Volume 104, Issue 7 , Pages 467-474, July 2010
Comparison of Parascreen Pan/Pf, Paracheck Pf and light microscopy for detection of malaria among febrile patients, Northwest Ethiopia
Abstract
Two malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDT), Parascreen Pan/Pf® and Paracheck Pf®, were tested in rural health centres in Ethiopia against independent expert microscopy (the gold standard). Participants (n =1997) presented with presumptive malaria to ten health centers in Amhara Regional State during the 2007 peak malaria season (October to December). By microscopy, 475 (23.8%) suspected malaria cases were positive, of which 57.7% were P. falciparum; 24.6% P. vivax and 17.7% mixed infections. Parascreen and Paracheck were positive for 442 (22.1%) and 277 (13.9%) febrile patients, respectively. For Parascreen, P. falciparum sensitivity was 79.6%, specificity 97.4%, positive predictive value (PPV) 86.9%, and negative predictive value (NPV) 95.6%. For Parascreen, P. vivax sensitivity was 74.4%, specificity 98.6%, PPV 76.3% and NPV 98.4%. For Paracheck, P. falciparum sensitivity was 73.7%, specificity 99.2%, PPV 95.3%, NPV 94.5%. Sensitivity was significantly higher for both tests (P
<
0.05) when parasite density was >100/μl of blood; in these cases Parascreen was 90.7% and 91.5% sensitive for P. falciparum and P. vivax, respectively, while Paracheck was 87.9% sensitive for P. falciparum. Parascreen thus performed adequately for both P. falciparum and P. vivax compared to expert microscopy and is more useful than Paracheck where microscopy is unavailable.
Keywords: Ethiopia, Malaria, Microscopy, Paracheck Pf, Parascreen Pf/Pan, Rapid Diagnostic Test
To access this article, please choose from the options below
PII: S0035-9203(10)00071-4
doi:10.1016/j.trstmh.2010.03.003
© 2010 Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Volume 104, Issue 7 , Pages 467-474, July 2010
