{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03492063492063492, 'fraction_numerical': 0.020634920634920634, 'mean_word_length': 5.080385852090032, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 1, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Comparison of direct microcopy and antigen casette tests for the detection of Giardia and Cryptosporidium].

OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to compare the direct microscopy used for detection of intestinal parasites with antigen casette tests used in diagnosis of giardiasis and crypyosporidiasis.


METHODS
Forty-six children who lived in the Şanlıurfa Orphanage were enrolled in this study. The stool specimens were taken in the morning and examined by using native-lugol, modified formalin-ethylacetate concentration methods and cellophane tape method on the same day at the Microbiology laboratory of Harran University. Also Kinyoun-acid fast stained preparations were used for the detection of Cryptosporidium. R-biopharm Cryptosporidium/Giardia casette antigen test was used for the determinaton of giardiasis and crytosporidiasis.


RESULTS
The mean age of the children enrolled in this study was 8.61±3.45 and the distribution of gender was 24 female (52.2%), 22 male (47.8%), respectively. According to stool examinations, 9 of 46 examples (19.60%) were determined as Giardia intestinalis, Cryptosporidium spp. had never been found. The result of the antigen screening casette test showed 9 of 46 samples (19.60%) were positive for G. intestinalis. Also Cryptosporidium spp. had never been found by the antigen casette test.


CONCLUSION
When we compared the results of the direct microscopy and antigen casette tests, we found no significant difference between them for test reliability (p > 0.05). Antigen tests have higher sensitivity (100%) and specifity (100%) than the modified acid-fast staining technique, therefore, it is a preferred reference method . However, an experienced staff working accurately might access the same conclusion. Considering the cost of antigen tests, direct microscopic examination is cheaper, andeasier when it used by an experienced person.