Effect of sampling and diagnostic effort on the assessment of schistosomiasis and soil-transmitted helminthiasis and drug efficacy: a meta-analysis of six drug efficacy trials and one epidemiological survey.

Abstract

It is generally recommended to perform multiple stool examinations in order to improve the diagnostic accuracy when assessing the impact of mass drug administration programmes to control human intestinal worm infections and determining efficacy of the drugs administered. However, the collection and diagnostic work-up of multiple stool samples increases costs and workload. It has been hypothesized that these increased efforts provide more accurate results when infection and drug efficacy are summarized by prevalence (proportion of subjects infected) and cure rate (CR, proportion of infected subjects that become egg-negative after drug administration), respectively, but not when these indicators are expressed in terms of infection intensity and egg reduction rate (ERR). We performed a meta-analysis of six drug efficacy trials and one epidemiological survey. We compared prevalence and intensity of infection, CR and ERR based on collection of one or two stool samples that were processed with single or duplicate Kato-Katz thick smears. We found that the accuracy of prevalence estimates and CR was lowest with the minimal sampling effort, but that this was not the case for estimating infection intensity and ERR. Hence, a single Kato-Katz thick smear is sufficient for reporting infection intensity and ERR following drug treatment.