Cargando…

2620. Respiratory Syncytial Virus Rapid Antigen Detection Test, Can It Be Trusted?

BACKGROUND: Many emergency departments and urgent care settings use the commonly available Respiratory Syncytial Virus Rapid Antigen Detection Test (RSV RADT) to diagnose children with RSV. We noted discordant results between RADT and definitive testing. Our study looked at the positive predictive v...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Titze, Nicole, Singh, Jasjit, Gornick, Wendi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6810058/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.2298
_version_ 1783462154317332480
author Titze, Nicole
Singh, Jasjit
Gornick, Wendi
author_facet Titze, Nicole
Singh, Jasjit
Gornick, Wendi
author_sort Titze, Nicole
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Many emergency departments and urgent care settings use the commonly available Respiratory Syncytial Virus Rapid Antigen Detection Test (RSV RADT) to diagnose children with RSV. We noted discordant results between RADT and definitive testing. Our study looked at the positive predictive value (PPV) and the false discovery rate (FDR) of the RSV RADT at our facility. METHODS: We pro- and retrospectively reviewed all patients with positive RSV RAPD tests from July 1, 2017 through March 31, 2019. The test utilized was the QuickVue® RSV Test Kit (QUIDEL Corp, CA, USA), which detects the viral fusion protein present in RSV. Of the tests performed, we chose patients who had definitive testing with either a direct fluorescent antibody (DFA) or a polymerase chain reaction (PCR). We then calculated the PPV as well as the FDR of the RSV RADT during the total interval period, as well as off-season periods (April 1 through October 31) and in-season periods (November 1 through March 31). RESULTS: During the study period there were 1128 RSV RADT tests performed, of which 232 had definitive testing with either DFA or PCR (Figures 1 and 2). We found the overall PPV during the study period was 63.3%. During the off-season 30 positive RSV RADT received definitive testing, of which 6 were positive, which yields a PPV of only 20%. In season, 202 RSV RADT received additional testing with 141 positive for RSV. The PPV was 69.8%. The FDR correlated with 36.7% throughout the entire studied period, 80% during the off-season and 30.2% during in-season. As expected, the PPV was higher during times of higher prevalence (Figure 3). CONCLUSION: Based on our results, utilization of the RSV RADT during time of low prevalence yields a high false detection rate and should therefore be discouraged. The use during times of high prevalence yields only modest results and is unlikely to aid in clinical decision-making. Our results differ from those published by the manufacturer (PPV 84%), and may reflect differences in sample collection in the acute care setting. [Image: see text] [Image: see text] [Image: see text] DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6810058
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68100582019-10-28 2620. Respiratory Syncytial Virus Rapid Antigen Detection Test, Can It Be Trusted? Titze, Nicole Singh, Jasjit Gornick, Wendi Open Forum Infect Dis Abstracts BACKGROUND: Many emergency departments and urgent care settings use the commonly available Respiratory Syncytial Virus Rapid Antigen Detection Test (RSV RADT) to diagnose children with RSV. We noted discordant results between RADT and definitive testing. Our study looked at the positive predictive value (PPV) and the false discovery rate (FDR) of the RSV RADT at our facility. METHODS: We pro- and retrospectively reviewed all patients with positive RSV RAPD tests from July 1, 2017 through March 31, 2019. The test utilized was the QuickVue® RSV Test Kit (QUIDEL Corp, CA, USA), which detects the viral fusion protein present in RSV. Of the tests performed, we chose patients who had definitive testing with either a direct fluorescent antibody (DFA) or a polymerase chain reaction (PCR). We then calculated the PPV as well as the FDR of the RSV RADT during the total interval period, as well as off-season periods (April 1 through October 31) and in-season periods (November 1 through March 31). RESULTS: During the study period there were 1128 RSV RADT tests performed, of which 232 had definitive testing with either DFA or PCR (Figures 1 and 2). We found the overall PPV during the study period was 63.3%. During the off-season 30 positive RSV RADT received definitive testing, of which 6 were positive, which yields a PPV of only 20%. In season, 202 RSV RADT received additional testing with 141 positive for RSV. The PPV was 69.8%. The FDR correlated with 36.7% throughout the entire studied period, 80% during the off-season and 30.2% during in-season. As expected, the PPV was higher during times of higher prevalence (Figure 3). CONCLUSION: Based on our results, utilization of the RSV RADT during time of low prevalence yields a high false detection rate and should therefore be discouraged. The use during times of high prevalence yields only modest results and is unlikely to aid in clinical decision-making. Our results differ from those published by the manufacturer (PPV 84%), and may reflect differences in sample collection in the acute care setting. [Image: see text] [Image: see text] [Image: see text] DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures. Oxford University Press 2019-10-23 /pmc/articles/PMC6810058/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.2298 Text en © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Abstracts
Titze, Nicole
Singh, Jasjit
Gornick, Wendi
2620. Respiratory Syncytial Virus Rapid Antigen Detection Test, Can It Be Trusted?
title 2620. Respiratory Syncytial Virus Rapid Antigen Detection Test, Can It Be Trusted?
title_full 2620. Respiratory Syncytial Virus Rapid Antigen Detection Test, Can It Be Trusted?
title_fullStr 2620. Respiratory Syncytial Virus Rapid Antigen Detection Test, Can It Be Trusted?
title_full_unstemmed 2620. Respiratory Syncytial Virus Rapid Antigen Detection Test, Can It Be Trusted?
title_short 2620. Respiratory Syncytial Virus Rapid Antigen Detection Test, Can It Be Trusted?
title_sort 2620. respiratory syncytial virus rapid antigen detection test, can it be trusted?
topic Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6810058/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.2298
work_keys_str_mv AT titzenicole 2620respiratorysyncytialvirusrapidantigendetectiontestcanitbetrusted
AT singhjasjit 2620respiratorysyncytialvirusrapidantigendetectiontestcanitbetrusted
AT gornickwendi 2620respiratorysyncytialvirusrapidantigendetectiontestcanitbetrusted