertiary Healthcare Facility in Rivers State, Nigeria

Sensitivity and specificity of malaria rapid diagnostic test (mRDT CareStatTM) compared with microscopy amongst under five children attending a primary care clinic in southern Nigeria

Diagnostic Performance between Histidine-Rich Protein 2 (HRP-2), a Rapid Malaria Diagnostic Test and Microscopic-Based Staining Techniques for Diagnosis of Malaria

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About