一步尿疟疾试验(UMT)与快速诊断试验(RDT)对喀麦隆法科发热患者诊断性能特征的比较评估

N. C. Awah, Rengerline Bihnwi Nchotu, Agnes Djema Bongah, J. Assob
{"title":"一步尿疟疾试验(UMT)与快速诊断试验(RDT)对喀麦隆法科发热患者诊断性能特征的比较评估","authors":"N. C. Awah, Rengerline Bihnwi Nchotu, Agnes Djema Bongah, J. Assob","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-33603/v1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Background : Presently, all malaria diagnostic methods like: microscopy and Rapid Diagnostic Tests (RDT) are invasive as they depend on blood samples for malaria diagnosis. Hence this study was aimed at comparing the diagnostic performance characteristics of the novel Urine Malaria Test (UMT) to the currently used Blood RDT, and to find out the efficacy of this UMT in detecting low parasitaemia in the study population. Methodology : A cross sectional study involving 200 febrile participants, with no signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis and kidney diseases, no history of hematuria, >15/µl leucocytes and urobilinogens of > 1 mg/dl in their urine, were recruited from the month of April to August 2017 in the Limbe and Buea Regional Hospitals. The main samples requested for analyses were urine and blood. Results : Using the blood smear microscopy as standard, out of the 200 participants, 93 (46.5%) were positive for P . malaria. UMT had a sensitivity and specificity of 82.41% and 83.48 while that of RDT was 84.09% and 83.03 respectively falciparum (CI: 72.80 to 92.05%, Kappa 0.665, p =0.001). The UMT had a lowest limit of detection of 140 parasites/μl which was similar to RDT. The PPV and NPV of UMT and RDT were (81.74% and 85.98%) and (80.04% and 87.28%), respectively. There was a close agreement between the RDT and UMT when compared to microscopy (83.5% and 83.0% respectively). Conclusion : The UMT kit that was evaluated in comparison to the blood based RDT, showed a lot of similarities using the blood smear microscopy as gold standard. Hence, it can be recommended for the prompt and accurate diagnosis of malaria in febrile patients.","PeriodicalId":93064,"journal":{"name":"Advancements in journal of urology and nephrology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Evaluation of the Diagnostic Performance Characteristics of a One-Step Urine Malaria Test (UMT) against Rapid Diagnostic Tests (RDT) in Febrile Patients from Fako Division, Cameroon\",\"authors\":\"N. C. Awah, Rengerline Bihnwi Nchotu, Agnes Djema Bongah, J. Assob\",\"doi\":\"10.21203/rs.3.rs-33603/v1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Background : Presently, all malaria diagnostic methods like: microscopy and Rapid Diagnostic Tests (RDT) are invasive as they depend on blood samples for malaria diagnosis. Hence this study was aimed at comparing the diagnostic performance characteristics of the novel Urine Malaria Test (UMT) to the currently used Blood RDT, and to find out the efficacy of this UMT in detecting low parasitaemia in the study population. Methodology : A cross sectional study involving 200 febrile participants, with no signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis and kidney diseases, no history of hematuria, >15/µl leucocytes and urobilinogens of > 1 mg/dl in their urine, were recruited from the month of April to August 2017 in the Limbe and Buea Regional Hospitals. The main samples requested for analyses were urine and blood. Results : Using the blood smear microscopy as standard, out of the 200 participants, 93 (46.5%) were positive for P . malaria. UMT had a sensitivity and specificity of 82.41% and 83.48 while that of RDT was 84.09% and 83.03 respectively falciparum (CI: 72.80 to 92.05%, Kappa 0.665, p =0.001). The UMT had a lowest limit of detection of 140 parasites/μl which was similar to RDT. The PPV and NPV of UMT and RDT were (81.74% and 85.98%) and (80.04% and 87.28%), respectively. There was a close agreement between the RDT and UMT when compared to microscopy (83.5% and 83.0% respectively). Conclusion : The UMT kit that was evaluated in comparison to the blood based RDT, showed a lot of similarities using the blood smear microscopy as gold standard. Hence, it can be recommended for the prompt and accurate diagnosis of malaria in febrile patients.\",\"PeriodicalId\":93064,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advancements in journal of urology and nephrology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advancements in journal of urology and nephrology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-33603/v1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advancements in journal of urology and nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-33603/v1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:目前,所有的疟疾诊断方法,如显微镜和快速诊断测试(RDT)都是侵入性的,因为它们依赖于血液样本来诊断疟疾。因此,本研究旨在比较新型尿液疟疾测试(UMT)与目前使用的血液RDT的诊断性能特征,并了解该UMT在检测研究人群中低寄生虫血症方面的疗效。方法:2017年4月至8月,在Limbe和Buea地区医院招募了一项横断面研究,涉及200名发热参与者,他们没有类风湿性关节炎和肾脏疾病的体征和症状,没有血尿史,尿液中白细胞>15/µl,尿胆原>1 mg/dl。要求进行分析的主要样本是尿液和血液。结果:以血液涂片镜检为标准,在200名参与者中,93人(46.5%)P呈阳性。疟疾UMT对恶性疟原虫的敏感性和特异性分别为82.41%和83.48,RDT的敏感性和特异度分别为84.09%和83.03(CI:72.80-92.05%,Kappa 0.665,p=0.001)。UMT和RDT的PPV和NPV分别为(81.74%和85.98%)和(80.04%和87.28%)。与显微镜检查相比,RDT和UMT之间的一致性非常高(分别为83.5%和83.0%)。结论:UMT试剂盒与基于血液的RDT相比,使用血液涂片显微镜作为金标准显示出许多相似性。因此,它可以被推荐用于发热患者疟疾的快速准确诊断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative Evaluation of the Diagnostic Performance Characteristics of a One-Step Urine Malaria Test (UMT) against Rapid Diagnostic Tests (RDT) in Febrile Patients from Fako Division, Cameroon
Background : Presently, all malaria diagnostic methods like: microscopy and Rapid Diagnostic Tests (RDT) are invasive as they depend on blood samples for malaria diagnosis. Hence this study was aimed at comparing the diagnostic performance characteristics of the novel Urine Malaria Test (UMT) to the currently used Blood RDT, and to find out the efficacy of this UMT in detecting low parasitaemia in the study population. Methodology : A cross sectional study involving 200 febrile participants, with no signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis and kidney diseases, no history of hematuria, >15/µl leucocytes and urobilinogens of > 1 mg/dl in their urine, were recruited from the month of April to August 2017 in the Limbe and Buea Regional Hospitals. The main samples requested for analyses were urine and blood. Results : Using the blood smear microscopy as standard, out of the 200 participants, 93 (46.5%) were positive for P . malaria. UMT had a sensitivity and specificity of 82.41% and 83.48 while that of RDT was 84.09% and 83.03 respectively falciparum (CI: 72.80 to 92.05%, Kappa 0.665, p =0.001). The UMT had a lowest limit of detection of 140 parasites/μl which was similar to RDT. The PPV and NPV of UMT and RDT were (81.74% and 85.98%) and (80.04% and 87.28%), respectively. There was a close agreement between the RDT and UMT when compared to microscopy (83.5% and 83.0% respectively). Conclusion : The UMT kit that was evaluated in comparison to the blood based RDT, showed a lot of similarities using the blood smear microscopy as gold standard. Hence, it can be recommended for the prompt and accurate diagnosis of malaria in febrile patients.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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