IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/gjhsjl/v12y2020i8p52.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rapid Diagnostic Test Versus Microscopy for Diagnosing Malaria Among Pregnant Women in a Resource-Poor Setting; A Cross-Sectional Comparative Study

Author

Listed:
  • Bartholomew N. Odio
  • Leonard O. Ajah
  • Perpetus C. Ibekwe
  • Monique I. Ajah
  • George O. Ugwu
  • Theophilus O. Nwankwo
  • Christian C. Anikwe

Abstract

BACKGROUND- Diagnostic challenge of malaria in Nigeria remarkably impedes the World Health Organization (WHO) recommendation of laboratory diagnosis before treatment. Rapid Diagnostic Test (RDT) is easier and cheaper to perform when compared with microscopy especially in resource-poor settings. However there are conflicting results on the accuracy of RDT versus microscopy from previous studies. AIM- To compare the overall accuracy of microscopy and RDT in detecting peripheral malaria among pregnant women with clinical features of malaria. MATERIALS & METHODS- This was a cross-sectional comparative studyin whichRDT, microscopy and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) were performed using the peripheral bloodof the eligible study participants at the Alex Ekwueme Federal University Teaching Hospital, Abakaliki between September 1, 2016 and March 31, 2017.The PCR was used as the gold standard in this study. Data was analyzed with the Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 18 (IBM SPSS, Chicago, USA). P value ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS- The actual prevalent rates of malaria based on RDT, microscopy and PCR results among the participants were 58.2%, 59.9% and 61.1% respectively. There was no statistical significant difference among RDT, microscopy and combined RDT and microscopy on overall accuracy. Malaria infestation was associated with self-employed and unemployed women, primigravidity, second trimester, rural residence, non-use of long lasting insecticide treated nets and intermittent preventive therapy for malaria. CONCLUSION- There was no difference in overall accuracy among RDT, microscopy and combined RDT and microscopy. This underscores the need to scale up RDT for every patient with clinical features of malaria before treatment in this environment.

Suggested Citation

  • Bartholomew N. Odio & Leonard O. Ajah & Perpetus C. Ibekwe & Monique I. Ajah & George O. Ugwu & Theophilus O. Nwankwo & Christian C. Anikwe, 2020. "Rapid Diagnostic Test Versus Microscopy for Diagnosing Malaria Among Pregnant Women in a Resource-Poor Setting; A Cross-Sectional Comparative Study," Global Journal of Health Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(8), pages 1-52, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:ibn:gjhsjl:v:12:y:2020:i:8:p:52
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/gjhs/article/download/0/0/42907/44861
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/gjhs/article/view/0/42907
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:gjhsjl:v:12:y:2020:i:8:p:52. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.