Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
2.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 27(11): 2887-2891, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1369635

ABSTRACT

Among symptomatic outpatients, subgenomic RNA of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in nasal midturbinate swab specimens was concordant with antigen detection but remained detectable in 13 (82.1%) of 16 nasopharyngeal swab specimens from antigen-negative persons. Subgenomic RNA in midturbinate swab specimens might be useful for routine diagnostics to identify active virus replication.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Diagnostic Tests, Routine , Humans , Nasopharynx , RNA
3.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 14604, 2021 07 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1315611

ABSTRACT

While there has been significant progress in the development of rapid COVID-19 diagnostics, as the pandemic unfolds, new challenges have emerged, including whether these technologies can reliably detect the more infectious variants of concern and be viably deployed in non-clinical settings as "self-tests". Multidisciplinary evaluation of the Abbott BinaxNOW COVID-19 Ag Card (BinaxNOW, a widely used rapid antigen test, included limit of detection, variant detection, test performance across different age-groups, and usability with self/caregiver-administration. While BinaxNOW detected the highly infectious variants, B.1.1.7 (Alpha) first identified in the UK, B.1.351 (Beta) first identified in South Africa, P.1 (Gamma) first identified in Brazil, B.1.617.2 (Delta) first identified in India and B.1.2, a non-VOC, test sensitivity decreased with decreasing viral loads. Moreover, BinaxNOW sensitivity trended lower when devices were performed by patients/caregivers themselves compared to trained clinical staff, despite universally high usability assessments following self/caregiver-administration among different age groups. Overall, these data indicate that while BinaxNOW accurately detects the new viral variants, as rapid COVID-19 tests enter the home, their already lower sensitivities compared to RT-PCR may decrease even more due to user error.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Serological Testing , COVID-19/diagnosis , Point-of-Care Systems , Self-Testing , Humans , Limit of Detection , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL