Updates in immunoassays: parasitology

Although most clinical laboratories use microscopy and routine O&P procedures when identifying parasitic infections, there are several parasites that are better detected through serological means. Toxoplasma, Giardia, and Cryptosporidium were discussed along with immunoassays used for their detection. Immunoassays provide quick results and are less labor intensive than specimen concentration and slide preparation for microscopic examination. These assays are easy to use and provide sensitive and specific results. Some clinical laboratories no longer perform O&Ps in house and refer specimens to reference laboratories for evaluation. By using immunoassays, some of the more common parasites can be identified in a timely manner reducing turn-around times. Some controversy exists over the use of IIF and EIA tests used for ANA testing along with measuring CRPs and PCT as predictors of bacterial sepsis and septic shock. Regardless of the methodology discussed in this series of articles, there are pros and cons to the various immunoassays available. Determining the most appropriate assay based on patient population and volume is governed by the institution and its patients' needs. In conclusion, immunoassays, whether manual or automated, are easy to use, cost effective and allow the medical laboratory professional to provide quick and accurate results to the clinician so the most appropriate treatment can be administered to the patient. The ultimate goal of healthcare professionals is to provide the highest quality of medical care in a timely manner. The use of immunoassays in the clinical laboratory allows the healthcare team to successfully achieve this goal.