• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Public Health. Rapid point-of-care testing for SARS-CoV-2 in a community screening setting shows low sensitivity

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Public Health. 2020 Apr 18;182:170-172. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2020.04.009. [Epub ahead of print]
Rapid point-of-care testing for SARS-CoV-2 in a community screening setting shows low sensitivity.


D?hla M[SUP]1[/SUP], Boesecke C[SUP]2[/SUP], Schulte B[SUP]3[/SUP], Diegmann C[SUP]4[/SUP], Sib E[SUP]4[/SUP], Richter E[SUP]3[/SUP], Eschbach-Bludau M[SUP]3[/SUP], Aldabbagh S[SUP]3[/SUP], Marx B[SUP]3[/SUP], Eis-H?binger AM[SUP]3[/SUP], Schmithausen RM[SUP]4[/SUP], Streeck H[SUP]3[/SUP].

Author information




Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

With the current SARS-CoV2 outbreak, countless tests need to be performed on potential symptomatic individuals, contacts and travellers. The gold standard is a quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR)-based system taking several hours to confirm positivity. For effective public health containment measures, this time span is too long. We therefore evaluated a rapid test in a high-prevalence community setting.
STUDY DESIGN:

Thirty-nine randomly selected individuals at a COVID-19 screening centre were simultaneously tested via qPCR and a rapid test. Ten previously diagnosed individuals with known SARS-CoV-2 infection were also analysed.
METHODS:

The evaluated rapid test is an IgG/IgM-based test for SARS-CoV-2 with a time to result of 20 min. Two drops of blood are needed for the test performance.
RESULTS:

Of 49 individuals, 22 tested positive by repeated qPCR. In contrast, the rapid test detected only eight of those positive correctly (sensitivity: 36.4%). Of the 27 qPCR-negative individuals, 24 were detected correctly (specificity: 88.9%).
CONCLUSION:

Given the low sensitivity, we recommend not to rely on an antibody-based rapid test for public health measures such as community screenings.
Copyright ? 2020 The Royal Society for Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.



KEYWORDS:

COVID-19; Coronavirus; Outbreak; Rapid test; SARS-CoV-2


PMID:32334183DOI:10.1016/j.puhe.2020.04.009
 
Back
Top