Dataset Information

Viral load testing in a resource-limited setting: quality control is critical.

ABSTRACT:

Background

World Health Organization guidelines now recommend routine use of viral load testing, where available, for patients receiving antiretroviral treatment (ART). However, its use has not been routinely implemented in many resource-limited settings due to cost, availability and accessibility. Viral load testing is complex, making its application in resource-limited settings challenging. We describe the issues encountered by Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) when using routine viral load testing in a large HIV programme in sub-Saharan Africa.

Methods

Between October 2005 and August 2006, more than 1200 patients on ART had viral load tests at baseline and at three-month intervals performed by a local reference laboratory that was quality assured by an experienced international institution. Concerns with reliability of results halted testing. The quality control measures instituted with a second laboratory and outcomes of these were documented.

Results

In 2005 and 2006, only 178 of 334 (53%) previously ART-naïve patients tested after six to 12 months of treatment had viral loads of less than 1000 copies/mL. Similar MSF programmes elsewhere demonstrated virological suppression rates of more than 85%, and duplicate testing showed unacceptable discordance. Laboratory problems encountered included: disregarded quality control; time delays; requirement for retesting; and duplicate sample variations. Potentially harmful clinical outcomes of inaccurate viral load results include: unnecessary ART regimen changes; unnecessary enhanced adherence counselling after "false failures"; and undetected virological failure.

Conclusions

Viral load testing performed without rigorous quality control carries the risk of erroneous and potentially damaging results. Viral load testing should be utilized only if robust quality assurance has been implemented. Our experience in this and other settings led to the development of a guide for assessing the suitability of a laboratory for viral load testing that can be used to help achieve reliable results.

SUBMITTER: Greig J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3116452 | biostudies-literature | 2011 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Viral load testing in a resource-limited setting: quality control is critical.

Greig Jane J du Cros Philipp P Klarkowski Derryck D Mills Clair C Jørgensen Steffen S Harrigan P Richard PR O'Brien Daniel P DP

Journal of the International AIDS Society 20110512

<h4>Background</h4>World Health Organization guidelines now recommend routine use of viral load testing, where available, for patients receiving antiretroviral treatment (ART). However, its use has not been routinely implemented in many resource-limited settings due to cost, availability and accessibility. Viral load testing is complex, making its application in resource-limited settings challenging. We describe the issues encountered by Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) when using routine viral lo ...[more]

PMID: 21569393

Similar Datasets

Project description:HIV infection in Cameroon is characterized by a great viral diversity with all HIV-1 groups (M, N, O, and P) and HIV-2 in circulation. HIV group determination is very important if tailored viral load analysis and treatments are to be applied. In our laboratory, HIV viral load is carried out using two platforms; Biocentric and Abbott depending on the HIV group identified. Biocentric which quantifies HIV-1 group M is a cheap and open system useful in resource limited settings. The objective of this study was to compare the viral load analyses of serologically group-indeterminate HIV samples using the two platforms with the view of reducing cost.Consecutive samples received between March and May 2014, and between August and September 2014 in our laboratory for HIV viral load analysis were included. All these samples were analyzed for their HIV groups using an in-house ELISA serotyping test. All HIV-1 group M samples were quantified using the Biocentric test while all other known atypical samples (HIV-1 groups N, O and P) were analyzed using the Abbott technique. HIV group-indeterminate samples (by serotyping) were quantified with both techniques.Among the 6355 plasma samples received, HIV-1 group M was identified in 6026 (94.82%) cases; HIV-1 group O, in 20 (0.31%); HIV-1 group M?+?O, in 3 (0.05%) and HIV-2, in 3 (0.05%) case. HIV-group indeterminate samples represented about 4.76% (303/6355) and only 231 of them were available for analysis by Abbott Real-Time HIV-1 and Generic HIV Viral Load techniques. Results showed that 188 (81.39%) samples had undetectable viral load in both techniques. All the detectable samples showed high viral load, with a mean of 4.5 log copies/ml (range 2.1-6.5) for Abbott Real-Time and 4.5 log copies/ml (range 2-6.4) for Generic HIV Viral Load. The mean viral load difference between the two techniques was 0.03 log10 copies/ml and a good correlation was obtained (r 2 ?=?0.89; P?<?0.001).Our results suggest that cheaper and open techniques such as Biocentric could be useful alternatives for HIV viral load follow-up quantification in resource limited settings like Cameroon; even with its high viral diversity.

Project description:Background: Blood cultures (BC) have a high clinical relevance and are a priority specimen for surveillance of antimicrobial resistance. Manual BC are still most frequently used in resource-limited settings. Data on automated BC performance in Africa are scarce. We implemented automated BC at a surveillance site of the African Network for improved Diagnostics, Epidemiology and Management of Common Infectious Agents (ANDEMIA). Methods: Between June 2017 and January 2018, pairs of automated BC (BacT/ALERT®FA Plus) and manual BC (brain-heart infusion broth) were compared at a University hospital in Bouaké, Côte d'Ivoire. BC were inoculated each with a target blood volume of 10 ml from the same venipuncture. Automated BC were incubated for up to 5 days, manual BC for up to 10 days. Terminal subcultures were performed for manual BC only. The two systems were compared regarding yield, contamination, and turnaround time. For quality assurance, isolates were retested in a German routine microbiological laboratory. Results: BC sampling was increased from on average 24 BC to 63 BC per month. A total of 337 matched pairs of BC were included. Automated BC was positive in 36.5%, manual BC in 24.0% (p-value < 0.01), proportion of contamination was 47.9 and 43.8%, respectively (p-value = 1.0). Turnaround time of positive BC was shortened by 2.5 days with automated compared to manual BC (p < 0.01). Most common detected pathogens in both systems were Klebsiella spp. (26.0%) and Staphylococcus aureus (18.2%). Most contaminants were members of the skin flora. Retesting of 162 isolates was concordant in 79.6% on family level. Conclusions: Implementing automated BC in a resource-limited setting is possible and improves microbiological diagnostic performance. Automated BC increased yield and shortened turnaround times. Regular training and mentorship of clinicians has to be intensified to increase number and quality of BC. Pre-analytical training to improve diagnostic stewardship is essential when implementing a new microbiological method. Retesting highlighted that manual identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing can be of good quality and sustainable. The implementation of automated tools should be decided individually according to economic considerations, number of samples, stable supply chain of consumables, and technical sustainability.

Dataset Information

Viral load testing in a resource-limited setting: quality control is critical.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Viral load testing in a resource-limited setting: quality control is critical.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets