| Literature DB >> 22647557 |
Amidou Diarra1, Issa Nébié, Alfred Tiono, Souleymane Sanon, Issiaka Soulama, Alphonse Ouédraogo, Adama Gansané, Jean B Yaro, Espérance Ouédraogo, Alfred S Traoré, Sodiomon B Sirima.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Treatment of confirmed malaria patients with Artemisinin-based Combination Therapy (ACT) at remote areas is the goal of many anti-malaria programs. Introduction of effective and affordable malaria Rapid Diagnosis Test (RDT) in remote areas could be an alternative tool for malaria case management. This study aimed to assess performance of the OptiMAL dipstick for rapid malaria diagnosis in children under five.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22647557 PMCID: PMC3461428 DOI: 10.1186/1756-3305-5-103
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Performance of the RDT compared to light microscopy
| Positive | 1768 | 235 | 2003 |
| Negative | 205 | 1011 | 1216 |
| Total | 1973 | 1246 | 3219 |
Demographic and parasitological data
| Sex ratio | 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.93 |
| Mean age (years) | 1.3 | 1.2 | 1.3 |
| Children with fever ≥37.5 °C (%) | 75.5 | 78.6 | 77.4 |
| Children with history of fever (%) | 24.5 | 21.4 | 22.6 |
| Positive by microscopy (%) | 41 | 73.3 | 61.1 |
| Positive by RDT (%) | 39.2 | 74.6 | 61.2 |
| Positive by microscopy and negative by RDT (%) | 10.7 | 5.2 | 7.3 |
| Negative by microscopy and positive by RDT (%) | 7.1 | 5.9 | 6.3 |
| 37.8 | 71.1 | 58.6 | |
| RDT positive for | 28.9 | 66.3 | 52.2 |
| 3.5 | 1.4 | 2.2 | |
| RDT positive for | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 |
| 1.1 | 0.4 | 0.7 | |
| RDT positive for | 0.7 | 0.2 | 0.4 |
| 0.6 | 0.09 | 0.3 | |
| RDT positive for | 0.1 | 0 | 0.2 |
| Mixed | 3.1 | 2.1 | 2.5 |
| RDT positive for mixed | 2.2 | 2 | 2.1 |
| Geometric means of | 3921(3201–4804) | 14615(13187–16197) |
*Mixed infections = P. falciparum with P. malaria or P. ovale, or P. malariae with P. ovale.
OptiMAL-IT performance during different malaria transmission seasons
| Sensitivity (%) | 74.9(70.9-78.5) | 92.9(91.5-94.1) | 0.001 | 88.2(86.7-89.6) |
| Specificity (%) | 87.5(84.8-89.9) | 77.2(73.4-80.8) | 0.001 | 83.1(80.9-85.2) |
| PPV (%) | 81.8(78.0-85.2) | 92(90.5-93.3) | 0.001 | 89.6(88.1-90.9) |
| NPV (%) | 82.3(79.3-85.0) | 79.4(75.6-82.8) | 0.04 | 81.2(78.9-83.4) |
P: P value for comparison between low and high malaria transmission seasons.
PPV: Positive Predictive Value.
NPV: Negative Predictive Value.
Sensitivity of OptiMAL-IT at different levels of peripheral parasitemia during different malaria transmission seasons
| [0–100] | 29 | 10.2 (2.1-27.3) | 37 | 45.9 (29.4-63.0) | 0.001 |
| [100–500] | 76 | 40.7 (29.6-52.6) | 91 | 67.0 (56.3-76.5) | 0.001 |
| [500–1,000] | 41 | 56.0 (39.7-71.5) | 66 | 71.2 (58.7-81.6) | 0.11 |
| [1,000-5,000] | 109 | 82.5 (74.1-89.1) | 184 | 90.2 (84.9-94.0) | 0.05 |
| [5,000-10,000] | 37 | 83.7 (67.9-93.8) | 114 | 98.2 (93.8-99.7) | 0.002 |
| > 10,000 | 203 | 97.5 (94.3-99.1) | 981 | 98.8 (98.0-99.4) | 0.24 |
P: P value for comparison between low and high malaria transmission seasons.
Sensitivity and specificity of OptiMAL-IT in different age groups and during different malaria transmission seasons
| [0–1] | 84.3 (75.5-90.9) | 88.2 (83.8-91.8) | 94.1 (91.3-96.1) | 78.6 (72.5-83.9) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| [1–2] | 82.6 (74.0-89.4) | 89.2 (83.0-93.6) | 93.5 (90.5-95.8) | 76.6 (68.6-83.4) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| [2–3] | 76.6 (68.6-83.4) | 89.7 (82.7-94.5) | 94.3 (91.3-96.5) | 74.7 (64.5-83.2) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| [3–4] | 68.2 (58.4-77.0) | 88.6 (79.4-94.6) | 92.5 (87.9-95.7) | 80.0 (66.2-89.9) | 0.001 | 0.01 |
| [4–5] | 58.1 (46.0-69.4) | 79.4 (67.8-88.2) | 84.8 (77.9-90.2) | 77.4 (58.9-90.4) | 0.001 | 0.6 |
P: P value for comparison of sensitivity between seasons; P*: P value for comparison of specificity between malaria transmission seasons.
Malaria asexual parasite density and distribution of RDT false negative results, by season
| [0–100] | 26 | 21.8 | 20 | 20 |
| [100–500] | 45 | 37.8 | 30 | 30 |
| [500–1,000] | 18 | 15.1 | 19 | 19 |
| [1,000-5,000] | 19 | 15.9 | 18 | 18 |
| [5,000-10,000[ | 11 | 09.2 | 13 | 13 |