Table 5 Use of RDTs for Diagnosis of Malaria
Variables | N (%) |
|---|---|
Have Ever Used RDT (n = 45) | Â |
Yes | 23 (51.1) |
No | 22 (48.9) |
Ever used according to location | Â |
Urban (n = 34) | 16 (47.1) |
Rural (n = 11) | 7 (63.6) |
Chi-square | 0.91 |
P-value | 0.339 |
Ever used RDTs according to type of facility | Â |
Public (n = 26) | 16 (61.5) |
Private (n = 19) | 7 (36.8) |
Chi-square | 2.68 |
P-value | 0.102 |
Ever used according to professional cadre | Â |
Doctors (n = 18) | 11 (61.1) |
Nurses (n = 3) | 0 (0.0) |
CHEW/CHO (n = 10) | 5 (50.0) |
Laboratory technologists (n = 14) | 7 (50.0) |
Chi-square | 5.99 |
P-value | 0.102 |
Current usage (n = 23) | Â |
Yes | 10 (43.5) |
No | 13 (56.5) |
Non usage of RDTs according to facility | Â |
Public (n = 26) | 5 (19.2) |
Private (n = 19) | 8 (42.1) |
Chi-square | 2.8 |
P-value | 0.09 |
Reasons for non use (n = 13) | Â |
Supply issues | 4 (30.8) |
Not reliable | 8 (61.5) |
Prefer other methods | 2 (15.4) |
Cost of RDT | 2 (15.4) |