admin
Last year the Ministry of Health and Child Welfare banned the use of ParaCheck because of its low sensitivity of 50 percent to malaria detection compared to other available tests kits whose sensitivity range between 95 and 98 percent.
The Government’s decision to condemn ParaCheck, was influenced after an avalanche of reports by doctors throughout the country, including provincial medical directors, that the kits were largely ineffective.
Ironically, the same Ministry proceeded to buy the test kits for $100 000 and to date, about 20 000 units of the condemned kits have already been delivered to the National Pharmaceutical Company (Natpharm).
A further 39 328 are expected to arrive in the second week of next month.
First Response test kit with a sensitivity of 98 percent, won the tender through the State Procurement Board while ParaCheck came third.
ParaCheck is manufactured by an Indian company, Tulip.
It could not be established how the condemned kits were procured ahead of the First Response.
However, Government officials in the national malaria programme last week Friday maintained that ParaCheck is not different from any of the available test kits.
Although malaria manager Dr Stanford Mashaire said there was nothing wrong with the test kits, Health and Child Welfare laboratory services director Dr Douglas Mangwanya, said the kits were condemned and should be returned.
“It’s a lie. Tell whoever gave you that story that the (malaria) programme said it’s a lie. All test kits are the same. In fact, I do not even want to waste my time on that. I am afraid you are being used,” said Dr Mshaire.
Dr Mashaire said, according to the WHO recommendations, ParaCheck could be bought with pre-shipment testing.
But Dr Mangwanya said the kits should be immediately returned to the manufacturer.
“We are not going to accept them . . . The Government of Zimbabwe agreed to use First Response and not ParaCheck.
“When funding was released we heard that UNDP bought ParaCheck which is inferior and not recommended by WHO,” Dr Mangwanya said.
UNDP bought the product with funding from the Global Fund to Fight Aids, Tuberculosis and Malaria with Government approval.
Provincial medical directors have also condemned the purchase of the test kit.
Mashonaland East provincial medical director Dr Simukai Zizhou said ParaCheck was not reliable as it always gives negative results for malaria parasites.
“People who are telling you that all test kits are the same are actually lying. ParaCheck always gives us a negative result but if you put the same sample on a slide you get a positive result, what does that tell you,” said Dr Zizhou.
Dr Zizhou had compiled statistics of samples that were negative with ParaCheck but turned out positive on slide test.
Although he could not provide the figures he said the numbers were so significant.
“I cannot remember the actual numbers unless I go back to Mutoko where we did the analysis and look at the records but I know they were quite significant,” Dr Zizhou said.
He said reports were sent to head office in Harare but some officials in Ministry of Health gave varying reasons to keep it in use.
“ParaCheck is unreliable. We have always wanted to get rid of it,” he said.
Dr Zizhou said continued use of Para Check would compromise patients.
“If a result is negative, the patient might not get treatment unless the practitioner strongly suspect that its malaria and continue with prescribing treatment,” he said.
Masvingo provincial medical director Dr Robert Mudyarandima also expressed reservations on ParaCheck.
“ParaCheck is weak at picking parasites and we do not want to use it. There are better products on the market that our head office can consider,” said Dr Mudyarandima.
Other provinces, which had bad experiences with ParaCheck are Mashonaland Central, Matabeleland South and North.
According to the WHO’s notice of concern, countries should consider the risk of procuring products such as ParaCheck.
It recommends alternative products where a viable option exists.
“Principal recipients should judiciously consider the risk related to procurement of any of these products and consider alternative products for procurement, where a viable option exists,” reads part of WHO’s recommendations.
The WHO further recommends a systematic pre-shipment lot testing.
“At least two weeks should be foreseen from sampling at manufacturing site to reporting of test results.”
It further recommends testing at central stores when pre-shipment lot testing is not done.
The Global Fund’s country coordinating mechanism coordinator Mr Rangarirai Chiteure said a committee of malaria specialists had since been set to look into the issue and advise on way forward.
“The country coordinating mechanism has taken note of the concern and a committee comprising malaria specialists have been set to look into the issue,” Mr Chiteure said.
Last year a tender believed to have been corruptly floated by NatPharm for the supply and delivery of the controversial test kit, was withdrawn with the participating bidders being refunded their tender fees.
Zimbabwe recently lost its bid to become the Southern African Development Community (Sadc) reference laboratory after experts questioned its continued use of the inefficient ParaCheck test kit.
This is not the first time the ministry’s malaria test kits procurement has come under scrutiny because of alleged corruption.
In 2009 millions of the inefficient ParaCheck test kits were corruptly procured ahead of the more effective test kits with reports of ministry officials having received kickbacks.
Online Reporter