Evaluation of Wet Mount and Concentration Techniques of Stool Examination for Intestinal Parasites Identification at Debre Markos Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, Ethiopia

Figures & data

Table 1 Prevalence of Intestinal Parasite Species Identified by the WT, FEC, and Combination of WM and FEC Techniques among Pregnant Women at DMCSH, Ethiopia

Parasite Species	WM Method	FEC Method	Combined Method
	Pos (%)	Pos (%)	Pos (%)
A. lumbricoides	9(1.1)	17(2.2)	26 (3.3)
S.mansoni	5 (0.6)	29 (3.6)	34 (4.3)
Hookworm	13 (1.6)	111 (13.9)	114 (14.3)
T. trichiura	1 (0.1)	10 (1.3)	11 (1.4)
Taenia species	14 (1.8)	21 (2.6)	34 (4.3)
S. stercoralis	2 (0.3)	8 (1.0)	8 (1.0)
H. nana	1 (0.1)	10 (1.3)	11(1.4)
E. histolytica	54 (6.8)	23 (2.9)	77 (9.7)
G. lamblia	22 (2.7)	9 (1.1)	28 (3.5)

Abbreviations: Pos, number of positives; %, percentage.

Table 2 The Performance of Wet Mount and Formol-Ether Concentration Techniques to Diagnose Intestinal Parasite against the Gold Standard among Pregnant Women in DMCSH, Ethiopia

Method	Result	Combined Result as “Gold Standard”
		Pos	Neg	Sensitivity	NPV	TE	TA
				% (95% CI)	% (95% CI)	% (95% CI)	Kappa Value
WM	Pos	104	0	37.1 (31.7–42.9)	74.6 (71.2–77.7)	77.9 (74.8–80.7)	0.434
	Neg	176	516
FEC	Pos	205	0	73.5 (68.0–78.3)	87.5 (84.6–89.9)	90.7 (88.3–92.5)	0.783
	Neg	75	516

Abbreviations: Pos, positive; Neg, negative.