ABSTRACT
Purpose: Sensitive, specific, rapid and cost-effective technique for malaria diagnosis is need of the hour. Microscopy has been the gold standard for malaria diagnosis, but its interpersonnel variability and lack of sensitivity make it subjective test. Conventional polymerase chain reaction (cPCR) has proven to be sensitive technique, but costly and time-consuming. Considering these factors, we have compared microscopy and cPCR with newly derives ultra-fast, portable PCR machine called Palm PCR. Materials and Methods: Palm PCR is arranged with three heat blocks precisely made for three stages of PCR cycles with 34 min for 1100 bp Plasmodium genus outer primer to amplify and 10 min each for Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax inner primers of 120 bp and 205 bp, respectively. A total of 191 suspected samples were processed and evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Results: The area under ROC curve analysis for Palm PCR with reference standard microscopy for P. falciparum, P. vivax and Plasmodium was 0.8969, 0.9121 and 0.9116, respectively, and with reference standard cPCR was 1.0 for all of them. ROC curve area close of suggests that Palm PCR can be as significant as cPCR in malaria diagnosis. In fact, ultra-rapid amplification with same precision makes Palm PCR better technique than cPCR. Conclusion: Palm PCR is sensitive, rapid and works on battery with simple laboratory facility requirements. Portable electrophoresis and transilluminator combined with Palm PCR could be implemented as an important diagnostic tool in resource-limited and rural areas. Similar studies with wider parameters in rural areas will help us evaluate and maybe establish Palm PCR as PCR platform of choice for such specific set-ups.