AIM: The objective of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of mRDT CareStatTM with microscopy.
SETTING: This study was conducted in the paediatric primary care clinic of the Federal Medical Centre, Asaba, Nigeria.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study for diagnostic accuracy was conducted from May 2016 to October 2016. Ninety-eight participants were involved to obtain a precision of 5%, sensitivity of mRDT CareStatTM of 95% from published work and 95% level of confidence after adjusting for 20% non-response rate or missing data. Consecutive participants were tested using both microscopy and mRDT. The results were analysed using EPI Info Version 7.
RESULTS: A total of 98 children aged 3-59 months were enrolled. Malaria prevalence was found to be 53% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 46% - 60%), whilst sensitivity and specificity were 29% (95% CI = 20% - 38%) and 89% (95% CI = 83% - 95%), respectively. The positive and negative predictive values were 75% (95% CI = 66.4% - 83.6%) and 53% (95% CI = 46% - 60%), respectively.
CONCLUSION: Agreement between malaria parasitaemia using microscopy and mRDT positivity increased with increase in the parasite density. The mRDT might be negative when malaria parasite density using microscopy is low.
OBJECTIVE: With distinct optical attributes (e.g., robust photostability, restricted emission spectra, tunable broad excitation, and high quantum output), fluorescent quantum dots (QDs) have been feasibly functionalized with manageable interfaces and considerably utilized as a new class of optical probe in biological investigations.
METHODS: In this review article, we structured the current advancements in the preparation methods and attributes of QDs. Furthermore, we extend an overview of the outstanding potential of QDs for biomedical research and radical approaches to drug delivery.
CONCLUSION: Notably, the applications of QDs as smart next-generation nanosystems for neuroscience and pharmacokinetic studies have been explained. Moreover, recent interests in the potential toxicity of QDs are also apprised, ranging from cell investigations to animal studies.
METHODS: A total of 50 serum samples were collected from patients clinically suspected for acute leptospirosis on admission in the Hospital Serdang, from June 2016 to June 2017. All the samples were subjected to MAT, lipL32 PCR and the two rapid tests (Leptocheck-WB and ImmuneMed Leptospira IgM Duo Rapid test).
RESULTS: Out of the 50 clinically suspected patients sampled, 19 were confirmed positive for leptospirosis. Six (12%) were confirmed by MAT and 13 (26%) by PCR. Similarly, of the 50 clinically suspected cases, 17 (34%) showed positivity for Leptocheck-WB and 7 (14%) for ImmuneMed Leptospira IgM Duo Rapid test. The overall sensitivity and specificity was 47.37% and 80.65% for Leptocheck-WB, and 21.05% and 90.32% for ImmuneMed Leptospira IgM Duo Rapid test. In another set of previously confirmed MAT positive samples (1:400-1:3600) obtained from a reference laboratory, Leptocheck-WB showed higher sensitivity (90.72%) than ImmuneMed Leptospira IgM Duo Rapid test (40.21%), and comparable specificity for ImmuneMed Leptospira IgM Duo Rapid test (88.89%) and Leptocheck-WB (82.86%).
CONCLUSION: The sensitivity was higher for Leptocheck-WB and had a comparable specificity with ImmuneMed Leptospira IgM Duo Rapid test. Therefore, based on the present study, Leptocheck-WB is found to be a more sensitive rapid immunodiagnostic test for acute leptospirosis screening in hospital settings.