Unravelling the quality of malaria microscopy across Kinshasa, DR Congo.

MalariaWorld journal Pub Date : 2024-02-09 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.5281/zenodo.10630995
Pierre Mukadi-Kaningu, Fortunat Kandanda Muele, Nestor Tshimanga, Joel Unandu, Brigitte Mbuyam-Ba Mbamba, Eric Mukomena Sompwe
{"title":"Unravelling the quality of malaria microscopy across Kinshasa, DR Congo.","authors":"Pierre Mukadi-Kaningu, Fortunat Kandanda Muele, Nestor Tshimanga, Joel Unandu, Brigitte Mbuyam-Ba Mbamba, Eric Mukomena Sompwe","doi":"10.5281/zenodo.10630995","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In the current study we assessed clinical laboratories' staff ability across the city of Kinshasa with particular focus on their practices and performance regarding malaria microscopy.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This was a non-random cross-sectional study included clinical laboratories in Kinshasa and focused on cross-checking of blood slides, a questionnaire and checklist according to standardised analytic malaria microscopy procedures. Regarding the cross-checking of slides, participant responses were considered 'corrects' in cases of complete congruence with the reference; 'acceptable' for malaria-positive slides but no identification of <i>Plasmodium</i> species, stage of development, parasite density and/or reported as <i>P. falciparum</i> instead of 'P. non falciparum'; and 'incorrect' if 'false positive' and 'false negative' cases.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-eight among the 90 targeted clinical laboratories (participation 97.8%) took part in the investigation from February to July 2019. The ability assessment revealed that individuals qualified to perform thick blood films (TBF) according to the national malaria control program (NMCP) procedures ranged from 48.6% to 100.0%. Overall cross-checking performance of 167 eligible routine slides was relatively low: 37.7%; 25.8% and 36.5% of correct, acceptable and incorrect responses, respectively. The first routine slide was correctly and acceptably scored respectively by 35.3% and 28.2% of participating laboratories (n = 85); and the second, by 40.2% and 23.2% respectively (n = 82). The sensitivity and specificity were found to be 79.4% and 53.8%, respectively. However, the relative high scores reported in relation with the ability needed to perform TBF based on NMCP standards contrasted with the poor performance from cross-checking slides. Consecutively, only one-third of the 88 participating laboratories reached a score > 60% in agreement with NMCP procedures and had acceptable responses to cross-checked slides.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The study was conducted as part of the activities relating to \"Ensuring early diagnosis and prompt malaria treatment\" component of the national malaria control strategy with NMCP support. More laboratories must implement clear and standardised malaria microscopy procedures, and need to include more rigorous quality control.</p>","PeriodicalId":74100,"journal":{"name":"MalariaWorld journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10949414/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MalariaWorld journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10630995","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: In the current study we assessed clinical laboratories' staff ability across the city of Kinshasa with particular focus on their practices and performance regarding malaria microscopy.

Materials and methods: This was a non-random cross-sectional study included clinical laboratories in Kinshasa and focused on cross-checking of blood slides, a questionnaire and checklist according to standardised analytic malaria microscopy procedures. Regarding the cross-checking of slides, participant responses were considered 'corrects' in cases of complete congruence with the reference; 'acceptable' for malaria-positive slides but no identification of Plasmodium species, stage of development, parasite density and/or reported as P. falciparum instead of 'P. non falciparum'; and 'incorrect' if 'false positive' and 'false negative' cases.

Results: Eighty-eight among the 90 targeted clinical laboratories (participation 97.8%) took part in the investigation from February to July 2019. The ability assessment revealed that individuals qualified to perform thick blood films (TBF) according to the national malaria control program (NMCP) procedures ranged from 48.6% to 100.0%. Overall cross-checking performance of 167 eligible routine slides was relatively low: 37.7%; 25.8% and 36.5% of correct, acceptable and incorrect responses, respectively. The first routine slide was correctly and acceptably scored respectively by 35.3% and 28.2% of participating laboratories (n = 85); and the second, by 40.2% and 23.2% respectively (n = 82). The sensitivity and specificity were found to be 79.4% and 53.8%, respectively. However, the relative high scores reported in relation with the ability needed to perform TBF based on NMCP standards contrasted with the poor performance from cross-checking slides. Consecutively, only one-third of the 88 participating laboratories reached a score > 60% in agreement with NMCP procedures and had acceptable responses to cross-checked slides.

Conclusions: The study was conducted as part of the activities relating to "Ensuring early diagnosis and prompt malaria treatment" component of the national malaria control strategy with NMCP support. More laboratories must implement clear and standardised malaria microscopy procedures, and need to include more rigorous quality control.

了解刚果民主共和国金沙萨疟疾显微镜检查的质量。
简介:在本研究中,我们评估了金沙萨市临床实验室工作人员的能力,尤其关注他们在疟疾显微镜检查方面的实践和表现:在本次研究中,我们评估了金沙萨市临床实验室工作人员的能力,尤其关注他们在疟疾显微镜检查方面的实践和表现:这是一项非随机横断面研究,研究对象包括金沙萨的临床实验室,重点是根据标准化疟疾显微镜分析程序交叉检查血片、问卷和核对表。关于切片的交叉核对,如果与参考文献完全一致,参与者的回答将被视为 "正确";如果切片显示疟疾阳性,但未确定疟原虫种类、发育阶段、寄生虫密度和/或报告为恶性疟原虫而非 "非恶性疟原虫",参与者的回答将被视为 "可接受";如果出现 "假阳性 "和 "假阴性 "病例,参与者的回答将被视为 "不正确":90 家目标临床实验室中有 88 家(参与率 97.8%)参加了 2019 年 2 月至 7 月的调查。能力评估结果显示,根据国家疟疾防治计划(NMCP)程序,有资格进行血液浓片(TBF)检查的人员占 48.6% 至 100.0%。167 张合格常规玻片的总体交叉核对成绩相对较低:正确、可接受和不正确回答的比例分别为 37.7%、25.8% 和 36.5%。参与实验室中,第一张常规切片的正确率和可接受率分别为 35.3% 和 28.2%(n = 85);第二张常规切片的正确率和可接受率分别为 40.2% 和 23.2%(n = 82)。灵敏度和特异性分别为 79.4% 和 53.8%。然而,根据 NMCP 标准进行 TBF 所需的能力得分相对较高,而交叉核对切片的表现却较差。在 88 个参与研究的实验室中,只有三分之一的实验室在与 NMCP 程序的一致性方面达到了 60% 以上的分数,并且对交叉核对切片的反应是可接受的:这项研究是在国家疟疾防治方案的支持下,作为国家疟疾防治战略 "确保早期诊断和及时治疗 "相关活动的一部分进行的。更多的实验室必须实施明确和标准化的疟疾显微镜检查程序,并需要进行更严格的质量控制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信