Malaria screening: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
← Older editNewer edit →
VisualWikitext
Joao Silva (talk | contribs)
nocaptcha, Administrators
12,083 edits
No edit summary
Joao Silva (talk | contribs)
nocaptcha, Administrators
12,083 edits
No edit summary
Line 8: Line 8:
Screening for malaria infection is important in:
Screening for malaria infection is important in:
* Sub-Saharan refugees
* Sub-Saharan refugees
** A sub-optimal alternative to presumptive therapy is to test newly arriving for malaria infection.
** Studies have demonstrated that a single malaria thick-and-thin blood smear lacks sensitivity for detecting asymptomatic or sub-clinical malaria in these populations.
** Three separate blood films taken at 12 to 24 hour intervals, the standard recommendation for diagnosis of clinical malaria, has a greater sensitivity. However, this approach is rarely feasible for screening newly arriving refugee populations because of cost constraints and the need for multiple visits.
** When a refugee does not receive presumptive therapy they should be monitored for [[signs]] or [[symptoms]] of disease, particularly during the initial 3 months after arrival, regardless of the post-arrival testing results.
* Blood donor screening
* Blood donor screening
<!--
Medical and laboratory screening after arrival
A sub-optimal alternative to presumptive therapy is to test newly arriving for malaria infection. Although microscopic examination of a properly stained blood smear remains the standard for diagnosis of Plasmodium infection in symptomatic individuals presenting in the U.S., studies have demonstrated that a single malaria thick-and-thin blood smear lacks sensitivity (<40%) for detecting asymptomatic or sub-clinical malaria in these populations. 8 9 Three separate blood films taken at 12 to 24 hour intervals, the standard recommendation for diagnosis of clinical malaria, has a greater sensitivity. However, this approach is rarely feasible for screening newly arriving refugee populations because of cost constraints and the need for multiple visits. A rapid diagnostic test (RDT) was recently approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (NOW-MalariaÔ) for use in diagnosis of symptomatic malaria in the United States. Although this test has excellent sensitivity for P. falciparum in symptomatic patients preliminary data suggests it is less than 30% sensitive in the diagnosis of asymptomatic P. falciparum in newly arrived refugees. 9 When a refugee does not receive presumptive therapy they should be monitored for signs or symptoms of disease, particularly during the initial 3 months after arrival, regardless of the post-arrival testing results.
Although this document addresses individuals with no signs or symptoms of malaria, it is worth noting hematologic and physical examination findings that may be noted on screening in asymptomatic individuals and which have a high positive predictive value for malaria. Two studies have demonstrated that no parameters, including anemia and/or thrombocytopenia, consistently predict persons with infection (poor sensitivity and negative predictive value).8 10 However, when thrombocytopenia or splenomegaly are present among individuals in these populations, they frequently indicate malaria (high specificity and positive predictive value). 10 Refugees with these clinical signs, even when not symptomatic, should receive appropriate evaluation for clinical malaria.
-->


==References==
==References==

Revision as of 22:37, 24 July 2014

Malaria Microchapters

Home

Patient Information

Overview

Historical perspective

Classification

Pathophysiology

Causes

Differentiating Malaria from other Diseases

Epidemiology and Demographics

Risk Factors

Screening

Natural History, Complications and Prognosis

Diagnosis

History and Symptoms

Physical Examination

Laboratory Findings

Xray

Ultrasound

CT scan

MRI

Other Diagnostic Studies

Treatment

Medical Therapy

Primary Prevention

Secondary Prevention

Cost-Effectiveness of Therapy

Future or Investigational Therapies

Case studies

Case #1

Malaria screening On the Web

Most recent articles

Most cited articles

Review articles

CME Programs

Powerpoint slides

Images

American Roentgen Ray Society Images of Malaria screening

All Images
X-rays
Echo & Ultrasound
CT Images
MRI

Ongoing Trials at Clinical Trials.gov

US National Guidelines Clearinghouse

NICE Guidance

FDA on Malaria screening

CDC on Malaria screening

Malaria screening in the news

Blogs on Malaria screening

Directions to Hospitals Treating Malaria

Risk calculators and risk factors for Malaria screening

Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]

Overview

Screening

Screening for malaria infection is important in:

  • Sub-Saharan refugees
    • A sub-optimal alternative to presumptive therapy is to test newly arriving for malaria infection.
    • Studies have demonstrated that a single malaria thick-and-thin blood smear lacks sensitivity for detecting asymptomatic or sub-clinical malaria in these populations.
    • Three separate blood films taken at 12 to 24 hour intervals, the standard recommendation for diagnosis of clinical malaria, has a greater sensitivity. However, this approach is rarely feasible for screening newly arriving refugee populations because of cost constraints and the need for multiple visits.
    • When a refugee does not receive presumptive therapy they should be monitored for signs or symptoms of disease, particularly during the initial 3 months after arrival, regardless of the post-arrival testing results.
  • Blood donor screening

References

Template:WikiDoc Sources

Retrieved from "https://www.wikidoc.org/index.php?title=Malaria_screening&oldid=1000928"