Control de la calidad del diagnóstico coproparasitológico en la provincia de Ciudad de La Habana, Cuba

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Angel Núñez, Fidel
Data de Publicação: 1997
Outros Autores: Ginorio, Dora E., Finlay, Carlos M.
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: spa
Título da fonte: Cadernos de Saúde Pública
Texto Completo: https://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/ojs/index.php/csp/article/view/923
Resumo: An external quality assessment in coproparasitology was carried out in 77 laboratories from Havana City. A questionnaire and ten plastic vials with different intestinal parasites in a small nylon bag, duly sealed, were sent to each laboratory. Answers were collected during the 72 hours after delivery. Results were analyzed by means of a computer program. The majority of the laboratories (70%) passed the test; the municipalities with the worst scores in the province were Lisa, Marianao, and Habana del Este. Better results were obtained among technologists working only in parasitology than those who were also performing other laboratory work, and better averages were observed in hospitals than in polyclinics. The best identified intestinal protozoan was Giardia lamblia and the worst identified was Blastocystis hominis (with a 61% mistake rate), followed by Endolimax nana (24.6%), and Entamoeba histolytica (22%). Among helminths, the best identified was Trichuris trichiura (9.2% mistake rate) and the highest percentage of incorrect diagnoses was for Taenia sp. and Fasciola hepatica (both with 66.2%). Taking into account these results, we feel it is necessary to provide training in parasitology among these laboratories.
id FIOCRUZ-5_7f718e160dcafa6c1bb0475c5bf388d0
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.teste-cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br:article/923
network_acronym_str FIOCRUZ-5
network_name_str Cadernos de Saúde Pública
repository_id_str
spelling Control de la calidad del diagnóstico coproparasitológico en la provincia de Ciudad de La Habana, CubaControl de CalidadDiagnósticoParasitologíaCoproparasitologíaAn external quality assessment in coproparasitology was carried out in 77 laboratories from Havana City. A questionnaire and ten plastic vials with different intestinal parasites in a small nylon bag, duly sealed, were sent to each laboratory. Answers were collected during the 72 hours after delivery. Results were analyzed by means of a computer program. The majority of the laboratories (70%) passed the test; the municipalities with the worst scores in the province were Lisa, Marianao, and Habana del Este. Better results were obtained among technologists working only in parasitology than those who were also performing other laboratory work, and better averages were observed in hospitals than in polyclinics. The best identified intestinal protozoan was Giardia lamblia and the worst identified was Blastocystis hominis (with a 61% mistake rate), followed by Endolimax nana (24.6%), and Entamoeba histolytica (22%). Among helminths, the best identified was Trichuris trichiura (9.2% mistake rate) and the highest percentage of incorrect diagnoses was for Taenia sp. and Fasciola hepatica (both with 66.2%). Taking into account these results, we feel it is necessary to provide training in parasitology among these laboratories.Se realizó un estudio sobre la calidad del diagnóstico coproparasitológico en 77 laboratorios de la red de salud pública de la provincia Ciudad de La Habana, Cuba. El procedimiento se basó en la entrega a cada jefe de laboratorio de un modelo de encuesta, y una bolsa de nylon conteniendo 10 viales plásticos con distintos especímenes parasitarios, preservados en formaldehído al 7%. Recogidos los resultados en las primeras 72 horas después de su entrega, se realizó la evaluación mediante una escala de puntuación establecida. La mayoría de los laboratorios aprobaron (70%); sin embargo aún existen centros, sobre todo policlínicas, con calificaciones deficientes. Los municipios con resultados más desfavorables fueron, Lisa, Marianao y Habana del Este, alcanzándose mejores resultados en los hospitales que en las policlínicas. En el análisis de Protozooarios, el mejor diagnosticado fué Giardia lamblia, con solo un centro que erró al identificarlo. Las mayores dificultades se presentaron en Blastocystis hominis con 61% de fallas, Endolimax nana, con 24,6%, y Entamoeba histolytica, con 22%. Entre los helmintos, la mayor aprobación fué en Trichuris trichiura y los errores diagnósticos predominaron con Fasciola hepatica y Taenia sp., ambos con 66,2% de fallas. Dados los resultados obtenidos, hemos organizado una intervención educativa en la red de laboratorios de la provincia.Reports in Public HealthCadernos de Saúde Pública1997-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlapplication/pdfhttps://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/ojs/index.php/csp/article/view/923Reports in Public Health; Vol. 13 No. 1 (1997): January/MarchCadernos de Saúde Pública; v. 13 n. 1 (1997): Janeiro/Março1678-44640102-311Xreponame:Cadernos de Saúde Públicainstname:Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)instacron:FIOCRUZspahttps://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/ojs/index.php/csp/article/view/923/1836https://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/ojs/index.php/csp/article/view/923/1837Angel Núñez, FidelGinorio, Dora E.Finlay, Carlos M.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2024-03-06T15:26:09Zoai:ojs.teste-cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br:article/923Revistahttps://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/ojs/index.php/csphttps://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/ojs/index.php/csp/oaicadernos@ensp.fiocruz.br||cadernos@ensp.fiocruz.br1678-44640102-311Xopendoar:2024-03-06T13:01:08.255303Cadernos de Saúde Pública - Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)true
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Control de la calidad del diagnóstico coproparasitológico en la provincia de Ciudad de La Habana, Cuba
title Control de la calidad del diagnóstico coproparasitológico en la provincia de Ciudad de La Habana, Cuba
spellingShingle Control de la calidad del diagnóstico coproparasitológico en la provincia de Ciudad de La Habana, Cuba
Angel Núñez, Fidel
Control de Calidad
Diagnóstico
Parasitología
Coproparasitología
title_short Control de la calidad del diagnóstico coproparasitológico en la provincia de Ciudad de La Habana, Cuba
title_full Control de la calidad del diagnóstico coproparasitológico en la provincia de Ciudad de La Habana, Cuba
title_fullStr Control de la calidad del diagnóstico coproparasitológico en la provincia de Ciudad de La Habana, Cuba
title_full_unstemmed Control de la calidad del diagnóstico coproparasitológico en la provincia de Ciudad de La Habana, Cuba
title_sort Control de la calidad del diagnóstico coproparasitológico en la provincia de Ciudad de La Habana, Cuba
author Angel Núñez, Fidel
author_facet Angel Núñez, Fidel
Ginorio, Dora E.
Finlay, Carlos M.
author_role author
author2 Ginorio, Dora E.
Finlay, Carlos M.
author2_role author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Angel Núñez, Fidel
Ginorio, Dora E.
Finlay, Carlos M.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Control de Calidad
Diagnóstico
Parasitología
Coproparasitología
topic Control de Calidad
Diagnóstico
Parasitología
Coproparasitología
description An external quality assessment in coproparasitology was carried out in 77 laboratories from Havana City. A questionnaire and ten plastic vials with different intestinal parasites in a small nylon bag, duly sealed, were sent to each laboratory. Answers were collected during the 72 hours after delivery. Results were analyzed by means of a computer program. The majority of the laboratories (70%) passed the test; the municipalities with the worst scores in the province were Lisa, Marianao, and Habana del Este. Better results were obtained among technologists working only in parasitology than those who were also performing other laboratory work, and better averages were observed in hospitals than in polyclinics. The best identified intestinal protozoan was Giardia lamblia and the worst identified was Blastocystis hominis (with a 61% mistake rate), followed by Endolimax nana (24.6%), and Entamoeba histolytica (22%). Among helminths, the best identified was Trichuris trichiura (9.2% mistake rate) and the highest percentage of incorrect diagnoses was for Taenia sp. and Fasciola hepatica (both with 66.2%). Taking into account these results, we feel it is necessary to provide training in parasitology among these laboratories.
publishDate 1997
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 1997-01-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/ojs/index.php/csp/article/view/923
url https://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/ojs/index.php/csp/article/view/923
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv spa
language spa
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/ojs/index.php/csp/article/view/923/1836
https://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/ojs/index.php/csp/article/view/923/1837
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Reports in Public Health
Cadernos de Saúde Pública
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Reports in Public Health
Cadernos de Saúde Pública
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Reports in Public Health; Vol. 13 No. 1 (1997): January/March
Cadernos de Saúde Pública; v. 13 n. 1 (1997): Janeiro/Março
1678-4464
0102-311X
reponame:Cadernos de Saúde Pública
instname:Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)
instacron:FIOCRUZ
instname_str Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)
instacron_str FIOCRUZ
institution FIOCRUZ
reponame_str Cadernos de Saúde Pública
collection Cadernos de Saúde Pública
repository.name.fl_str_mv Cadernos de Saúde Pública - Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv cadernos@ensp.fiocruz.br||cadernos@ensp.fiocruz.br
_version_ 1798943344781426688