Comparing parasitological vs serological determination of Schistosoma haematobium infection prevalence in preschool and primary school-aged children: implications for control programmes

Welcome M. Wami, Norman Nausch, Katharina Bauer, Nicholas Midzi, Reggis Gwisai, Peter Simmonds, Takafira Mduluza, Mark Woolhouse, Francisca Mutapi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

To combat schistosomiasis, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that infection levels are determined prior to designing and implementing control programmes, as the treatment regimens depend on the population infection prevalence. However, the sensitivity of the parasitological infection diagnostic method is less reliable when infection levels are low. The aim of this study was to compare levels of Schistosoma haematobium infection obtained by the parasitological method vs serological technique. Infection levels in preschool and primary school-aged children and their implications for control programmes were also investigated. Infection prevalence based on serology was significantly higher compared with that based on parasitology for both age groups. The difference between infection levels obtained using the two methods increased with age. Consequentially, in line with the WHO guidelines, the serological method suggested a more frequent treatment regimen for this population compared with that implied by the parasitological method. These findings highlighted the presence of infection in children aged ≤5 years, further reiterating the need for their inclusion in control programmes. Furthermore, this study demonstrated the importance of using sensitive diagnostic methods as this has implications on the required intervention controls for the population.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-9
JournalParasitology
Early online date28 Mar 2014
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparing parasitological vs serological determination of Schistosoma haematobium infection prevalence in preschool and primary school-aged children: implications for control programmes'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this