Comparative evaluation of the diagnostic accuracies of four different malaria rapid diagnostic test kits available in Ghana.

Malaria rapid diagnostic test (mRDT) kit is one of the techniques for diagnosing malaria. Due to its inherent advantages over the microscopy technique, several brands of the kit have flooded malaria endemic countries, without prior in-country evaluation. Two of such mRDT kits are Oscar (India) and Standard Q (Korea Republic). In this study, the performance of Oscar and Standard Q mRDT kits were compared to First Response (India) and CareStart (USA) mRDTs, which have been evaluated and deployed for use approved by the Ministry of Health (MOH). In this comparative study, whole blood samples were collected from patients suspected of malaria. Plasmodium falciparum was detected in each sample using nested polymerase chain reaction (nPCR), microscopy and the four mRDTs. The sensitivities, specificities, accuracies, positive and negative predictive values and accuracies of the mRDTs were determined using nPCR as a reference technique. Kappa statistic was used to determine the level of agreement among the techniques. Two hundred (200) blood samples were analyzed in this study. The overall detection rates of P. falciparum by microscopy, First Response, CareStart, Oscar-PfHRP2, Standard Q mRDT kits and nPCR were 31.5%, 34.5%, 33.5%, 32%, 31% and 43% (x2 = 6.1, p = 0.046), respectively. The accuracies of CareStart and First Response were comparable (90.5% vs. 89.5%). Further, comparing their sensitivities, Oscar-PfHRP2 was 74.4% (95% confidence interval (CI): 63.9-83.2) while that of Standard Q was 72.1% (95% CI: 61.4-81.2), with comparable accuracies (Oscar-PfHRP2-89% and Standard Q -88%). Apart from First Response that was 98.3% specific, the others were 100% specific. Kappa test revealed perfect diagnostic agreement (κ = 0.90-0.98) among the four mRDTs. That notwithstanding, Oscar-PfHRP2 agreed better with CareStart (κ = 0.94) and First Response (κ = 0.92) compared to the agreement between Standard Q and, CareStart (κ = 0.92) and First Response (κ = 0.90). Taken together, the diagnostic performance of the four mRDT kits were statistically similar. That notwithstanding, new mRDT kits should be evaluated prior to deployment for use.

Co-infections of SARS-CoV-2 with respiratory syncytial virus and human influenza A in patients with symptoms of COVID-19 in Ghana: A retrospective study.

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic the aetiology of respiratory illnesses were narrowed to SARS-CoV-2. This prevented diagnosis of other pathogens and patients were not notified of the accurate diagnosis of their illnesses when SARS-CoV-2 was absent. It is therefore important to look back and determine what else was present but was missed. Objective: This retrospective study sought to gain insights into prevalence of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and influenza A alongside SARS-CoV-2 in patients who reported with clinical symptoms of respiratory illnesses. Methods: Samples from patients who had reported of respiratory symptoms were selected at random from a pool. RNA was extracted and RT-PCR was performed for SARS-CoV-2, RSV and Influenza A in parallel. Data on the clinical symptoms was extracted from case-base forms and analysed. Results: Of the 400 symptomatic samples tested, prevalence of SARS-CoV-2, influenza A and RSV was 20.3 %, 2.0 % and 0.5 % respectively. Only one sample tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and influenza A. About 77 % of the symptomatic cases did not test positive for any of the three agents. Cough (79 %) was the most common symptom followed by fever and chills, headache, sore throat and runny nose. Conclusion: The large proportion of symptomatic cases that tested negative for all three respiratory viruses raises a flag and a need for more investigations into the actual burden of respiratory aetiologic agents during the pandemic. With the low levels of co-infections, parallel testing may not be needed however, a strong case for multiplex tests for respiratory agents exists.

Faecal shedding of SARS-CoV-2 from patients with asymptomatic and mild COVID-19 without gastrointestinal symptoms in Ghana.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we sought to determine whether faecal shedding occurs among SARS-COV-2 positive Ghanaians, as reported elsewhere. Hence we assayed for SARS-COV-2 in the stools of 48 SARS-COV-2 confirmed patients at the Ho Municipal Hospital in Ghana. RESULTS: Of the 48 COVID-19 patients, 45 (93.8%) had positive tests for SARS-CoV-2 faecal shedding. About 60% reported no respiratory symptoms, while only 2% (1 patient) reported gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms in the form of nausea. Other symptoms reported included headache (57.9%), weakness (57.9%), cough (52.6%), blocked/runny nose (47.4%), fever (31.6%), sore throat (31.6%), and shortness of breath (21.1%). One person complained of nausea (5.3%) Semi-quantitative comparison of the SARS COV-2 viral loads in matched respiratory and faecal samples using the cycle threshold (CT) values revealed no statistical differences. Furthermore, the duration between collection of respiratory and faecal samples did not have any direct influence on the differences in the CT values. This suggests that treatment and use of sewage for environmental surveillance of SARS COV-2 could be a potential public health countermeasure.