A comparative study of the typhidot (Dot-EIA) and Widal tests in blood culture positive cases of typhoid fever

Abstract

Seventy-six blood culture positive typhoid cases and forty-eight controls were studied. The typhidot test was positive in 74 (97.36%) cases, with a sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value of 96%, 89.5%, and 95%, respectively, compared to the Widal test which was positive in 56 (73.68%) cases with a sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of 72%, 87%, and 87%, respectively (P = 0.001). In the control group, seven (14.5%) cases tested positive for the Widal test and two (4.16%) for the typhidot (P = 0.001), yielding the sensitivity and specificity for the Widal test and the typhidot test of 63% and 83%, and 85% and 97%, respectively. We conclude that the Dot-EIA (enzyme immunoassay; typhidot) is a more sensitive and specific test which is easy to perform and more reliable compared to the Widal test and that it is useful in early therapy.