Cargando…

Can visual interpretation of NucliSens graphs reduce the need for repeat viral load testing?

BACKGROUND: In Zimbabwe, viral load (VL) testing for people living with HIV on antiretroviral therapy is performed at the National Microbiology Reference Laboratory using a NucliSens machine. Anecdotal evidence has shown that invalid graphs for “Target Not Detectable (TND)” will upon repeat VL testi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Handireketi, Newten, Timire, Collins, Shewade, Hemant Deepak, Munemo, Ellen, Nyagupe, Charles, Chipuka, Sandra, Sisya, Lucia, Gumbo, Hlanai, Dhitima, Ezekiel, Harries, Anthony D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6867593/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31747448
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223597
_version_ 1783472103232634880
author Handireketi, Newten
Timire, Collins
Shewade, Hemant Deepak
Munemo, Ellen
Nyagupe, Charles
Chipuka, Sandra
Sisya, Lucia
Gumbo, Hlanai
Dhitima, Ezekiel
Harries, Anthony D.
author_facet Handireketi, Newten
Timire, Collins
Shewade, Hemant Deepak
Munemo, Ellen
Nyagupe, Charles
Chipuka, Sandra
Sisya, Lucia
Gumbo, Hlanai
Dhitima, Ezekiel
Harries, Anthony D.
author_sort Handireketi, Newten
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In Zimbabwe, viral load (VL) testing for people living with HIV on antiretroviral therapy is performed at the National Microbiology Reference Laboratory using a NucliSens machine. Anecdotal evidence has shown that invalid graphs for “Target Not Detectable (TND)” will upon repeat VL testing produce a valid result for virus not detected, therefore removing the need to repeat the test. This needs formal assessment. OBJECTIVES: To determine i) intra- and inter-rater agreement of the visual interpretation of NucliSens graphs (Target Detectable [TD], TND and No Line [NL]) between two laboratory scientists and ii) sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of the NucliSens graphs compared with repeat VL results. METHOD: Cross sectional study using secondary data. Two laboratory scientists independently rated graphs one week apart for intra-rater agreement and compared final ratings with each other for inter-rater agreement. Consensus interpretations of graphs were compared with repeat VL results. Kappa coefficients were used to obtain measures of agreement. RESULTS: There were 562 patients with NucliSens graphs and repeat VL. Kappa scores were: 0.98 (Scientist A); 0.99 (Scientist B); 0.96 (Scientist A versus Scientist B); and 0.65 (NucliSens graphs versus VL). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value for graphs compared with VL were 71%, 92%, 79% and 89% respectively. CONCLUSION: Intra-and inter-rater agreements were almost perfect. The negative predictive value translates to a false negative rate of 11%. If repeat VL testing is not done, the clinical consequences need to be balanced against cost savings and the risks outweigh the benefits.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6867593
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68675932019-12-07 Can visual interpretation of NucliSens graphs reduce the need for repeat viral load testing? Handireketi, Newten Timire, Collins Shewade, Hemant Deepak Munemo, Ellen Nyagupe, Charles Chipuka, Sandra Sisya, Lucia Gumbo, Hlanai Dhitima, Ezekiel Harries, Anthony D. PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: In Zimbabwe, viral load (VL) testing for people living with HIV on antiretroviral therapy is performed at the National Microbiology Reference Laboratory using a NucliSens machine. Anecdotal evidence has shown that invalid graphs for “Target Not Detectable (TND)” will upon repeat VL testing produce a valid result for virus not detected, therefore removing the need to repeat the test. This needs formal assessment. OBJECTIVES: To determine i) intra- and inter-rater agreement of the visual interpretation of NucliSens graphs (Target Detectable [TD], TND and No Line [NL]) between two laboratory scientists and ii) sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of the NucliSens graphs compared with repeat VL results. METHOD: Cross sectional study using secondary data. Two laboratory scientists independently rated graphs one week apart for intra-rater agreement and compared final ratings with each other for inter-rater agreement. Consensus interpretations of graphs were compared with repeat VL results. Kappa coefficients were used to obtain measures of agreement. RESULTS: There were 562 patients with NucliSens graphs and repeat VL. Kappa scores were: 0.98 (Scientist A); 0.99 (Scientist B); 0.96 (Scientist A versus Scientist B); and 0.65 (NucliSens graphs versus VL). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value for graphs compared with VL were 71%, 92%, 79% and 89% respectively. CONCLUSION: Intra-and inter-rater agreements were almost perfect. The negative predictive value translates to a false negative rate of 11%. If repeat VL testing is not done, the clinical consequences need to be balanced against cost savings and the risks outweigh the benefits. Public Library of Science 2019-11-20 /pmc/articles/PMC6867593/ /pubmed/31747448 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223597 Text en © 2019 Handireketi et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Handireketi, Newten
Timire, Collins
Shewade, Hemant Deepak
Munemo, Ellen
Nyagupe, Charles
Chipuka, Sandra
Sisya, Lucia
Gumbo, Hlanai
Dhitima, Ezekiel
Harries, Anthony D.
Can visual interpretation of NucliSens graphs reduce the need for repeat viral load testing?
title Can visual interpretation of NucliSens graphs reduce the need for repeat viral load testing?
title_full Can visual interpretation of NucliSens graphs reduce the need for repeat viral load testing?
title_fullStr Can visual interpretation of NucliSens graphs reduce the need for repeat viral load testing?
title_full_unstemmed Can visual interpretation of NucliSens graphs reduce the need for repeat viral load testing?
title_short Can visual interpretation of NucliSens graphs reduce the need for repeat viral load testing?
title_sort can visual interpretation of nuclisens graphs reduce the need for repeat viral load testing?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6867593/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31747448
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223597
work_keys_str_mv AT handireketinewten canvisualinterpretationofnuclisensgraphsreducetheneedforrepeatviralloadtesting
AT timirecollins canvisualinterpretationofnuclisensgraphsreducetheneedforrepeatviralloadtesting
AT shewadehemantdeepak canvisualinterpretationofnuclisensgraphsreducetheneedforrepeatviralloadtesting
AT munemoellen canvisualinterpretationofnuclisensgraphsreducetheneedforrepeatviralloadtesting
AT nyagupecharles canvisualinterpretationofnuclisensgraphsreducetheneedforrepeatviralloadtesting
AT chipukasandra canvisualinterpretationofnuclisensgraphsreducetheneedforrepeatviralloadtesting
AT sisyalucia canvisualinterpretationofnuclisensgraphsreducetheneedforrepeatviralloadtesting
AT gumbohlanai canvisualinterpretationofnuclisensgraphsreducetheneedforrepeatviralloadtesting
AT dhitimaezekiel canvisualinterpretationofnuclisensgraphsreducetheneedforrepeatviralloadtesting
AT harriesanthonyd canvisualinterpretationofnuclisensgraphsreducetheneedforrepeatviralloadtesting