These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Field evaluation of the ICT malaria P.f/P.v immunochromatographic test for detection of Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax in patients with a presumptive clinical diagnosis of malaria in eastern Indonesia.
    Author: Tjitra E, Suprianto S, Dyer M, Currie BJ, Anstey NM.
    Journal: J Clin Microbiol; 1999 Aug; 37(8):2412-7. PubMed ID: 10405377.
    Abstract:
    In areas such as eastern Indonesia where both Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax occur, rapid antigen detection tests for malaria need to be able to detect both species. We evaluated the new combined P. falciparum-P. vivax immunochromatographic test (ICT Malaria P.f/P.v.) in Radamata Primary Health Centre, Sumba, Indonesia, from February to May 1998 with 560 symptomatic adults and children with a presumptive clinical diagnosis of malaria. Blinded microscopy was used as the "gold standard," with all discordant and 20% of concordant results cross-checked blindly. Only 50% of those with a presumptive clinical diagnosis of malaria were parasitemic. The ICT Malaria P.f/P.v immunochromatographic test was sensitive (95. 5%) and specific (89.8%) for the diagnosis of falciparum malaria, with a positive predictive value (PPV) and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 88.1 and 96.2%, respectively. HRP2 and panmalarial antigen line intensities were associated with parasitemia density for both species. Although the specificity and NPV for the diagnosis of vivax malaria were 94.8 and 98.2%, respectively, the overall sensitivity (75%) and PPV (50%) for the diagnosis of vivax malaria were less than the desirable levels. The sensitivity for the diagnosis of P. vivax malaria was 96% with parasitemias of >500/microl but only 29% with parasitemias of <500/microl. Nevertheless, compared with the test with HRP2 alone, use of the combined antigen detection test would reduce the rate of undertreatment from 14.7 to 3.6% for microscopy-positive patients, and this would be at the expense of only a modest increase in the rate of overtreatment of microscopy-negative patients from 7.1 to 15. 4%. Cost remains a major obstacle to widespread use in areas of endemicity.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]