SARS-CoV-2 patient self-testing with an antigen-detecting rapid test: a head-to-head comparison with professional testing

Author:

Lindner Andreas K.,Nikolai Olga,Rohardt Chiara,Kausch Franka,Wintel Mia,Gertler Maximilian,Burock Susen,Hörig Merle,Bernhard Julian,Tobian Frank,Gaeddert Mary,Lainati Federica,Corman Victor M.,Jones Terry C.,Sacks Jilian A.,Seybold Joachim,Denkinger Claudia M.,Mockenhaupt Frank P.

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundAntigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) have been widely recommended as a complement to RT-PCR. Considering the possibility of nasal self-sampling and the ease-of-use in performing the test, self-testing may be an option.Methods and FindingsWe performed a manufacturer-independent, prospective diagnostic accuracy study of nasal mid-turbinate self-sampling and self-testing when using a WHO-listed SARS-CoV-2 Ag-RDT. Symptomatic participants suspected to have COVID-19 received written and illustrated instructions. Procedures were observed without intervention. For comparison, Ag-RDTs with nasopharyngeal sampling were professionally performed. Estimates of agreement, sensitivity, and specificity relative to RT-PCR on a combined oro-/nasopharyngeal sample were calculated. Feasibility was evaluated by observer and participant questionnaires.Among 146 symptomatic adults, 40 (27.4%) were RT-PCR-positive for SARS-CoV-2. Sensitivity with self-testing was 82.5% (33/40 RT-PCR positives detected; 95% CI 68.1-91.3), and 85.0% (34/40; 95% CI 70.9-92.9) with professional testing. The positive percent agreement between self-testing and professional testing on Ag-RDT was 91.4% (95% CI 77.6-97.0), and negative percent agreement 99.1% (95% CI 95.0-100). At high viral load (>7.0 log10 SARS-CoV-2 RNA copies/ml), sensitivity was 96.6% (28/29; 95% CI 82.8-99.8) for both self- and professional testing. Deviations in sampling and testing (incomplete self-sampling or extraction procedure, or imprecise volume applied on the test device) were observed in 25 out of the 40 PCR-positives. Participants were rather young (mean age 35 years) and educated (59.6% with higher education degree). Most participants (80.9%) considered the Ag-RDT as rather easy to perform.ConclusionsAmbulatory participants suspected for SARS-CoV-2 infection were able to reliably perform the Ag-RDT and test themselves. Procedural errors might be reduced by refinement of the Ag-RDTs for self-testing, such as modified instructions for use or product design/procedures. Self-testing may result in more wide-spread and more frequent testing. Paired with the appropriate information and education of the general public about the benefits and risks, self-testing may therefore have significant impact on the pandemic.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

Reference23 articles.

1. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Options for the use of rapid antigen tests for COVID-19 in the EU/EEA and the UK. November 19 2020. https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications-data/options-use-rapid-antigen-tests-covid-19-eueea-and-uk. Date last accessed: December 20 2020.

2. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Surveillance of COVID-19 at long-term care facilities in the EU/EEA. May 19 2020. https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications-data/surveillance-COVID-19-long-term-care-facilities-EU-EEA. Date last accessed: December 20 2020.

3. Corman VM , Landt O , Kaiser M , Molenkamp R , Meijer A , Chu DK , et al. Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR. Euro Surveill. 2020;25(3).

4. Krüger LJ , Gaeddert M , Köppel L , Brümmer LE , Gottschalk C , Miranda IB , et al. Evaluation of the accuracy, ease of use and limit of detection of novel, rapid, antigen-detecting point-of-care diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2. medRxiv. 2020:2020.10.01.20203836.

5. Corman VM , Haage VC , Bleicker T , Schmidt ML , Mühlemann B , Zuchowski M , et al. Comparison of seven commercial SARS-CoV-2 rapid Point-of-Care Antigen tests. medRxiv. 2020:2020.11.12.20230292.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3