Due to the high mortality rate of malaria, limitation of the microscopic method in the malaria control program and the need for special equipment, the use of a rapid diagnostic method with microscopic methods seems necessary. Therefore, many efforts have been made to detect malaria outside the range of microscopic techniques. These methods are nucleic acid probes and immunofluorescence, diffusion gel, counterimmunoelectrophoresis, radioimmunoassay, enzyme immunoassay, immunochromatography test (ICT), hemagglutination test, indirect immunofluorescence, and western blot (
10-
12). Polymerase chain reduction (PCR) is used to identify the four
Plasmodium species in the cases where the parasite level is low; moreover, it can be used in mixed infection (
13-
15). The aforementioned diagnostic methods need equipment and facilities. ICT is considered for qualitative detection of malaria antigen. For each slide, about 20 to 60 minutes in microscopic method and five to 30 minutes with RDT method is needed (
1,
4). Sensitivity of both microscopic and RDT studies shows that although this method is simple and accessible, has no significant sensitivity. It also has major differences with other studies in this field; in 2003, World health organization showed that if the number of parasites was about 100/μL of blood, the sensitivity of RDT could be similar to that of microscopic method. Regarding
P. falciparum, if the number of parasites was more than 100/μL of blood, the sensitivity of PLDH and PfHRP-2 would be over 95% (
16,
17). Specificity investigation of these two methods by WHO in 2000 revealed that RDT has a specificity of 100% in diagnosing
P. falciparum (
6). In the study by Bell et al. on RDT sensitivity in detecting
P. falciparum, the sensitivity of PfHRP-2 was more than PLDH and aldolase (
7). For sensitivity and specificity investigation of PfHRP-2 and PLDH tests in detecting
P. falciparum, Iqbal J et al. illustrated that the sensitivity of PfHRP-2 was more than PLHD; however, specificity of PLDH was more than PfHRP-2 (
1,
4,
16,
17). In addition, the Edrisian et al. indicated that the specificity and sensitivity of ICT were around 100% and 93%, respectively (
5). Evaluation of the stability level of RDTs by Bell and Peeling demonstrated that PLDH and aldolase had lower stability in comparison to PfHRP-2 Whereas the temperature also increased and immediately lowered their sensitivity in uncontrollable conditions (
7). False-negative cases were reported in 2003 (WHO), for instance, in very low level of parasite (< 100/μL), the kit is corrupted or damaged and the sensitivity is lost. Reported false-positive cases are due the presence of rheumatoid factor, incomplete treatment, and delay in clearance of blood circulating antigens that are either free or complex. Singh et al. by studying 344 patients with symptomatic
P. falciparum and
P. vivax revealed that sensitivity and specificity were 97.5% and 88% for
P. falciparum and 72% and 99% for
P. vivax, respectively (
3). In the current study, we used the gold standard of malaria diagnosis (microscopic method), which revealed a sensitivity of 100% for
P. falciparum and 71.4% for
P. vivax. It illustrates a significant difference in the sensitivity level of attempted test regarding diagnosing
P. vivax. Since the detection mechanism for
P. falciparum is pfHRP-2, enzyme reaction and PLDH enzyme reactions are related to
P. vivax, our results are in agreement with that of Bell et al. They believed that the sensitivity of the Pf HRP-2 was more than PLDH and aldolase (
7). Due to the quality of the kit manufacturers, the difference could be seen because the used kit in this study was made in china; therefore, more attention should be paid to the selection of high quality kit. Bell et al. study on the stability level of RDTs revealed that PLDH and aldolase were less stable in comparison to PfHRP-2 in terms of temperature rise and they lost their sensitivity rapidly in the uncontrollable conditions (
7-
9). Since the present study was performed in tropical areas, the results might be different in sensitivity of considered tests with similar studies conducted on the mentioned subject. Our study showed that only 71.4% of all positive samples for
P. vivax in microscopic method were detected via RDT. The results were the same for both methods in diagnosis of
P. falciparum.