Masanja Irene M, McMorrow Meredith L, Maganga Mussa B, Sumari Debora, Udhayakumar Venkatachalam, McElroy Peter D, Kachur S Patrick, Lucchi Naomi W
Health System Sciences, Ifakara Health Institute, PO Box 78373, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Malaria Branch, Centers for Global Health, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Malar J. 2015 Feb 19;14:85. doi: 10.1186/s12936-015-0597-3.
The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends parasitologic confirmation of suspected malaria cases before treatment. Due to the limited availability of quality microscopy services, this recommendation has become scalable following increased use of antigen-detecting malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) in many malaria-endemic countries. This study was carried out to monitor quality of RDT performance in selected health facilities using two quality assurance (QA) methods: reference microscopy and detection of parasite DNA by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) on dried blood spots (DBS).
Blood samples for QA were collected from patients undergoing RDT for diagnostic confirmation of malaria during two to three consecutive days per month in 12 health facilities in rural Tanzania. Stained blood smears (BS) were first examined at the district hospitals (BS1) and then at a reference laboratory (BS2). Discordant BS1 and BS2 results prompted a third examination. Molecular analysis was carried out at the Ifakara Health Institute laboratory in Bagamoyo.
Malaria RDTs had a higher positivity rate (6.5%) than qPCR (4.2%) or microscopy (2.9% for BS1 and 2.5% for BS2). Poor correlation was observed between RDT and BS results: BS1 (K = 0.5), BS2 (K = 0.43) and qPCR (K = 0.45), challenging the utility of these tests for RDT QA. In addition, many challenges related to qPCR processing were recorded and long delays in obtaining QA test results for both microscopy and qPCR.
Overall there was limited agreement among the three diagnostic approaches and neither microscopy nor qPCR appear to be good QA options for RDTs under field conditions.
世界卫生组织(WHO)建议在治疗前对疑似疟疾病例进行寄生虫学确诊。由于高质量显微镜检查服务的可及性有限,随着许多疟疾流行国家增加使用抗原检测疟疾快速诊断试验(RDT),这一建议已变得可扩展。本研究旨在使用两种质量保证(QA)方法监测选定卫生设施中RDT性能的质量:参考显微镜检查和通过对干血斑(DBS)进行实时定量聚合酶链反应(qPCR)检测寄生虫DNA。
在坦桑尼亚农村的12个卫生设施中,每月连续两到三天从接受RDT以确诊疟疾的患者中采集用于QA的血样。首先在地区医院检查染色血涂片(BS)(BS1),然后在参考实验室检查(BS2)。BS1和BS2结果不一致时会进行第三次检查。在巴加莫约的伊法卡拉卫生研究所实验室进行分子分析。
疟疾RDT的阳性率(6.5%)高于qPCR(4.2%)或显微镜检查(BS1为2.9%,BS2为2.5%)。观察到RDT与BS结果之间的相关性较差:与BS1的kappa值(K = 0.5)、BS2的kappa值(K = 0.43)以及qPCR的kappa值(K = 0.45),这对这些检测用于RDT质量保证的效用提出了挑战。此外,记录了许多与qPCR处理相关的挑战,并且在获得显微镜检查和qPCR的QA检测结果方面存在长时间延迟。
总体而言,这三种诊断方法之间的一致性有限,在现场条件下,显微镜检查和qPCR似乎都不是用于RDT的良好质量保证选项。