Skip to main content

Table 4 Participant questionnaire: ease of use, risk and appropriateness of each devicea

From: Blood transfer devices for malaria rapid diagnostic tests: evaluation of accuracy, safety and ease of use

 

Nigeria

n = 78b

Philippines

n = 75b

Uganda

n = 73bc

Combined

n = 226b

 

Number and (%) of health workers answering "Yes">

Easy to collect (pick up) blood

    

LOOP

77 (99%)

30 (40%)

67 (92%)

174 (77%)

STRAW-PIPETTE

42 (54%)

61/74 (82%)

40 (55%)

143/225 (64%)

GLASS CAPILLARY

72 (92%)

63/74 (85%)

50 (68%)

185/225 (82%)

CALIBRATED PIPETTE

42 (54%)

61/74 (82%)

32 (44%)

135/225 (60%)

INVERTED CUP

78 (100%)

57 (76%)

71 (97%)

206 (91%)

Easy to release (deposit) blood

    

LOOP

78 (100%)

63 (84%)

69 (95%)

210 (93%)

STRAW-PIPETTE

61 (78%)

68/74 (92%)

61 (84%)

190/225 (84%)

GLASS CAPILLARYd

9 (12%)

28/74 (38%)

34 (47%)

71/225 (32%)

CALIBRATED PIPETTE

61 (78%)

68/74 (92%)

66 (90%)

195/225 (87%)

INVERTED CUP

78 (100%)

65 (87%)

68 (93%)

211 (93%)

Risk of blood exposure

    

LOOP

1/76 (1%)

22/74 (30%)

9 (12%)

32/223 (14%)

STRAW-PIPETTE

5 (6%)

7/73 (10%)

19 (26%)

31/224 (14%)

GLASS CAPILLARY

21 (27%)

11/71 (15%)

17 (23%)

49/222 (22%)

CALIBRATED PIPETTE

14 (18%)

5/73 (7%)

17 (23%)

36/224 (16%)

INVERTED CUP

0/77 (0%)

10/74 (14%)

2 (3%)

12/224 (5%)

Appropriate for health workers to use in patient care

    

LOOP

76 (97%)

37 (49%)

65 (89%)

178 (79%)

STRAW-PIPETTE

47 (60%)

63/73 (86%)

39 (53%)

149/224 (67%)

GLASS CAPILLARYd

22 (28%)

48/71 (68%)

36 (49%)

106/222 (48%)

CALIBRATED PIPETTE

37 (47%)

63/73 (86%)

36 (49%)

136/224 (61%)

INVERTED CUP

78 (100%)

61/74 (82%)

71 (97%)

210/225 (93%)

  1. a See on-line Supplementary Table for more detailed qualitative data on health workers' reasons for these answers.
  2. b Where alternative "n" specified, the balance had blank data in the case record forms.
  3. c One participant did not answer questions in this section.
  4. d The glass capillary's results for blood release were negatively affected by the fact that the filter paper surface used in this study does not consistently draw blood from the capillary device, and therefore it was more difficult for study participants to release or deposit blood using this device.