| Literature DB >> 32854715 |
Guluma Tadesse1, Claire Kamaliddin2,3, Cody Doolan2,3, Ranmalee Amarasekara2,3, Ruth Legese2,3, Abu Naser Mohon2,3, James Cheaveau2,3, Delenasaw Yewhalaw1,4, Dylan R Pillai5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: 125 million women are pregnant each year in malaria endemic areas and are, therefore, at risk of Malaria in Pregnancy (MiP). MiP is the direct consequence of Plasmodium infection during pregnancy. The sequestration of Plasmodium falciparum parasites in the placenta adversely affects fetal development and impacts newborn birth weight. Importantly, women presenting with MiP commonly develop anaemia. In Ethiopia, the Ministry of Health recommends screening symptomatic women only at antenatal care visits with no formal intermittent preventive therapy. Since MiP can display low-level parasitaemia, current tests which include microscopy and RDT are challenged to detect these cases. Loop mediated isothermal Amplification (LAMP) technology is a highly sensitive technique for DNA detection and is field compatible. This study aims to evaluate the impact of active malaria case detection during pregnancy using LAMP technology in terms of birth outcomes.Entities:
Keywords: Anemia; Asymptomatic infections; Ethiopia; LAMP; Low birth weight; Malaria; Pregnancy
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32854715 PMCID: PMC7457308 DOI: 10.1186/s12936-020-03380-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Malar J ISSN: 1475-2875 Impact factor: 2.979
Fig. 1Flowchart depicting enrolment and follow-up of pregnant women at Gimbo and Gojeb Health Centres, Kafa Zone, SW Ethiopia
Description of the population at inclusion of the study
| Characteristic | All (n = 199) | LAMP (n = 149) | SOC (n = 50) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, mean (SD), years | 26.4 (4.6) | 26.2 (4.6) | 27.1(4.8) | 0.224 |
| Haemoglobin, median (IQR), g/dL | 12.00 (1.25) | 12.00 (1.20) | 12.01 (1.30) | 0.698 |
| Parity, no. (%) | 0.012 | |||
| Primiparous | 58 (29.1) | 36 (24.2) | 22 (44.0) | |
| Multiparous | 141 (70.9) | 113 (75.8) | 28 (56.0) | |
| Gestational age, mean (SD), weeks | 16.4 (5.8) | 16.4 (5.8) | 16.3 (5.7) | 0.863 |
| Educational level, no. (%) | 0.794 | |||
| Illiterate | 78 (39.2) | 60 (40.3) | 18 (36.0) | |
| Read/write | 84 (42.2) | 64 (42.9) | 20 (40.0) | |
| Primary school | 23 (11.6) | 16 (10.7) | 7 (14.0) | |
| Secondary school | 12 (6.0) | 8 (5.4) | 4 (8.0) | |
| College/above | 2 (1.0) | 1 (0.7) | 1 (2.0) | |
| Occupation, no. (%) | 0.209 | |||
| Daily labourer | 56 (28.1) | 37 (24.8) | 19 (38.0) | |
| Farmer | 85 (42.7) | 66 (44.3) | 19 (38.0) | |
| Merchant | 18 (9.1) | 16 (10.7) | 2 (4.0) | |
| Housewife | 40 (20.1) | 30 (20.1) | 10 (20.0) | |
| Use of ITN, no. (%) | 0.897 | |||
| No usage | 80 (40.2) | 61 (40.9) | 19 (38.0) | |
| Rare | 83 (41.7) | 62 (41.7) | 21 (42.0) | |
| Systematic | 36 (18.1) | 26 (17.4) | 10 (20.0) | |
| | 4/199 (2.0) | 3/149 (2.0) | 1/50 (2.0) | 0.801 |
Data are presented for all patients, as well as for each study arm. P-values are displayed for comparison between the two arms. Categorical variable were compared using Chi square test and continuous variables using Student’s t test
IQR interquartile range, SD standard deviation, ITN insecticide treated nets, LAMP loop mediated amplification, SOC standard of care
* At inclusion, estimation using stained thick blood smear
Fig. 2Characteristics of women at study inclusion (n = 193). Bars represent the proportion (%) of women with corresponding symptoms. Errors bars represent 95% confidence interval
Birth outcomes related to the study
| Characteristic | All (n = 193) | LAMP (n = 143) | SOC (n = 50) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preterm birth (no, %) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | N/A |
| Still birth (no, %) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | N/A |
| Newborn haemoglobin (g/dL) (mean, Q1–Q3) | 13.0 [12.7–13.6] | 13.1 [12.8–13.7] | 12.8 [12.0–13.4] | 0.024 |
| Maternal haemoglobin (g/dL) (mean, Q1–Q3) | 11.5 [11.0–12.0] | 11.5 [11.0–12.0] | 11.6 [11.0–12.0] | 0.771 |
| Low birth weight (no, %) | 7 (3.5) | 0 (0) | 7 (14) | < 0.001 |
| Birth weight (kg) (mean, Q1–Q3) | 3.034 [2.750–3.200] | 3.059 [2.761–2.960] | 2.965 [2.735–3.155] | 0.148 |
Results are presented for all included women and per study arm. Categorical variables were compared using Chi square test and continuous variables using Student’s t test
LAMP loop mediated amplification, SOC standard of care
Performance of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) and microscopy using LAMP as a gold standard (n = 435 samples)
| LAMP | Microscopy | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Positive | Negative | ||
| Positive | 5 | 4 | 9 |
| Negative | 0 | 426 | 426 |
| Total | 5 | 430 | 435 |
| Sensitivity | 55.6% (95% CI 21.10–86.30) | ||
| Specificity | 100.00% (95% CI 99.14–100.00) | ||
Data is presented as percentages with 95% confidence interval