↓ Skip to main content

Field evaluation of the 22 rapid diagnostic tests for community management of malaria with artemisinin combination therapy in Cameroon

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Field evaluation of the 22 rapid diagnostic tests for community management of malaria with artemisinin combination therapy in Cameroon
Published in
Malaria Journal, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12936-016-1085-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Innocent M. Ali, Jude D. Bigoga, Dorothy A. Forsah, Fidelis Cho-Ngwa, Vivian Tchinda, Vicky Ama Moor, Josephine Fogako, Philomena Nyongalema, Theresa Nkoa, Albert Same-Ekobo, Joseph Mbede, Etienne Fondjo, Wilfred F. Mbacham, Rose G. F. Leke

Abstract

All suspected cases of malaria should receive a diagnostic test prior to treatment with artemisinin-based combinations based on the new WHO malaria treatment guidelines. This study compared the accuracy and some operational characteristics of 22 different immunochromatographic antigen capture point-of- malaria tests (RDTs) in Cameroon to inform test procurement prior to deployment of artemisinin-based combinations for malaria treatment. One hundred human blood samples (50 positive and 50 negative) collected from consenting febrile patients in two health centres at Yaoundé were used for evaluation of the 22 RDTs categorized as "Pf Only" (9) or "Pf + PAN" (13) based on parasite antigen captured [histidine rich protein II (HRP2) or lactate dehydrogenase (pLDH) or aldolase]. RDTs were coded to blind technicians performing the tests. The sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of the positive and negative tests (PPV and NPV) as well as the likelihood ratios were assessed. The reliability and some operational characteristics were determined as the mean values from two assessors, and the Cohen's kappa statistic was then used to compare agreement. Light microscopy was the referent. Of all RDTs tested, 94.2 % (21/22) had sensitivity values greater than 90 % among which 14 (63.6 %) were 'Pf + PAN' RDTs. The specificity was generally lower than the sensitivity for all RDTs and poorer for "Pf Only" RDTs. The predictive values and likelihood ratios were better for non-HRP2 analytes for "Pf + PAN" RDTs. The Kappa value for most of the tests obtained was around 67 % (95 % CI 50-69 %), corresponding to a moderate agreement. Overall, 94.2 % (21/22) of RDTs tested had accuracy within the range recommended by the WHO, while one performed poorly, below acceptable levels. Seven "Pf + PAN" and 3 "Pf Only" RDTs were selected for further assessment based on performance characteristics. Harmonizing RDT test presentation and procedures would prevent mistakes of test performance and interpretation.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 64 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 20%
Researcher 9 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 14%
Student > Postgraduate 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 13 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 5%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 16 25%