scholarly journals Field evaluation of a rapid antigen test (Panbio™ COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test Device) for the diagnosis of COVID-19 in primary healthcare centers

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eliseo Albert ◽  
Ignacio Torres ◽  
Felipe Bueno ◽  
Dixie Huntley ◽  
Estefanía Molla ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Healthcare ◽  
Rapid Test ◽  
Field Evaluation ◽  
Antigen Test ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Test Device ◽  
Specificity And Sensitivity ◽  
Primary Healthcare Centers

AbstractWe evaluated the Panbio™ COVID-19 AG Rapid Test Device (RAD) for the diagnosis of COVID-19 in symptomatic patients attended in primary healthcare centers (n=412). Overall specificity and sensitivity of RAD was 100% and 79.6%, respectively, taking RT-PCR as the reference. SARS-CoV-2 could not be cultured from specimens yielding RT-PCR+/RAD- results.

scholarly journals An assessment of a rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen test in Bangladesh

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zannat Kawser ◽  
Mohabbat Hossain ◽  
Sara Suliman ◽  
Shahin Lockman ◽  
Jesse Gitaka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
False Positive ◽  
Rapid Test ◽  
Field Evaluation ◽  
Ease Of Use ◽  
Large Field ◽  
Antigen Test ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Rapid Antigen Detection Test ◽  
Antigen Tests ◽  
Asymptomatic Individuals

Early detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection is crucial to prevent the spread of the virus. In this study, we evaluated the performance of a commercial rapid antigen detection test, BD Veritor, and compared this (and another rapid test, Standard Q) against a gold-standard of nasopharyngeal (NP) swab tested by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in prospectively recruited adults in Dhaka, Bangladesh. We compared the sensitivity and specificity of the two rapid antigen tests against RT-PCR results in 130 symptomatic and 130 asymptomatic adults. In addition, we evaluated the suitability and ease-of-use of the BD Veritor test in a subsample of study participants (n=42) and implementers (n=5). The sensitivity of the BD Veritor rapid antigen 66 test was 70% in symptomatic (95% confidence interval [CI]: 51-85%) and 87% (95% CI: 69-96%) in asymptomatic individuals with positive SARSCoV-2 RT-PCR, for overall sensitivity of 78% (95% CI: 66-88%). The sensitivity of the Standard Q rapid antigen test was 63% (95% CI: 44-69 80%) in symptomatic and 73% (95% CI: 54-87%) in asymptomatic individuals. One false positive in BD Veritor test (specificity 99.5) and no false positive in Standard Q tests were observed (specificity 100%). The BD Veritor rapid antigen test was 78% sensitive when compared with RT-PCR irrespective of the cycle threshold (Ct) levels in this evaluation in Bangladesh. The implementation evaluation data showed good acceptability in the field settings. This warrants large field evaluation as well as use of the rapid antigen test for quick assessment of SARS-CoV-2 for containment of epidemics in the country.

scholarly journals Avian influenza and Newcastle disease virusindead chickens in markets in Dhaka, Bangladesh in 2011-2012

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 8-15
Author(s):  
LR Barman ◽  
RD Sarker ◽  
BC Das ◽  
EH Chowdhury ◽  
PM Das ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Influenza Virus ◽  
Avian Influenza ◽  
Newcastle Disease ◽  
Rapid Test ◽  
Type A ◽  
Antigen Test ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Test Kit ◽  
Live Bird

A virological survey for avian influenza (AI) and Newcastle disease (ND) was conducted in two selected live bird markets (LBMs), namely Kaptan Bazar and Karwan Bazar in Dhaka city, Bangladesh from August 2011 to July 2012. A total of 513 dead chickens were collected. An immune-chromatographic rapid antigen test for Type A influenza virus and both conventional and real time RT-PCR were used for the detection and characterization of AI and ND viruses. All carcasses were first screened by the rapid antigen test kit and 93 were positive for Type A influenza virus. RT-PCR on a representative number of rapid antigen test positive samples (n = 24) confirmed the presence of Type A influenza virus and mostly H5 influenza virus (22 out of 24 tested samples). Influenza rapid test negative samples (n = 420) were subjected to routine necropsy. Heat stress, suffocation and physical injury were the most common cause of mortality (163 cases), followed by ND, suspected to be the cause of 85 deaths. On molecular investigation of these 85 samples, the presence of ND virus was confirmed in 59 and AI virus in 6; 15 were negative for both ND and AI viruses and 5 were unsuitable for investigation. Among the 59 ND confirmed cases 18 also contained AI virus. In summary, out of 513 carcasses 117 (22.81%) contained AI virus and 59 (11.50%) contained ND virus. Eighteen (3.51%) carcasses contained both AI and ND viruses. The findings suggest that both AI and ND should be considered as major threats to the poultry industry.Bangl. vet. 2016. Vol. 33, No. 1, 8-15

Role of Covid Antigen in the Diagnosis of Covid Positive in Obstetric Patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (10) ◽  
pp. 3356-3358
Author(s):  
Ambreen Fatima ◽  
Nidda Yaseen ◽  
Amna Fareed ◽  
Kashif Ali Samin ◽  
Shumaela Kanwal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nucleic Acid ◽  
Early Detection ◽  
Negative Predictive Value ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Nucleic Acid Amplification ◽  
Antigen Test ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Specificity And Sensitivity

Background and Aim: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) rapid emergence postured significant challenges on the health system in recent years. The early detection of cases is thought to be critical in preventing this pandemic by coronavirus disease (COVID-19), especially important in the obstetrical population due to theirs numerous interactions with another parturient when hospitalized for delivery. Therefore, the present study aimed to assess the COVID antigen test performance in COVID-positive obstetrics patients. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted on 1296 Covid-19 asymptomatic women admitted to the Obstetrics and Gynaecology Department of Muhammad Teaching Hospital & Medical College, Peshawar and Fauji Foundation Hospital, Rawalpindi for the duration of six months from February 2021 to July 2021. Antigen-based test rapid diagnostic test (RDT) was used for screening out COVID-19 positive obstetrics patients or women through nasopharyngeal swabs. Women with negative rapid antigen test results were confirmed with RT-polymers chain reaction test of nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT). Ethical approval and informed consent were taken from the hospital ethical committee and each individual respectively. All the known positive COVID-19 patients during admission were excluded. SPSS version 24 was used for data analysis. Results: The overall prevalence of rapid antigen-positive tested patients was 13.2% (171/1296). The prevalence of positive tested women through rapid antigen test, Nucleic Acid Amplification Test (NAAT), and RT-PCR were 27 (2.1%), 51 (3.9%), and 93 (7.2%) respectively. Of the total 1296 rapid antigen tests, 27 were positive, and the false-negative confirmed positive by NAAT was 144.Thus the sensitivity of the rapid antigen test was 15.8% and the negative predictive value was 93.7%. Of the total 298 Nucleic Acid Amplification Tested had sensitivity and negative predictive value of 89.6% and 99.06% respectively. RT-PCR was carried out on 972 patients, positive diagnosed cases were 36 while 15 were initially negative and were positive with the test was repeated. The sensitivity and negative predictive value was 71.45% and 95.8% respectively. Conclusion: Our study found that Ag-RDT plays a significant role in SARS-CoV-2 early detection in infected individuals, with high specificity and sensitivity to disease infectious stage, whether symptomatic or asymptomatic, and can be used as a decision supported tool. Early detection of COVID-19 status in women admitted for delivery could benefit neonatal protection care. Keywords: Covid-19; Rapid antigen test; RT-PCR test

scholarly journals Field evaluation of specificity and sensitivity of a standard SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid diagnostic test: A prospective study at a teaching hospital in Northern Ghana

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (12) ◽  
pp. e0000040
Author(s):  
Alhassan Abdul-Mumin ◽  
Abdulai Abubakari ◽  
Faith Agbozo ◽  
Abass Abdul-Karim ◽  
Benjamin Demah Nuertey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Teaching Hospital ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Field Evaluation ◽  
Northern Ghana ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Life Conditions ◽  
Specificity And Sensitivity ◽  
Low Sensitivity ◽  
A Prospective Study

The testing capacity for SARS-CoV-2 in Africa is rather limited. Antigen detection rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) are a cheap and rapid alternative to reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests, but there is little data about their performance under real life conditions in tropical countries. The objective of this study is to evaluate the performance of a standard Ag-RDT in a population of a major hospital in northern Ghana. Prospective, cross-sectional, blinded verification of the performance of the SD Biosensor Standard Q SARS-CoV-2 Ag-RDT under real life conditions in 135 symptomatic patients and 58 contacts of RT-PCR positives at Tamale Teaching Hospital in February 2021. Nasopharyngeal samples were taken under standard conditions and tested against RT-PCR in the hospital laboratory. 193 participants (median age 35 years, 109 male) were included into the study for which both RT-PCR test and Ag-RDT results were available. A total of 42 (22%) were RT-PCR positive. Of the 42 RT-PCR positives, 27 were Ag-RDT positive, resulting in a sensitivity of 64% (95% CI 49–79). Sensitivity among symptomatic patients was 58% (95% CI 38–78). 123 were identified Ag-RDT negatives of the 151 RT-PCR negatives, resulting in a specificity of 81% (95% CI 75–87). SARS-CoV-2 Ag-RDTs appear to have a rather low sensitivity and particularly a low specificity under real life conditions in Africa. The role of existing Ag-RDTs in countries with high-temperature climates and limited resources still needs more data and discussion.

scholarly journals Diagnostic accuracy of two commercial SARS-CoV-2 Antigen-detecting rapid tests at the point of care in community-based testing centers

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alice Berger ◽  
Marie Therese Ngo Nsoga ◽  
Francisco Javier Perez-Rodriguez ◽  
Yasmine Abi Aad ◽  
Pascale Sattonnet-Roche ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Tests ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Rapid Test ◽  
Diagnostic Value ◽  
Rapid Diagnostic Tests ◽  
Ease Of Use ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Test Device ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Rapid Tests

AbstractBackgroundAntigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests for SARS-CoV-2 offer new opportunities for the quick and laboratory-independent identification of infected individuals for control of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.MethodsWe performed a prospective, single-center, point of care validation of two antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDT) in comparison to RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal swabs.FindingsBetween October 9th and 23rd, 2020, 1064 participants were enrolled. The Panbio™Covid-19 Ag Rapid Test device (Abbott) was validated in 535 participants, with 106 positive Ag-RDT results out of 124 positive RT-PCR individuals, yielding a sensitivity of 85.5% (95% CI: 78.0–91.2). Specificity was 100.0% (95% CI: 99.1–100) in 411 RT-PCR negative individuals. The Standard Q Ag-RDT (SD Biosensor, Roche) was validated in 529 participants, with 170 positive Ag-RDT results out of 191 positive RT-PCR individuals, yielding a sensitivity of 89.0% (95%CI: 83.7–93.1). One false positive result was obtained in 338 RT-PCR negative individuals, yielding a specificity of 99.7% (95%CI: 98.4–100). For individuals presenting with fever 1-5 days post symptom onset, combined Ag-RDT sensitivity was above 95%.InterpretationWe provide an independent validation of two widely available commercial Ag-RDTs, both meeting WHO criteria of ≥80% sensitivity and ≥97% specificity. Although less sensitive than RT-PCR, these assays could be beneficial due to their rapid results, ease of use, and independence from existing laboratory structures. Testing criteria focusing on patients with typical symptoms in their early symptomatic period onset could further increase diagnostic value.FundingFoundation of Innovative Diagnostics (FIND), Fondation privée des HUG, Pictet Charitable Foundation.

scholarly journals Real-life evaluation of a rapid antigen test (Panbio™ COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test Device) for SARS-CoV-2 detection in asymptomatic close contacts of COVID-19 patients

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ignacio Torres ◽  
Sandrine Poujois ◽  
Eliseo Albert ◽  
Javier Colomina ◽  
David Navarro
Keyword(s):  
Point Of Care ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Rapid Test ◽  
Optimal Timing ◽  
Upper Respiratory Tract ◽  
Limited Information ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Test Device ◽  
Household Contacts ◽  
Close Contacts

ABSTRACTObjectivesThere is limited information on the performance of rapid antigen detection (RAD) tests to identify SARS-CoV-2-infected asymptomatic individuals. In this field study, we evaluated the Panbio™ COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test Device (Abbott Diagnostics, Jena, Germany) for the purpose.MethodsA total of 634 individuals (355 female; median age, 37 years; range, 9-87) were enrolled. Household (n=338) contacts were tested at a median of 2 days (range, 1-7) after diagnosis of the index case and non-household contacts (n=296) at a median of 6 days (range, 1-7) after exposure. RAD testing was carried out at the point of care. The RT-PCR test used was the TaqPath COVID-19 Combo Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Massachusetts, USA).ResultsIn total, 79 individuals (12.4%) tested positive by RT-PCR, of whom 38 (48.1%) yielded positive RAD results. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the RAD test was 48.1% (95% CI: 37.4-58.9) and 100% (95% CI: 99.3-100), respectively. Sensitivity was higher in household (50.8%; 95% CI: 38.9-62.5) than in non-household (35.7%; 95% CI:16.3-61.2%) contacts. Individuals testing positive by RAD test were more likely (P<0.001) to become symptomatic than their negative counterparts.ConclusionThe Panbio test displays low sensitivity in asymptomatic close contacts of COVID-19 patients, particularly in non-household contacts. Nonetheless, establishing the optimal timing for upper respiratory tract collection in this group seems imperative to pinpoint test sensitivity.

scholarly journals Diagnostic accuracy of two commercial SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detecting rapid tests at the point of care in community-based testing centers

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. e0248921
Author(s):  
Alice Berger ◽  
Marie Therese Ngo Nsoga ◽  
Francisco Javier Perez-Rodriguez ◽  
Yasmine Abi Aad ◽  
Pascale Sattonnet-Roche ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Rapid Test ◽  
Diagnostic Value ◽  
Ease Of Use ◽  
Lower Sensitivity ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Test Device ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Rapid Tests

Objectives Determine the diagnostic accuracy of two antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDT) for SARS-CoV-2 at the point of care and define individuals’ characteristics providing best performance. Methods We performed a prospective, single-center, point of care validation of two Ag-RDT in comparison to RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal swabs. Results Between October 9th and 23rd, 2020, 1064 participants were enrolled. The PanbioTM Covid-19 Ag Rapid Test device (Abbott) was validated in 535 participants, with 106 positive Ag-RDT results out of 124 positive RT-PCR individuals, yielding a sensitivity of 85.5% (95% CI: 78.0–91.2). Specificity was 100.0% (95% CI: 99.1–100) in 411 RT-PCR negative individuals. The Standard Q Ag-RDT (SD Biosensor, Roche) was validated in 529 participants, with 170 positive Ag-RDT results out of 191 positive RT-PCR individuals, yielding a sensitivity of 89.0% (95%CI: 83.7–93.1). One false positive result was obtained in 338 RT-PCR negative individuals, yielding a specificity of 99.7% (95%CI: 98.4–100). For individuals presenting with fever 1–5 days post symptom onset, combined Ag-RDT sensitivity was above 95%. Lower sensitivity of 88.2% was seen on the same day of symptom development (day 0). Conclusions We provide an independent validation of two widely available commercial Ag-RDTs, both meeting WHO criteria of ≥80% sensitivity and ≥97% specificity. Although less sensitive than RT-PCR, these assays could be beneficial due to their rapid results, ease of use, and independence from existing laboratory structures. Testing criteria focusing on patients with typical symptoms in their early symptomatic period onset could further increase diagnostic value.

scholarly journals Field evaluation of specificity and sensitivity of a standard SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid diagnostic test: A prospective study at a teaching hospital in Northern Ghana

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alhassan Abdul-Mumin ◽  
Abdulai Abubakari ◽  
Faith Agbozo ◽  
Abass Abdul-Karim ◽  
Benjamin Demah Nuertey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Teaching Hospital ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Field Evaluation ◽  
Northern Ghana ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Life Conditions ◽  
Specificity And Sensitivity ◽  
Low Sensitivity ◽  
A Prospective Study

Background: The testing capacity for SARS-CoV-2 in Africa is rather limited. Antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) are a cheap and rapid alternative to reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests, but there is little data about their performance under real life conditions in tropical countries. Objective: To evaluate the performance of a standard Ag-RDT in a population of a major hospital in northern Ghana. Methods: Prospective, cross-sectional, blinded verification of the performance of the SD Biosensor Standard Q SARS-CoV-2 Ag-RDT under real life conditions in 135 symptomatic patients and 58 contacts of RT-PCR positives at Tamale Teaching Hospital in February 2021. Nasopharyngeal samples were taken under standard conditions and tested against RT-PCR in the hospital laboratory. Results: 193 participants (median age 35 years, 109 male) were included into the study for which both RT-PCR test and Ag-RDT results were available. A total of 42 (22%) were RT-PCR-positive. Of the 42 RT-PCR-positives, 27 were Ag-RDT positive, resulting in a sensitivity of 64% (95% CI 49-79). Sensitivity among symptomatic patients was 58% (95% CI 38-78). 123 were identified Ag-RDT negatives of the 151 RT-PCR negatives, resulting in a specificity of 81% (95% CI 75-87). Conclusions: SARS-CoV-2 Ag-RDTs appear to have a rather low sensitivity and particularly a low specificity under real life conditions in Africa. The role of existing Ag-RDTs in countries with high-temperature climates and limited resources still needs more data and discussion.

scholarly journals Potential Use of Antigen-Based Rapid Test for SARS-CoV-2 in Respiratory Specimens in Low-Resource Settings in Egypt for Symptomatic Patients and High-Risk Contacts

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abeer Mohamed Abdelrazik ◽  
Shahira Morsy Elshafie ◽  
Hossam M Abdelaziz
Keyword(s):  
Test Performance ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Rapid Test ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Antigen Test ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Viral Loads ◽  
Viral Transport Medium ◽  
Public Health Challenges ◽  
Polymerase Chain

Abstract Objective Because of the rapidly emerging SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and its wide public health challenges, rapid diagnosis is essential to decrease the spread. Antigen-based rapid detection tests are available; however, insufficient data about their performance are available. Methods The lateral-flow immunochromatographic BIOCREDIT COVID-19 antigen test was evaluated using nasopharyngeal swabs in a viral transport medium from patients with confirmed infection, contacts, and exposed healthcare professionals at Fayoum University Hospital in Egypt. Test performance was determined in comparison to the SARS-CoV-2 real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. Results Three hundred ten specimens from 3 categories—patients with confirmed diagnoses of COVID-19, contacts, and exposed healthcare professionals—were included; 188 specimens were RT-PCR-positive, from which 81 were detected by rapid antigen test. Overall sensitivity was 43.1%. Sensitivity was significantly higher in specimens with high viral loads. Conclusion Poor sensitivity of the BIOCREDIT COVID-19 test does not permit its use for diagnosis, and it can only be used in conjunction with RT-PCR for screening.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document