MalaQuick™ versus ParaSight F® as a diagnostic aid in travellers' malaria

In this study we assessed whether travellers can perform malaria rapid tests, following the provided information leaner, and correctly interpret performed and pre-prepared test strips. Two Plasmodium falciparum testing systems, namely MalaQuick(TM) (ICT) and ParaSight F(R) were used. Test performance and test interpretation of pre-prepared tests were compared. There was no significant difference in test performance between the 2 tests. Interpretation of prepared test strips in both test systems was very reliable in blood parasite densities between 0.1% and 2%, but major problems were encountered at low parasitaemia (<0.1% blood parasites) and also in ParaSight F test strips showing high parasitaemia (>2% blood parasites). Low parasitaemia ParaSight F test strips were, correctly interpreted by 52.1% compared with 10.8% correct interpretations with MalaQuick (P < 0.0001). Correct interpretation of highly positive (>2% blood parasites) pre-prepared test strips was higher with MalaQuick (96.8%) than with ParaSight F (33.8%), P < 0.0001. Both tests were associated with high levels of false-negative interpretations which render them unsuitable as self-diagnostic kits. Efforts must be made to assist lay individuals in test performance by technical test improvement, by equiping the test strips with an additional reading aid for interpretation, and by providing instruction by a skilled person.