Control de la calidad del diagnóstico coproparasitológico en la provincia de Ciudad de La Habana, Cuba
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 1997 |
Outros Autores: | , |
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 |