Cargando…
SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen testing in the healthcare sector: A clinical prediction model for identifying false negative results
OBJECTIVES: SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests (RAT) provide fast identification of infectious patients when RT-PCR results are not immediately available. We aimed to develop a prediction model for identification of false negative (FN) RAT results. METHODS: In this multicenter trial, patients with docum...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8431843/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34517045 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2021.09.008 |
_version_ | 1783751031591534592 |
---|---|
author | Leiner, Johannes Pellissier, Vincent Nitsche, Anne König, Sebastian Hohenstein, Sven Nachtigall, Irit Hindricks, Gerhard Kutschker, Christoph Rolinski, Boris Gebauer, Julian Prantz, Anja Schubert, Joerg Patzschke, Joerg Bollmann, Andreas Wolz, Martin |
author_facet | Leiner, Johannes Pellissier, Vincent Nitsche, Anne König, Sebastian Hohenstein, Sven Nachtigall, Irit Hindricks, Gerhard Kutschker, Christoph Rolinski, Boris Gebauer, Julian Prantz, Anja Schubert, Joerg Patzschke, Joerg Bollmann, Andreas Wolz, Martin |
author_sort | Leiner, Johannes |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests (RAT) provide fast identification of infectious patients when RT-PCR results are not immediately available. We aimed to develop a prediction model for identification of false negative (FN) RAT results. METHODS: In this multicenter trial, patients with documented paired results of RAT and RT-PCR between October 1(st) 2020 and January 31(st) 2021 were retrospectively analyzed regarding clinical findings. Variables included demographics, laboratory values and specific symptoms. Three different models were evaluated using Bayesian logistic regression. RESULTS: The initial dataset contained 4,076 patients. Overall sensitivity and specificity of RAT was 62.3% and 97.6%. 2,997 cases with negative RAT results (FN: 120; true negative: 2,877; reference: RT-PCR) underwent further evaluation after removal of cases with missing data. The best-performing model for predicting FN RAT results containing 10 variables yielded an area under the curve of 0.971. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV for 0.09 as cut-off value (probability for FN RAT) were 0.85, 0.99, 0.7 and 0.99. CONCLUSION: FN RAT results can be accurately identified through ten routinely available variables. Implementation of a prediction model in addition to RAT testing in clinical care can provide decision guidance for initiating appropriate hygiene measures and therefore helps avoiding nosocomial infections. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8431843 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84318432021-09-10 SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen testing in the healthcare sector: A clinical prediction model for identifying false negative results Leiner, Johannes Pellissier, Vincent Nitsche, Anne König, Sebastian Hohenstein, Sven Nachtigall, Irit Hindricks, Gerhard Kutschker, Christoph Rolinski, Boris Gebauer, Julian Prantz, Anja Schubert, Joerg Patzschke, Joerg Bollmann, Andreas Wolz, Martin Int J Infect Dis Article OBJECTIVES: SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests (RAT) provide fast identification of infectious patients when RT-PCR results are not immediately available. We aimed to develop a prediction model for identification of false negative (FN) RAT results. METHODS: In this multicenter trial, patients with documented paired results of RAT and RT-PCR between October 1(st) 2020 and January 31(st) 2021 were retrospectively analyzed regarding clinical findings. Variables included demographics, laboratory values and specific symptoms. Three different models were evaluated using Bayesian logistic regression. RESULTS: The initial dataset contained 4,076 patients. Overall sensitivity and specificity of RAT was 62.3% and 97.6%. 2,997 cases with negative RAT results (FN: 120; true negative: 2,877; reference: RT-PCR) underwent further evaluation after removal of cases with missing data. The best-performing model for predicting FN RAT results containing 10 variables yielded an area under the curve of 0.971. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV for 0.09 as cut-off value (probability for FN RAT) were 0.85, 0.99, 0.7 and 0.99. CONCLUSION: FN RAT results can be accurately identified through ten routinely available variables. Implementation of a prediction model in addition to RAT testing in clinical care can provide decision guidance for initiating appropriate hygiene measures and therefore helps avoiding nosocomial infections. The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases. 2021-11 2021-09-10 /pmc/articles/PMC8431843/ /pubmed/34517045 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2021.09.008 Text en © 2021 The Author(s) Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active. |
spellingShingle | Article Leiner, Johannes Pellissier, Vincent Nitsche, Anne König, Sebastian Hohenstein, Sven Nachtigall, Irit Hindricks, Gerhard Kutschker, Christoph Rolinski, Boris Gebauer, Julian Prantz, Anja Schubert, Joerg Patzschke, Joerg Bollmann, Andreas Wolz, Martin SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen testing in the healthcare sector: A clinical prediction model for identifying false negative results |
title | SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen testing in the healthcare sector: A clinical prediction model for identifying false negative results |
title_full | SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen testing in the healthcare sector: A clinical prediction model for identifying false negative results |
title_fullStr | SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen testing in the healthcare sector: A clinical prediction model for identifying false negative results |
title_full_unstemmed | SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen testing in the healthcare sector: A clinical prediction model for identifying false negative results |
title_short | SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen testing in the healthcare sector: A clinical prediction model for identifying false negative results |
title_sort | sars-cov-2 rapid antigen testing in the healthcare sector: a clinical prediction model for identifying false negative results |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8431843/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34517045 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2021.09.008 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT leinerjohannes sarscov2rapidantigentestinginthehealthcaresectoraclinicalpredictionmodelforidentifyingfalsenegativeresults AT pellissiervincent sarscov2rapidantigentestinginthehealthcaresectoraclinicalpredictionmodelforidentifyingfalsenegativeresults AT nitscheanne sarscov2rapidantigentestinginthehealthcaresectoraclinicalpredictionmodelforidentifyingfalsenegativeresults AT konigsebastian sarscov2rapidantigentestinginthehealthcaresectoraclinicalpredictionmodelforidentifyingfalsenegativeresults AT hohensteinsven sarscov2rapidantigentestinginthehealthcaresectoraclinicalpredictionmodelforidentifyingfalsenegativeresults AT nachtigallirit sarscov2rapidantigentestinginthehealthcaresectoraclinicalpredictionmodelforidentifyingfalsenegativeresults AT hindricksgerhard sarscov2rapidantigentestinginthehealthcaresectoraclinicalpredictionmodelforidentifyingfalsenegativeresults AT kutschkerchristoph sarscov2rapidantigentestinginthehealthcaresectoraclinicalpredictionmodelforidentifyingfalsenegativeresults AT rolinskiboris sarscov2rapidantigentestinginthehealthcaresectoraclinicalpredictionmodelforidentifyingfalsenegativeresults AT gebauerjulian sarscov2rapidantigentestinginthehealthcaresectoraclinicalpredictionmodelforidentifyingfalsenegativeresults AT prantzanja sarscov2rapidantigentestinginthehealthcaresectoraclinicalpredictionmodelforidentifyingfalsenegativeresults AT schubertjoerg sarscov2rapidantigentestinginthehealthcaresectoraclinicalpredictionmodelforidentifyingfalsenegativeresults AT patzschkejoerg sarscov2rapidantigentestinginthehealthcaresectoraclinicalpredictionmodelforidentifyingfalsenegativeresults AT bollmannandreas sarscov2rapidantigentestinginthehealthcaresectoraclinicalpredictionmodelforidentifyingfalsenegativeresults AT wolzmartin sarscov2rapidantigentestinginthehealthcaresectoraclinicalpredictionmodelforidentifyingfalsenegativeresults |