抗原检测严重急性呼吸系统综合征冠状病毒2型检测的准确性,使用自身和提供者收集的样本进行视觉解释,并使用BD Veritor™ Plus分析仪

IF 1.6 Q4 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Lauren Cooper , Karen Eckert , Joseph Mann , Rossmeri Montalvo , Luis Castillo , Dwan Fellows , Stephen Young
{"title":"抗原检测严重急性呼吸系统综合征冠状病毒2型检测的准确性,使用自身和提供者收集的样本进行视觉解释,并使用BD Veritor™ Plus分析仪","authors":"Lauren Cooper ,&nbsp;Karen Eckert ,&nbsp;Joseph Mann ,&nbsp;Rossmeri Montalvo ,&nbsp;Luis Castillo ,&nbsp;Dwan Fellows ,&nbsp;Stephen Young","doi":"10.1016/j.jcvp.2023.100140","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests (RATs) are in high demand for reducing the spread of SARS-CoV-2. Reduced involvement from health care professionals (HCPs) for collection and interpretation could significantly foster the wide-spread implementation of RATs, but data evaluating RATs, when used by lay people, is limited.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To valuate agreement between BD Veritor test results for self- and HCP-collected specimens, and visually- and analyzer-interpreted results.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Individuals with onset of COVID-19 symptoms within five days of enrollment had three nasal swabs collected; one self-collected and the other two HCP-collected. One HCP-collected swab was stored for future testing while the order of the other two (self and HCP) was randomized before testing. with the BD Veritor System for Rapid Detection of SARS-CoV-2. Results were first assessed visually, followed by interpretation with the analyzer.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>When self-collection was compared to HCP collection for SARS-CoV-2 detection, interpretation by analyzer resulted in positive percent agreement (PPA) of 94.7% (95% CI 82.7, 98.5) and negative percent agreement (NPA) of 99.0% (95% CI 97.5, 99.6). When visual interpretation was compared to analyzer-read results, collection by HCPs had a PPA of 97.4% (95% CI 86.5, 99.5) and NPA of 99.8% (95% CI 98.6, 100.0) while self-collection resulted in PPA of 94.9% (95% CI 83.1, 98.6) and NPA of 99.8% (95% CI 98.6, 100).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Similar PPA and NPA were observed for self- and HCP-collected specimens as well as visually- and analyzer-interpreted tests. The equivalence in performance supports the use of expanded collection and testing methods.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":73673,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical virology plus","volume":"3 1","pages":"Article 100140"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9846876/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accuracy of an antigen-detecting SARS-CoV-2 assay with self- and provider-collected specimens interpreted visually and with BD Veritor™ Plus analyzer\",\"authors\":\"Lauren Cooper ,&nbsp;Karen Eckert ,&nbsp;Joseph Mann ,&nbsp;Rossmeri Montalvo ,&nbsp;Luis Castillo ,&nbsp;Dwan Fellows ,&nbsp;Stephen Young\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jcvp.2023.100140\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests (RATs) are in high demand for reducing the spread of SARS-CoV-2. Reduced involvement from health care professionals (HCPs) for collection and interpretation could significantly foster the wide-spread implementation of RATs, but data evaluating RATs, when used by lay people, is limited.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To valuate agreement between BD Veritor test results for self- and HCP-collected specimens, and visually- and analyzer-interpreted results.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Individuals with onset of COVID-19 symptoms within five days of enrollment had three nasal swabs collected; one self-collected and the other two HCP-collected. One HCP-collected swab was stored for future testing while the order of the other two (self and HCP) was randomized before testing. with the BD Veritor System for Rapid Detection of SARS-CoV-2. Results were first assessed visually, followed by interpretation with the analyzer.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>When self-collection was compared to HCP collection for SARS-CoV-2 detection, interpretation by analyzer resulted in positive percent agreement (PPA) of 94.7% (95% CI 82.7, 98.5) and negative percent agreement (NPA) of 99.0% (95% CI 97.5, 99.6). When visual interpretation was compared to analyzer-read results, collection by HCPs had a PPA of 97.4% (95% CI 86.5, 99.5) and NPA of 99.8% (95% CI 98.6, 100.0) while self-collection resulted in PPA of 94.9% (95% CI 83.1, 98.6) and NPA of 99.8% (95% CI 98.6, 100).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Similar PPA and NPA were observed for self- and HCP-collected specimens as well as visually- and analyzer-interpreted tests. The equivalence in performance supports the use of expanded collection and testing methods.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73673,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of clinical virology plus\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"Article 100140\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9846876/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of clinical virology plus\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667038023000078\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical virology plus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667038023000078","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景严重急性呼吸系统综合征冠状病毒2型快速抗原检测(RAT)对减少严重急性呼吸系冠状病毒2型传播的需求很高。减少卫生保健专业人员(HCP)对收集和解释的参与可能会大大促进RAT的广泛实施,但评估RAT的数据在非专业人员使用时是有限的。目的评价BD Veritor对自身和HCP采集标本的检测结果与视觉和分析仪解释结果之间的一致性。方法对入组5天内出现新冠肺炎症状的个体采集3份鼻拭子;一个是自己收集的,另两个是HCP收集的。一个HCP采集的拭子被储存起来以备将来测试,而另外两个(自身和HCP)的顺序在测试前被随机分配。使用BD Veritor系统快速检测严重急性呼吸系统综合征冠状病毒2型。首先对结果进行视觉评估,然后用分析仪进行解释。结果在检测严重急性呼吸系统综合征冠状病毒2型时,将自身采集与HCP采集进行比较,分析仪解释的阳性一致性(PPA)为94.7%(95%CI 82.7,98.5),阴性一致性(NPA)为99.0%(95%CI 97.5,99.6),HCP采集的PPA为97.4%(95%CI 86.5,99.5),NPA为99.8%(95%CI 98.6,100.0),而自采的PPA为94.9%(95%CI 83.1,98.6),NPA99.8%(95%CI 98.6,100)。性能上的等效性支持使用扩展的收集和测试方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Accuracy of an antigen-detecting SARS-CoV-2 assay with self- and provider-collected specimens interpreted visually and with BD Veritor™ Plus analyzer

Accuracy of an antigen-detecting SARS-CoV-2 assay with self- and provider-collected specimens interpreted visually and with BD Veritor™ Plus analyzer

Background

SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests (RATs) are in high demand for reducing the spread of SARS-CoV-2. Reduced involvement from health care professionals (HCPs) for collection and interpretation could significantly foster the wide-spread implementation of RATs, but data evaluating RATs, when used by lay people, is limited.

Objective

To valuate agreement between BD Veritor test results for self- and HCP-collected specimens, and visually- and analyzer-interpreted results.

Methods

Individuals with onset of COVID-19 symptoms within five days of enrollment had three nasal swabs collected; one self-collected and the other two HCP-collected. One HCP-collected swab was stored for future testing while the order of the other two (self and HCP) was randomized before testing. with the BD Veritor System for Rapid Detection of SARS-CoV-2. Results were first assessed visually, followed by interpretation with the analyzer.

Results

When self-collection was compared to HCP collection for SARS-CoV-2 detection, interpretation by analyzer resulted in positive percent agreement (PPA) of 94.7% (95% CI 82.7, 98.5) and negative percent agreement (NPA) of 99.0% (95% CI 97.5, 99.6). When visual interpretation was compared to analyzer-read results, collection by HCPs had a PPA of 97.4% (95% CI 86.5, 99.5) and NPA of 99.8% (95% CI 98.6, 100.0) while self-collection resulted in PPA of 94.9% (95% CI 83.1, 98.6) and NPA of 99.8% (95% CI 98.6, 100).

Conclusions

Similar PPA and NPA were observed for self- and HCP-collected specimens as well as visually- and analyzer-interpreted tests. The equivalence in performance supports the use of expanded collection and testing methods.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of clinical virology plus
Journal of clinical virology plus Infectious Diseases
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
66 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信