[Sensitivity and specificity of nucleic acid testing in close contacts of COVID-19 cases in Guangzhou].

ABSTRACT

Objective: To analyze the sensitivity and specificity of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing in 20 348 close contacts of COVID-19 cases in different prevention and control stages in Guangzhou and to provide scientific evidence for optimizing epidemic response strategies. Methods: A total of 20 348 close contacts of COVID-19 cases in Guangzhou were traced between February 21 and September 22,2020. All the close contacts were tested for the nucleic acid of SARS-CoV-2. The sensitivity and specificity of nucleic acid testing and diagnosis in the different prevention and control stages were compared. Results: In 20 348 close contacts, 12 462 were males (61.24%), the median (P25,P75) of age of them was 31.0 years (23.0,43.0), the median number (P25,P75) of nucleic acid testing for them was 2.0 (1.0,3.0), and the median (P25,P75) of their quarantine days was 12.0 (8.0,13.0) days, respectively. A total of 256 COVID-19 cases were confirmed in the close contacts after seven nucleic acid tests. In the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 7th nucleic acid testing, the sensitivity and specificity were 69.14% and 99.99% (177 cases confirmed), 89.84% and 99.99% (230 cases confirmed), 97.27% and 99.99% (249 cases confirmed), and 100.00% and 99.98%, respectively. In the three stages of COVID-19 prevention and control in China domestic case stage, imported case stage, and imported case associated local epidemic stage, the sensitivity of the 1st nucleic acid testing was 70.68%, 68.00% and 67.35%, and the specificity was 99.98%, 100.00% and 100.00%, respectively. Conclusions: The sensitivity of nucleic acid testing in the close contacts at the different stages were consistent with slight decrease, which might be related to the increased proportion of asymptomatic infections in the late stage of epidemic prevention and control with COVID-19 in Guangzhou. It is suggested to give three nucleic acid tests to improve the sensitivity and reduce false negative risk.