Actions

Thick vs Thin film comparison: Difference between revisions

From MalariaETC

No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 33: Line 33:
!colspan="3" style = "background:#e1f1fd; border:solid; border-width: 3px;"|<span style="font-size:90%;">'''COMPARISON OF THICK AND THIN FILMS'''</span></br>
!colspan="3" style = "background:#e1f1fd; border:solid; border-width: 3px;"|<span style="font-size:90%;">'''COMPARISON OF THICK AND THIN FILMS'''</span></br>
|-
|-
| Sensitivity for detection  
!Sensitivity for detection  
| Higher: detects low parasitaemia ~5–10 parasites/µL || Lower: generally needs ~50 parasites/µL for reliable detection)
| Higher: detects low parasitaemia ~5–10 parasites/µL
| Lower: generally needs ~50 parasites/µL for reliable detection)
|}
|}
----
----

Revision as of 10:53, 13 February 2025


Navigation
>Main Malaria Index
>>Malaria Biology Index
>>>Current page: Initial infection


Relative merits of thick or thin films in malaria diagnosis


COMPARISON OF THICK AND THIN FILMS
Feature Thick Film Thin Film
Sensitivity for detection Higher: detects low parasitaemia ~5–10 parasites/µL Lower: generally needs ~50 parasites/µL for reliable detection)
Species Identification Poor: RBC morphology lost and species-specific features may be difficult Excellent: Parasite morphology and RBC characteristics are readily observed
Quantification of parasitaemia Difficult: requires estimation so is imprecise Easier: parasites can be counted per number of RBCs
Preparation and staining Longer: requires air drying before careful staining to avoid artefact Faster: films are fixed and stained immediately with clearer morphology
COMPARISON OF THICK AND THIN FILMS
Sensitivity for detection Higher: detects low parasitaemia ~5–10 parasites/µL Lower: generally needs ~50 parasites/µL for reliable detection)