Actions

Practical reasons for poor RDT performance: Difference between revisions

From MalariaETC

No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{DISPLAYTITLE:<span style="position: absolute; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); clip: rect(1px, 1px, 1px, 1px);">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</span>}}
----
----
'''Navigation'''</br>
'''Navigation'''</br>
[[Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs)|Go Back]]
<span style="font-size:90%">[[MalariaETC Index|Main Malaria Index]]''</span></br>
<span style="font-size:90%">>[[Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs)|RDT main page]]''</span></br>
<span style="font-size:90%">>>[[Interpretation guide: SINGLE BAND tests|Single Band Tests]]''</span></br>
<span style="font-size:90%">>>>Current page: '''Practical reasons for test failure'''</span>
----
----
   
   
Line 9: Line 13:
|colspan="1" style = "font-size:100%; color:blasck; background: FFFAFA"|<span style="color:navy>'''Practical considerations '''</span>
|colspan="1" style = "font-size:100%; color:blasck; background: FFFAFA"|<span style="color:navy>'''Practical considerations '''</span>


<span style="font-size:90%">Bibilography: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4652944/]</span>
<span style="font-size:90%">Bibilography: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4652944/], [https://www.who.int/teams/global-malaria-programme/case-management/diagnosis/rapid-diagnostic-tests]</span>




<span style="font-size:90%">'''1. Selection and procurement of MDTs'''</br>
<span style="font-size:90%">'''1. Selection and procurement of MDTs'''</br>


<span style="font-size:90%">(a) Quality of test design/production. There may be significant variation of performance between tests, users are advised to check test performance (see WHO testing information available from [https://www.who.int/teams/global-malaria-programme/case-management/diagnosis/rapid-diagnostic-tests].</br>(b) Lot variability. Variability between different production batches has been observed and should be considered if RDT performance is less than expected.</br>
<span style="font-size:90%">(a) Quality of test design/production. There may be significant variation of performance between tests, users are advised to check test performance (see WHO testing information ref 2 above)</br>(b) Lot variability. Variability between different production batches has been observed and should be considered if RDT performance is less than expected.</br>


<span style="font-size:90%">'''2. Stability and storage issues'''</br>
<span style="font-size:90%">'''2. Stability and storage issues'''</br>
Line 22: Line 26:
<span style="font-size:90%">'''3. Operator training'''</br>
<span style="font-size:90%">'''3. Operator training'''</br>


<span style="font-size:90%">(a)Problems in test usage may include inappropriate placement of test reagents or blood sample.</br>
<span style="font-size:90%">(a)Problems in test usage may include inappropriate placement of test reagents or blood sample on RDT.</br>(b)Poor interpretion of faint lines.</br>(c) Inadequate training or reference materials
Poor interpretion of faint lines.</br>Inadequate training or reference materials
 
In the case of malarial RDTs, the WHO requires a panel detection score of 75% at a parasitaemia of 200 parasites/μl in order for the product to warrant endorsement. [16] However, the threshold for pyrogenic onset has been shown to vary from 10 to 200,000 parasites/μl, with 22% of patients developing their first acute fever at a parasite load below 200/μl. [75] Thus, even for the select assortment of commercial malaria RDTs demonstrating compliance with WHO standards, sufficiently low limits of detection have not been demonstrated for the early and accurate diagnosis of nascent infections, or of asymptomatic carriers.
 
 
In order to improve test sensitivities when dealing with non-ideal biomarkers, manufacturers of RDTs often seek to use the multiplexed detection of distinct, species-specific antigens. In the case of malaria, RDTs are often multiplexed to detect HRP2 and the P. vivax variant of parasite lactate dehydrogenase (Pv-pLDH), to distinguish between infections by P. falciparum and P. vivax. Alternatively, tests can be multiplexed to select for Pf-pLDH and HRP2, which yields highly sensitive indications for falciparum malaria. [16] Multiplexed RDTs have also proven to be efficacious in discriminating between distinct diseases with non-specific symptomatic presentations.

Latest revision as of 16:05, 6 October 2024

Navigation
Main Malaria Index
 >RDT main page
 >>Single Band Tests
 >>>Current page: Practical reasons for test failure


Practical considerations

Bibilography: [1], [2]


1. Selection and procurement of MDTs

(a) Quality of test design/production. There may be significant variation of performance between tests, users are advised to check test performance (see WHO testing information ref 2 above)
(b) Lot variability. Variability between different production batches has been observed and should be considered if RDT performance is less than expected.

2. Stability and storage issues

(a) RDTs typically have a shelf-life of 18–24 months providing storage is appropriateR.
(b) Tests can suffer degradation if stored in inappropriate heat or humidity: generally tests are stable in the range 2–30°C or higher, but these limits may be exceeded in many countries, and continuous product refrigeration to the point of use may not be guarenteed in developing countries.

3. Operator training

(a)Problems in test usage may include inappropriate placement of test reagents or blood sample on RDT.
(b)Poor interpretion of faint lines.
(c) Inadequate training or reference materials

Retrieved from "https://haematologyetc.org/index.php?title=Practical_reasons_for_poor_RDT_performance&oldid=900"