TY - JOUR
T1 - Performance comparison of two malaria rapid diagnostic test with real time polymerase chain reaction and gold standard of microscopy detection method
AU - Wardhani, Puspa
AU - Butarbutar, Trieva Verawaty
AU - Adiatmaja, Christophorus Oetama
AU - Betaubun, Amarensi Milka
AU - Hamidah, Nur
AU - Aryati,
N1 - Funding Information:
The work was supported by Simlitabmas Programme by Kementretian Riset Teknologi dan Pendidikan Tinggi Republik Indonesia (KEMENRISTEKDIKTI RI), contract number: 544/UN3.14/LT/2019.
Publisher Copyright:
© Copyright the Author(s), 2020
PY - 2020
Y1 - 2020
N2 - Background: The diagnostic test for malaria is mostly based on Rapid Diagnostic Test (RDT) and detection by microscopy. Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) is also a sensitive detection method that can be considered as a diagnostic tool. The outcome of malaria microscopy detection depends on the examiner’s ability and experience. Some RDT has been distributed in Indonesia, which needs to be evaluated for their results. Objective: This study aimed to compare the performance of RightSign RDT and ScreenPlus RDT for detection of Plasmodium in human blood. We used specific real-time polymerase chain reaction abTESTMMalaria qPCRII) and gold standard of microscopy detection method to measure diagnostic efficiency. Methods: Blood specimens were evaluated using RightSign RDT, ScreenPlus RDT, Microscopy detection, and RT-PCR as the protocol described. The differences on specificity (Sp), sensitivity (Sn), positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were analyzed using McNemar and Kruskal Wallis analysis. Results: A total of 105 subjects were recruited. Based on microscopy test, RightSign RDT had sensitivity, Specificity, PPV, NPV, 100%, 98%, 98.2%, 100%, respectively. ScreenPlus showed 100% sensitivity, 98% specificity, 98.2% PPV, 100% NPV. The sensitivity of both RDTs became lower (75%) and the specificity Non higher (100 %) when using real-time PCR. Both RDTs showed a 100% agreement. RT-PCR detected higher mix infection when compared to microscopy and RDTs. Conclusion: RightSign and ScreenPlus RDT have excellent performance when using microscopy detection as a gold standard. Real-time PCR method can be considered as a confirmation tool for malaria diagnosis.
AB - Background: The diagnostic test for malaria is mostly based on Rapid Diagnostic Test (RDT) and detection by microscopy. Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) is also a sensitive detection method that can be considered as a diagnostic tool. The outcome of malaria microscopy detection depends on the examiner’s ability and experience. Some RDT has been distributed in Indonesia, which needs to be evaluated for their results. Objective: This study aimed to compare the performance of RightSign RDT and ScreenPlus RDT for detection of Plasmodium in human blood. We used specific real-time polymerase chain reaction abTESTMMalaria qPCRII) and gold standard of microscopy detection method to measure diagnostic efficiency. Methods: Blood specimens were evaluated using RightSign RDT, ScreenPlus RDT, Microscopy detection, and RT-PCR as the protocol described. The differences on specificity (Sp), sensitivity (Sn), positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were analyzed using McNemar and Kruskal Wallis analysis. Results: A total of 105 subjects were recruited. Based on microscopy test, RightSign RDT had sensitivity, Specificity, PPV, NPV, 100%, 98%, 98.2%, 100%, respectively. ScreenPlus showed 100% sensitivity, 98% specificity, 98.2% PPV, 100% NPV. The sensitivity of both RDTs became lower (75%) and the specificity Non higher (100 %) when using real-time PCR. Both RDTs showed a 100% agreement. RT-PCR detected higher mix infection when compared to microscopy and RDTs. Conclusion: RightSign and ScreenPlus RDT have excellent performance when using microscopy detection as a gold standard. Real-time PCR method can be considered as a confirmation tool for malaria diagnosis.
KW - Malaria
KW - Microscopy detection
KW - Rapid diagnostic test
KW - Real-time polymerase chain reaction
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85090466546&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.4081/idr.2020.8731
DO - 10.4081/idr.2020.8731
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85090466546
SN - 2036-7430
VL - 12
JO - Infectious Disease Reports
JF - Infectious Disease Reports
M1 - 8731
ER -