Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2002 May-Jun;96(3):258-65.

Field and laboratory comparative evaluation of ten rapid malaria diagnostic tests.

Author information

  • 1Malaria Research Programme, Medical Research Council, 491 Ridge Road, P.O. Box 70380, Overport 4067, Durban, South Africa. craigm@mrc.ac.za

Abstract

The paper reports on a comparative evaluation of 10 rapid malaria tests available in South Africa in 1998: AccuCheck (AC, developmental), Cape Biotech (CB), ICT Malaria Pf (ICT1) and Pf/Pv (ICT2), Kat Medical (KAT), MakroMal (MM), OptiMAL (OP), ParaSight-F (PS), Quorum (Q), Determine-Malaria (DM). In a laboratory study, designed to test absolute detection limits, Plasmodium falciparum-infected blood was diluted with uninfected blood to known parasite concentrations ranging from 500 to 0.1 parasites per microlitre (P/microL). The 50% detection limits were: ICT1, 3.28; ICT2, 4.86; KAT, 6.36; MM, 9.37; CB, 11.42; DM, 12.40; Q, 16.98; PS, 20; AC, 31.15 and OP, 91.16 P/microL. A field study was carried out to test post-treatment specificity. Blood samples from malaria patients were tested with all products (except AC and DM) on the day of treatment and 3 and 7 days thereafter, against a gold standard of microscopy and polymerase chain reaction (PCR). OP and PS produced fewer false-positive results on day 7 (18 and 19%, respectively) than the other rapid tests (38-56%). However, microscopy, PCR, OP and PS disagreed largely as to which individuals remained positive. The tests were further compared with regard to general specificity, particularly cross-reactivity with rheumatoid factor, speed, simplicity, their ability to detect other species, storage requirements and general presentation.

PMID:
12174773
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk