Accuracy of verbal autopsy, clinical data and minimally invasive autopsy in the evaluation of malaria-specific mortality: an observational study.
diseases
disorders
infections
injuries
malaria
Journal
BMJ global health
ISSN: 2059-7908
Titre abrégé: BMJ Glob Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101685275
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2021
06 2021
Historique:
received:
21
02
2021
accepted:
12
05
2021
entrez:
4
6
2021
pubmed:
5
6
2021
medline:
25
6
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Global malaria mortality estimates are hindered by the low reliability of the verbal autopsy (VA) and the clinical records, the most common sources of information used to estimate malaria-specific mortality. We aimed to determine the accuracy of these tools, as well as of the minimally invasive autopsy (MIA), a needle-based postmortem sampling method, to identify malaria-specific mortality in a large series of deceased patients from Mozambique, using complete autopsy as the gold standard. Observational study that included 264 deaths, occurring at a tertiary level hospital in Mozambique, from 1 November 2013 to 31 March 2015 (17 months-long period). Clinical data were abstracted, a computer coded VA was completed using the clinical data as source of information, and an MIA followed by a complete autopsy were performed. Screening for malaria infection was conducted postmortem to all participants using molecular and histological techniques (PCR and immunohistochemistry). Malaria infection was considered the cause of death in 6/264 (2.3%) cases: 2/54 children (3.7%, both less than 5 years old) and 4/57 (7.0%) maternal deaths. The sensitivity and specificity of the VA, the clinical data and the MIA to identify malaria-specific deaths were 33.3% and 96.1%, 66.7% and 96.1%, and 100% and 100%, respectively. In addition, malaria was identified as a possible contributor in 14 additional patients who died of other diseases. These cases were also accurately identified by the MIA (sensitivity 82.4%, specificity 100%). The high sensitivity and specificity of the MIA in identifying malaria may help to improve current estimates of malaria-specific mortality in endemic areas.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Global malaria mortality estimates are hindered by the low reliability of the verbal autopsy (VA) and the clinical records, the most common sources of information used to estimate malaria-specific mortality. We aimed to determine the accuracy of these tools, as well as of the minimally invasive autopsy (MIA), a needle-based postmortem sampling method, to identify malaria-specific mortality in a large series of deceased patients from Mozambique, using complete autopsy as the gold standard.
METHODS
Observational study that included 264 deaths, occurring at a tertiary level hospital in Mozambique, from 1 November 2013 to 31 March 2015 (17 months-long period). Clinical data were abstracted, a computer coded VA was completed using the clinical data as source of information, and an MIA followed by a complete autopsy were performed. Screening for malaria infection was conducted postmortem to all participants using molecular and histological techniques (PCR and immunohistochemistry).
FINDINGS
Malaria infection was considered the cause of death in 6/264 (2.3%) cases: 2/54 children (3.7%, both less than 5 years old) and 4/57 (7.0%) maternal deaths. The sensitivity and specificity of the VA, the clinical data and the MIA to identify malaria-specific deaths were 33.3% and 96.1%, 66.7% and 96.1%, and 100% and 100%, respectively. In addition, malaria was identified as a possible contributor in 14 additional patients who died of other diseases. These cases were also accurately identified by the MIA (sensitivity 82.4%, specificity 100%).
INTERPRETATION
The high sensitivity and specificity of the MIA in identifying malaria may help to improve current estimates of malaria-specific mortality in endemic areas.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34083241
pii: bmjgh-2021-005218
doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005218
pmc: PMC8183227
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
ID : 212176
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
ID : 212176
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
ID : 203077
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
ID : 203077
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
Malar J. 2009 Jan 09;8:9
pubmed: 19134201
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2013 Nov;19(11):1035-41
pubmed: 23137191
Hum Pathol. 2019 Mar;85:184-193
pubmed: 30496801
Clin Infect Dis. 2019 Oct 9;69(Suppl 4):S302-S310
pubmed: 31598667
Gates Open Res. 2020 May 28;4:55
pubmed: 33145479
Lancet. 2012 Feb 4;379(9814):413-31
pubmed: 22305225
J Glob Health. 2015 Jun;5(1):010402
pubmed: 25734004
Br Med Bull. 2009;92:7-32
pubmed: 19776034
PLoS Med. 2017 Jun 20;14(6):e1002318
pubmed: 28632735
AIDS. 2007 Nov;21 Suppl 6:S97-S104
pubmed: 18032945
Epidemiol Rev. 2010;32:38-55
pubmed: 20203105
Mod Pathol. 2012 Jun;25(6):777-83
pubmed: 22362052
Nat Med. 2004 Feb;10(2):143-5
pubmed: 14745442
PLoS Med. 2016 Nov 22;13(11):e1002171
pubmed: 27875530
Lancet. 2014 Sep 13;384(9947):1005-70
pubmed: 25059949
Malar J. 2020 Jun 17;19(1):210
pubmed: 32552891
Glob Health Action. 2013 Sep 13;6:21518
pubmed: 24041439
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2007 Dec;77(6 Suppl):99-105
pubmed: 18165480
Lancet. 2003 Jun 28;361(9376):2226-34
pubmed: 12842379
Lancet Infect Dis. 2007 Feb;7(2):93-104
pubmed: 17251080
J Clin Microbiol. 2014 Jun;52(6):2144-9
pubmed: 24740073
Malar J. 2018 Feb 27;17(1):97
pubmed: 29482553
Trop Med Int Health. 2002 Jan;7(1):19-28
pubmed: 11851951
PLoS One. 2014 Sep 02;9(9):e106197
pubmed: 25180495
PLoS Med. 2017 Jun 20;14(6):e1002317
pubmed: 28632739
PLoS Med. 2016 Nov 22;13(11):e1002172
pubmed: 27875532
Lancet Glob Health. 2013 Sep;1(3):e125-6
pubmed: 25104253
J Infect Dis. 2012 Feb 15;205(4):663-71
pubmed: 22207648
BMC Public Health. 2009 Feb 24;9:67
pubmed: 19236726
Lancet. 2010 Nov 20;376(9754):1768-74
pubmed: 20970179
PLoS One. 2015 Jun 30;10(6):e0132057
pubmed: 26126191
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2020 Jul;103(1):41-47
pubmed: 32314692
Arch Pediatr. 2020 Jul;27(5):257-260
pubmed: 32409247
Virchows Arch. 2019 Nov;475(5):649-658
pubmed: 31201504
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2016 Jan;84(1):80-86
pubmed: 26508103
Glob Health Action. 2014 Oct 29;7:25365
pubmed: 25377326
Malar J. 2015 Sep 26;14:369
pubmed: 26409483
Lancet. 1992 Aug 8;340(8815):351-5
pubmed: 1353814
Malar J. 2017 Oct 23;16(1):421
pubmed: 29058621
AIDS Rev. 2010 Oct-Dec;12(4):183-94
pubmed: 21179183
PLoS One. 2019 Sep 6;14(9):e0220657
pubmed: 31490955
Popul Health Metr. 2011 Aug 04;9:32
pubmed: 21816104
Popul Health Metr. 2007 Feb 08;5:1
pubmed: 17288607
Trop Med Int Health. 2013 Feb;18(2):219-21
pubmed: 23190010
PLoS Med. 2017 Nov 8;14(11):e1002431
pubmed: 29117196
Lancet. 2015 Oct 3;386(10001):1395-1406
pubmed: 25971218
Glob Health Action. 2012 Sep 03;5:1-8
pubmed: 22944365
PLoS Med. 2008 Feb;5(2):e44
pubmed: 18288887
Malar J. 2007 Sep 21;6:128
pubmed: 17883879
PLoS Med. 2009 Feb 24;6(2):e1000036
pubmed: 19243215