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

Database
Main subject
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
Microbiol Spectr ; 11(1): e0454222, 2023 02 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2193585

ABSTRACT

Rapid and reliable diagnosis is important for the management of individuals infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The rapid antigen detection test (RADT) is a rapid, inexpensive, and easy method. Several studies have reported that RADTs performed well in many countries; however, very few studies have been reported in China. In this study, we assessed the performance of the RADT (Ediagnosis COVID-19 antigen test kit). This study was conducted in a centralized isolation site in Shanghai and enrolled 716 patients with COVID-19 and 203 noninfected participants. Nasopharyngeal swabs from all participants were collected on the same day and tested using the RADT and real-time reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR). The performance of the RADT was evaluated in different scenarios, such as threshold cycle (CT) values, symptomatic phase, and symptoms on the day of testing. The results demonstrated that the sensitivity for patients with CT values lower than 20 was 96.55% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87.05 to 99.4). The sensitivities were 78.4% (95% CI, 69.96 to 85.05) for participants within 5 days after the first RT-PCR-positive result and 90.77% (95% CI, 80.34 to 96.19) within 5 days after symptom onset. Moreover, the sensitivity of the RADT was more than 80% for patients with symptoms on the day of testing, including fever (89.29%), cough (86.84%), stuffy nose (92.59%), runny nose (92%), sore throat (81.25%), and muscle pain (80.77%), especially for those with upper respiratory tract symptoms. The specificity of the RADT was good in all scenarios. During the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic, Ediagnosis performed excellently in individuals with a higher viral load (evidenced by lower CT values), individuals in the early symptomatic phase, and especially those with upper respiratory tract symptoms. IMPORTANCE RADTs have demonstrated excellent performance in many counties for screening SARS-CoV-2 infection, but very few studies have been conducted in China. The performance of RADTs is largely related to different real-life scenarios. In our study, the performance of the RADT was evaluated in different scenarios, such as CT values, symptomatic phase, and symptoms on the day of testing. The results demonstrated that Ediagnosis (an RADT made in China) performed excellently for individuals with a higher viral load (evidenced by lower CT values), individuals in the early symptomatic phase, and especially those with upper respiratory tract symptoms.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Pandemics , China/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing
2.
Respir Res ; 23(1): 315, 2022 Nov 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2119361

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Respiratory symptoms are associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes. However, the impacts of upper and lower respiratory symptoms on COVID-19 outcomes in the same population have not been compared. The objective of this study was to characterize upper and lower respiratory symptoms and compare their impacts on outcomes of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This was a multicenter, retrospective cohort study; the database from the Japan COVID-19 Task Force was used. A total of 3314 COVID-19 patients were included in the study, and the data on respiratory symptoms were collected. The participants were classified according to their respiratory symptoms (Group 1: no respiratory symptoms, Group 2: only upper respiratory symptoms, Group 3: only lower respiratory symptoms, and Group 4: both upper and lower respiratory symptoms). The impacts of upper and lower respiratory symptoms on the clinical outcomes were compared. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients with poor clinical outcomes, including the need for oxygen supplementation via high-flow oxygen therapy, mechanical ventilation, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or death. RESULTS: Of the 3314 COVID-19 patients, 605, 1331, 1229, and 1149 were classified as Group 1, Group 2, Group 3, and Group 4, respectively. In univariate analysis, patients in Group 2 had the best clinical outcomes among all groups (odds ratio [OR]: 0.21, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.11-0.39), while patients in Group 3 had the worst outcomes (OR: 3.27, 95% CI: 2.43-4.40). Group 3 patients had the highest incidence of pneumonia, other complications due to secondary infections, and thrombosis during the clinical course. CONCLUSIONS: Upper and lower respiratory tract symptoms had vastly different impacts on the clinical outcomes of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Retrospective Studies , Respiration, Artificial , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL