Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters

Database
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
medrxiv; 2020.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2020.09.22.20199455

ABSTRACT

BackgroundThere is a high prevalence of COVID-19 in university-age students, who are returning to university campuses. There is little evidence regarding the feasibility of universal, asymptomatic testing to control outbreaks in this population. This study aimed to pilot mass COVID-19 testing on a university research park, to assess the feasibility and acceptability of scaling up to all staff and students. MethodsThis was a cross-sectional feasibility study on a university research park in the East of England. Staff and students (5,625) on the research park were eligible to participate. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing was offered to all participants. Participants were offered 4 swabs, which they self-administered over a two-week period. Outcome measures included: uptake; drop-out rate; positivity rates; participant acceptability measures; laboratory processing measures. Results798/1053 (76%) of those who registered provided at least one swab and of these, 687 (86%) provided all four. 681/687 (99%) had all negative results. 6 participants had one inconclusive result. There were no positive results. 458/798 (57%) participants responded to a post-testing questionnaire. 446/458 (97.5%) of those who responded agreed that they would be interested in repeat testing in the future. ConclusionsRepeated self-testing is feasible and acceptable to a university population.


Subject(s)
COVID-19
2.
medrxiv; 2020.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2020.06.11.20128306

ABSTRACT

We evaluated the FDA approved SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay (developed at Mount Sinai, by Krammer and colleagues) for the identification of COVID-19 seroconversion and potential cross-reactivity of the assay in a United Kingdom (UK) National Health Service (NHS) hospital setting. In our "set up" cohort we found that the SARS-CoV-2 IgG was detectable in 100% of patients tested 14 days post positive COVID-19 nucleic acid test. Serum samples taken from pregnant women in 2018 were used as a negative control group with zero false positives. We also analysed samples from patients with non-COVID-19 viral infections, paraproteinaemia or autoantibodies and found false positive results in 6/179. Modification of the sensitivity threshold to five standard deviations from the mean of the control group eliminated all false positive result in the set up cohort. We confirmed the validity of the test with a revised threshold on an independent prospective "validation cohort" of patient samples. Taking data from both cohorts we report a sensitivity of the Mount Sinai assay of 96.6% (28/29) and specificity of 100% (299/299) using a revised threshold cut-off, at a time point at least 14 days since the diagnostic antigen test. Finally, we conducted a health economic probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) on the costs of producing the tests, and the mean cost we estimate to be 13.63 pounds sterling (95%CI 9.63 - 18.40), allowing its cost effectiveness to be tested against other antibody tests. In summary, we report that the Mount Sinai IgG ELISA assay is highly sensitive test for SARS-Cov-2 infection, however modification of thresholding was required to minimise false positive results.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Virus Diseases
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL