Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

All these words:

For very narrow results

This exact word or phrase:

When looking for a specific result

Any of these words:

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

None of these words:

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Language:

Dates

Publication Date Range:

to

Document Data

Title:

Document Type:

Library

Collection:

Series:

People

Author:

Help
Clear All

Query Builder

Query box

Help
Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page

i

An Evaluation of the Performance and Acceptability of Three LED Fluorescent Microscopes in Zambia: Lessons Learnt for Scale-Up

Filetype[PDF-106.05 KB]


  • English

  • Details:

    • Alternative Title:
      PLoS One
    • Description:
      The World Health Organization recommends the roll-out of light-emitting diode (LED) fluorescent microscopes (FM) as an alternative to light microscopes in resource-limited settings. We evaluated the acceptability and performance of three LED FMs after a short orientation among laboratory technicians from government health centers in Zambia. Sixteen technicians with varied light microscopy experience were oriented to FMs and divided into groups; each group read a different set of 40 slides on each LED FM (Primo Star iLEDâ„¢, Luminâ„¢, FluoLEDâ„¢) and on a reference mercury-vapor FM (Olympus BX41TF). Slide reading times were recorded. An experienced FM technician examined each slide on the Olympus BX41TF. Sensitivity and specificity compared to TB culture were calculated. Misclassification compared to the experienced technician and inter-rater reliability between trainees was assessed. Trainees rated microscopes on technical aspects. Primo Star iLEDâ„¢, FluoLEDâ„¢ and Olympus BX41TF had comparable sensitivities (67%, 65% and 65% respectively), with the Luminâ„¢ significantly worse (56%; p<0.05). Specificity was low for trainees on all microscopes (75.9%) compared to the experienced technician on Olympus BX41TF (100%). Primo Star iLEDâ„¢ had significantly less misclassification (21.1% p<0.05) than FluoLEDâ„¢ (26.5%) and Luminâ„¢ (26.8%) and significantly higher inter-rater reliability (0.611; p<0.05), compared to FluoLEDâ„¢ (0.523) and Luminâ„¢ (0.492). Slide reading times for LED FMs were slower than the reference, but not significantly different from each other. Primo Star iLEDâ„¢ rated highest in acceptability measures, followed by FluoLEDâ„¢ then Luminâ„¢. Primo Star iLEDâ„¢ was consistently better than FluoLEDâ„¢ and Luminâ„¢, and performed comparably to the Olympus BX41TF in all analyses, except reading times. The Luminâ„¢ compared least favorably and was thought unacceptable for use. Specificity and inter-rater reliability were low for all microscopes suggesting that a brief orientation was insufficient in this setting. These results provide important data for resource-limited settings to consider as they scale-up LED FMs.
    • Pubmed ID:
      22073271
    • Pubmed Central ID:
      PMC3208552
    • Document Type:
    • Place as Subject:
    • Collection(s):
    • Main Document Checksum:
    • File Type:

    You May Also Like

    Checkout today's featured content at stacks.cdc.gov