Mentorship on malaria microscopy diagnostic service in Ethiopia: baseline competency of microscopists and performance of health facilities.
Adult
Cross-Sectional Studies
Diagnostic Services
/ statistics & numerical data
Diagnostic Tests, Routine
/ statistics & numerical data
Ethiopia
Female
Health Facilities
/ statistics & numerical data
Humans
Malaria
/ diagnosis
Male
Mentors
/ statistics & numerical data
Microscopy
/ statistics & numerical data
Middle Aged
Professional Competence
/ statistics & numerical data
Sensitivity and Specificity
Young Adult
Competency
External quality assurance
Malaria microscopy
Mentorship
Re-checking
Journal
Malaria journal
ISSN: 1475-2875
Titre abrégé: Malar J
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101139802
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
25 Feb 2021
25 Feb 2021
Historique:
received:
30
09
2020
accepted:
17
02
2021
entrez:
26
2
2021
pubmed:
27
2
2021
medline:
14
8
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In Ethiopia, malaria cases are declining as a result of proven interventions, and in 2017 the country launched a malaria elimination strategy in targeted settings. Accurate malaria diagnosis and prompt treatment are the key components of the strategy to prevent morbidity and stop the continuation of transmission. However, the quality of microscopic diagnosis in general is deteriorating as malaria burden declines. This study was carried out to evaluate the competency of microscopists and the performance of health facilities on malaria microscopic diagnosis. A cross-sectional study was conducted from 1 August to 30 September, 2019 in 9 regional states and one city administration. A standard checklist was used for on-site evaluation, archived patient slides were re-checked and proficiency of microscopists was tested using a WHO-certified set of slides from the national slide bank at the Ethiopian Public Health Institute (EPHI). The strength of agreement, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated. In this study, 102 health facilities (84 health centres and 18 hospitals) were included, from which 202 laboratory professionals participated. In slide re-checking, moderate agreement (agreement (A): 76.0%; Kappa (K): 0.41) was observed between experts and microscopists on malaria detection in all health facilities. The sensitivity and specificity of routine slide reading and the re-checking results were 78.1 and 80.7%, respectively. Likewise, positive predictive value of 65.1% and negative predictive value of 88.8% were scored in the routine diagnosis. By panel testing, a substantial overall agreement (A: 91.8%; K: 0.79) was observed between microscopists and experts in detecting malaria parasites. The sensitivity and specificity in the detection of malaria parasites was 92.7 and 89.1%, respectively. In identifying species, a slight agreement (A: 57%; K: 0.18) was observed between microscopists and experts. The study found significant false positive and false negative results in routine microscopy on slide re-checking of Plasmodium parasites. Moreover, reduced grade in parasite species identification was reported on the panel tests. Implementing comprehensive malaria microscopy mentorship, in-service training and supportive supervision are key strategies to improve the overall performance of health facilities in malaria microscopy.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In Ethiopia, malaria cases are declining as a result of proven interventions, and in 2017 the country launched a malaria elimination strategy in targeted settings. Accurate malaria diagnosis and prompt treatment are the key components of the strategy to prevent morbidity and stop the continuation of transmission. However, the quality of microscopic diagnosis in general is deteriorating as malaria burden declines. This study was carried out to evaluate the competency of microscopists and the performance of health facilities on malaria microscopic diagnosis.
METHODS
METHODS
A cross-sectional study was conducted from 1 August to 30 September, 2019 in 9 regional states and one city administration. A standard checklist was used for on-site evaluation, archived patient slides were re-checked and proficiency of microscopists was tested using a WHO-certified set of slides from the national slide bank at the Ethiopian Public Health Institute (EPHI). The strength of agreement, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated.
RESULTS
RESULTS
In this study, 102 health facilities (84 health centres and 18 hospitals) were included, from which 202 laboratory professionals participated. In slide re-checking, moderate agreement (agreement (A): 76.0%; Kappa (K): 0.41) was observed between experts and microscopists on malaria detection in all health facilities. The sensitivity and specificity of routine slide reading and the re-checking results were 78.1 and 80.7%, respectively. Likewise, positive predictive value of 65.1% and negative predictive value of 88.8% were scored in the routine diagnosis. By panel testing, a substantial overall agreement (A: 91.8%; K: 0.79) was observed between microscopists and experts in detecting malaria parasites. The sensitivity and specificity in the detection of malaria parasites was 92.7 and 89.1%, respectively. In identifying species, a slight agreement (A: 57%; K: 0.18) was observed between microscopists and experts.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The study found significant false positive and false negative results in routine microscopy on slide re-checking of Plasmodium parasites. Moreover, reduced grade in parasite species identification was reported on the panel tests. Implementing comprehensive malaria microscopy mentorship, in-service training and supportive supervision are key strategies to improve the overall performance of health facilities in malaria microscopy.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33632208
doi: 10.1186/s12936-021-03655-9
pii: 10.1186/s12936-021-03655-9
pmc: PMC7908686
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
115Références
BMC Infect Dis. 2020 May 19;20(1):355
pubmed: 32429860
Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2017 Feb 15;27(1):97-109
pubmed: 28392732
Malar J. 2006 Oct 25;5:92
pubmed: 17062168
Malar J. 2018 Jun 18;17(1):233
pubmed: 29914473
Malar Res Treat. 2018 Sep 02;2018:4914358
pubmed: 30245808
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1999 Jun;60(6):1024-30
pubmed: 10403337
Fam Med. 2005 May;37(5):360-3
pubmed: 15883903
PLoS One. 2020 Jun 25;15(6):e0235151
pubmed: 32584866
PLoS One. 2018 Oct 18;13(10):e0203420
pubmed: 30335752
BMC Res Notes. 2017 Dec 21;10(1):764
pubmed: 29268776
Malar J. 2011 Feb 17;10:45
pubmed: 21324210
Glob Health Res Policy. 2017 Nov 06;2:32
pubmed: 29202100
J Clin Microbiol. 2017 Jul;55(7):2009-2017
pubmed: 28404673
Microorganisms. 2019 Jun 21;7(6):
pubmed: 31234443
Malar J. 2012 Oct 24;11:352
pubmed: 23095668
BMC Res Notes. 2014 Nov 25;7:839
pubmed: 25422030
J Parasitol Res. 2017;2017:9064917
pubmed: 29410911
Bull World Health Organ. 2016 Oct 01;94(10):743-751
pubmed: 27843164