Combined RT-PCR and Host Response Point-of-Care Testing in Patients Hospitalised with Suspected COVID-19: A Prospective Diagnostic Accuracy Study

INTRODUCTION: RT-PCR has suboptimal sensitivity for the diagnosis of COVID-19. A composite reference standard comprising RT-PCR plus radiological and clinical features has been recommended for diagnostic accuracy studies. The FebriDx finger prick point-of-care test detects an antiviral host response...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Brendish, Nathan J., Tanner, Alex R., Poole, Stephen, Beard, Kate R., Naidu, Vasanth V., Mansbridge, Christopher T., Norton, Nicholas J., Wheeler, Helen, Presland, Laura, Clark, Tristan W.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Healthcare 2022
Materias:
Original Research
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9083481/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35534764
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40121-022-00646-4
Descripción
Sumario:INTRODUCTION: RT-PCR has suboptimal sensitivity for the diagnosis of COVID-19. A composite reference standard comprising RT-PCR plus radiological and clinical features has been recommended for diagnostic accuracy studies. The FebriDx finger prick point-of-care test detects an antiviral host response protein (MxA) in 10 min. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of FebriDx and RT-PCR compared to a composite reference standard. METHODS: Adults presenting to hospital with suspected COVID-19 were tested by FebriDx and RT-PCR. A composite reference standard was used to classify patients as having COVID-19 based on RT-PCR positivity, or RT-PCR negativity with COVID-19 radiological findings or other clinical criteria. Measures of accuracy were calculated for MxA alone, RT-PCR alone, and both combined. This study is registered with the ISRCTN (ISRCTN14966673) and has completed. RESULTS: A total of 478 patients were tested, with valid results in 475. Of these 475 patients, 222 (46.7%) were classified as having COVID-19; 192 (40.4%) were RT-PCR positive, and 30 (6.3%) were RT-PCR negative and diagnosed on radiological/clinical criteria. Sensitivity of FebriDx MxA vs the composite reference standard was 186/222 (83.8%, 95% CI 78.3–88.4) and was similar to the sensitivity of RT-PCR (192/222 (86.5%, 95% CI 81.3–90.7), (difference of 2.7%, 95% CI − 3.9 to 9.3, p = 0.42). The sensitivity of combined FebriDx and RT-PCR was 208/222 (93.7%) which was superior to both RT-PCR alone (difference of 9.9, 95% CI 4.1–15.9; p = 0.001) and FebriDx MxA alone (difference of 7.2, 95% CI 1.6–12.9; p = 0.011). CONCLUSION: Sensitivity of combined FebriDx and RT-PCR testing was superior to each alone for the detection of COVID-19 in hospital and may improve infection control and treatment decisions. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40121-022-00646-4.

Ejemplares similares