Publications & Reports

Comparison of Parascreen Pan/Pf, Paracheck Pf and light microscopy for detection of malaria among febrile patients, Northwest Ethiopia.

Tekola Endeshaw, Patricia M Graves, Estifanos Biru Shargie, Teshome Gebre, Berhan Ayele, Gideon Yohannes, Mulat Zerihun, Asrat Genet, Berhanu Melak, Amha Kebede, Daddi Jima, Zerihun Tadesse, Jeremiah Ngondi, Aryc W Mosher, Frank O Richards, Paul M Emerson
The Carter Center, Addis Ababa, 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/microl 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.

Publication

  • Journal: Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
  • Published: 01/07/2010
  • Volume: 104
  • Issue: 7
  • Pagination: 467-474

Author