Cargando…
Role of Rapid Antigen Testing in Population-Based SARS-CoV-2 Screening
This study evaluates a population-based screening of asymptomatic people, using a rapid antigen diagnostic test (RADT), in areas of high transmission. To detect sources of SARS-CoV-2 infection, nasopharyngeal samples were taken and were tested using RADT. Confirmatory RT-qPCR tests were performed in...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8432187/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34501297 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10173854 |
_version_ | 1783751105790869504 |
---|---|
author | Martín-Sánchez, Vicente Fernández-Villa, Tania Carvajal Urueña, Ana Rivero Rodríguez, Ana Reguero Celada, Sofía Sánchez Antolín, Gloria Fernández-Vázquez, José Pedro |
author_facet | Martín-Sánchez, Vicente Fernández-Villa, Tania Carvajal Urueña, Ana Rivero Rodríguez, Ana Reguero Celada, Sofía Sánchez Antolín, Gloria Fernández-Vázquez, José Pedro |
author_sort | Martín-Sánchez, Vicente |
collection | PubMed |
description | This study evaluates a population-based screening of asymptomatic people, using a rapid antigen diagnostic test (RADT), in areas of high transmission. To detect sources of SARS-CoV-2 infection, nasopharyngeal samples were taken and were tested using RADT. Confirmatory RT-qPCR tests were performed in both positive and negative cases. The internal validity of the RADT, the prevalence of infection, and the positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) were estimated, based on the percentages of confirmed cases with 95% confidence interval. Of the 157,920 people registered, 50,492 participated in the screening; 50,052 were negative, and 440 were positive on the RADT (0.87%). A total of 221 positive RADT samples were reanalysed using RT-qPCR and 214 were confirmed as positive (96.8%; 95% CI: 93.5–98.7%), while 657 out of 660 negative RADT samples were confirmed as RT-qPCR negative (99.5%; 95% CI 98.7–99.9%). The sensitivity obtained was 65.1% (38.4–90.2%) and the specificity was 99.97% (99.94–99.99%). The prevalence of infection was 1.30% (0.95–2.13%). The PPVs were 95.4% (85.9–98.9%) and 97.9% (93.3–99.5%), respectively, while the NPVs were 99.7% (99.4–100%) and 99.2% (98.7–100%), respectively. The high specificity found allow us to report a high screening performance in asymptomatic patients, even in areas where the prevalence of infection was less than 2%. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8432187 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84321872021-09-11 Role of Rapid Antigen Testing in Population-Based SARS-CoV-2 Screening Martín-Sánchez, Vicente Fernández-Villa, Tania Carvajal Urueña, Ana Rivero Rodríguez, Ana Reguero Celada, Sofía Sánchez Antolín, Gloria Fernández-Vázquez, José Pedro J Clin Med Article This study evaluates a population-based screening of asymptomatic people, using a rapid antigen diagnostic test (RADT), in areas of high transmission. To detect sources of SARS-CoV-2 infection, nasopharyngeal samples were taken and were tested using RADT. Confirmatory RT-qPCR tests were performed in both positive and negative cases. The internal validity of the RADT, the prevalence of infection, and the positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) were estimated, based on the percentages of confirmed cases with 95% confidence interval. Of the 157,920 people registered, 50,492 participated in the screening; 50,052 were negative, and 440 were positive on the RADT (0.87%). A total of 221 positive RADT samples were reanalysed using RT-qPCR and 214 were confirmed as positive (96.8%; 95% CI: 93.5–98.7%), while 657 out of 660 negative RADT samples were confirmed as RT-qPCR negative (99.5%; 95% CI 98.7–99.9%). The sensitivity obtained was 65.1% (38.4–90.2%) and the specificity was 99.97% (99.94–99.99%). The prevalence of infection was 1.30% (0.95–2.13%). The PPVs were 95.4% (85.9–98.9%) and 97.9% (93.3–99.5%), respectively, while the NPVs were 99.7% (99.4–100%) and 99.2% (98.7–100%), respectively. The high specificity found allow us to report a high screening performance in asymptomatic patients, even in areas where the prevalence of infection was less than 2%. MDPI 2021-08-27 /pmc/articles/PMC8432187/ /pubmed/34501297 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10173854 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Martín-Sánchez, Vicente Fernández-Villa, Tania Carvajal Urueña, Ana Rivero Rodríguez, Ana Reguero Celada, Sofía Sánchez Antolín, Gloria Fernández-Vázquez, José Pedro Role of Rapid Antigen Testing in Population-Based SARS-CoV-2 Screening |
title | Role of Rapid Antigen Testing in Population-Based SARS-CoV-2 Screening |
title_full | Role of Rapid Antigen Testing in Population-Based SARS-CoV-2 Screening |
title_fullStr | Role of Rapid Antigen Testing in Population-Based SARS-CoV-2 Screening |
title_full_unstemmed | Role of Rapid Antigen Testing in Population-Based SARS-CoV-2 Screening |
title_short | Role of Rapid Antigen Testing in Population-Based SARS-CoV-2 Screening |
title_sort | role of rapid antigen testing in population-based sars-cov-2 screening |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8432187/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34501297 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10173854 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT martinsanchezvicente roleofrapidantigentestinginpopulationbasedsarscov2screening AT fernandezvillatania roleofrapidantigentestinginpopulationbasedsarscov2screening AT carvajaluruenaana roleofrapidantigentestinginpopulationbasedsarscov2screening AT riverorodriguezana roleofrapidantigentestinginpopulationbasedsarscov2screening AT regueroceladasofia roleofrapidantigentestinginpopulationbasedsarscov2screening AT sanchezantolingloria roleofrapidantigentestinginpopulationbasedsarscov2screening AT fernandezvazquezjosepedro roleofrapidantigentestinginpopulationbasedsarscov2screening |