Cargando…

Diagnostic performance, user acceptability, and safety of unsupervised SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen-detecting tests performed at home

BACKGROUND: One strategy for reducing spread of COVID-19 is to contain the infection with broad screening, isolating infected individuals, and tracing contacts. This strategy requires widely available, reliable SARS-CoV-2 testing. To increase testing, rapid antigen detection tests (RADTs) were devel...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Møller, Ida Johanne B., Utke, Amalie R., Rysgaard, Ulla K., Østergaard, Lars J., Jespersen, Sanne
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8759098/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35038598
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2022.01.019
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: One strategy for reducing spread of COVID-19 is to contain the infection with broad screening, isolating infected individuals, and tracing contacts. This strategy requires widely available, reliable SARS-CoV-2 testing. To increase testing, rapid antigen detection tests (RADTs) were developed for self-sampling, self-testing, and self-interpretation. This study examined diagnostic performance, user acceptability, and safety of nasal self-RADTs compared with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing. METHODS: Self-RADT kits were distributed at a public COVID-19 test center in Aarhus, Denmark or delivered to participants. Participants reported test results and test preferences. During enrollment, participants reported occurrence and duration of symptoms consistent with COVID-19. Sensitivity and specificity of self-RADT, relative to oropharyngeal PCR testing, were calculated. RESULTS: Among 827 participants, 102 showed positive PCR test results. Sensitivities of the self-RADTs were 65.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 49.2–79.2; DNA Diagnostic) and 62.1% (95% CI: 50.1–72.9; Hangzhou), and specificities were 100% (95% CI: 99.0–100; DNA Diagnostic) and 100% (95% CI: 98.9–100; Hangzhou). The sensitivities of both self-RADTs appeared higher in symptomatic participants than in asymptomatic participants. Two of every 3 participants preferred self-RADT over PCR test. CONCLUSION: Self-performed RADTs were reliable, user-acceptable, and safe among laypeople as a supplement to professionally collected oropharyngeal PCR testing.