Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Evaluating a SARS-CoV-2 screening strategy based on serological tests.
Baccini, Michela; Mattei, Alessandra; Rocco, Emilio; Vannucci, Giulia; Mealli, Fabrizia.
  • Baccini M; Department of Statistics, Computer Science, Applications (DISIA), University of Florence, Florence (Italy); michela.baccini@unifi.it.
  • Mattei A; Florence Center for Data Science, Florence (Italy).
  • Rocco E; Department of Statistics, Computer Science, Applications (DISIA), University of Florence, Florence (Italy.
  • Vannucci G; Florence Center for Data Science, Florence (Italy).
  • Mealli F; Department of Statistics, Computer Science, Applications (DISIA), University of Florence, Florence (Italy.
Epidemiol Prev ; 44(5-6 Suppl 2): 193-199, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2238909
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

facing the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic requires intensive testing on the population to early identify and isolate infected subjects. Although RT-PCR is the most reliable technique to detect ongoing infections, serological tests are frequently proposed as tools in heterogeneous screening strategies.

OBJECTIVES:

to analyse the performance of a screening strategy proposed by the local government of Tuscany (Central Italy), which first uses qualitative rapid tests for antibody detection, and then RT-PCR tests on the positive subjects.

METHODS:

a simulation study is conducted to investigate the number of RT-PCR tests required by the screening strategy and the undetected ongoing infections in a pseudo-population of 500,000 subjects, under different prevalence scenarios and assuming a sensitivity of the serological test ranging from 0.50 to 0.80 (specificity 0.98). A compartmental model is used to predict the number of new infections generated by the false negatives two months after the screening, under different values of the infection reproduction number.

RESULTS:

assuming a sensitivity equal to 0.80 and a prevalence of 0.3%, the screening procedure would require on average 11,167 RT-PCR tests and would produce 300 false negatives, responsible after two months of a number of contagions ranging from 526 to 1,132, under the optimistic scenario of a reproduction number between 0.5 to 1. Resources and false negatives increase with the prevalence.

CONCLUSIONS:

the analysed screening procedure should be avoided unless the prevalence and the rate of contagion are very low. The cost and effectiveness of the screening strategies should be evaluated in the actual context of the epidemic, accounting for the fact that it may change over time.
Subject(s)
Keywords

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Computer Simulation / Mass Screening / Pandemics / COVID-19 Serological Testing / SARS-CoV-2 / COVID-19 / Models, Theoretical / Antibodies, Viral Type of study: Diagnostic study / Experimental Studies / Observational study / Prognostic study / Qualitative research Limits: Humans Country/Region as subject: Europa Language: English Journal: Epidemiol Prev Journal subject: Epidemiology Year: 2020 Document Type: Article

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Computer Simulation / Mass Screening / Pandemics / COVID-19 Serological Testing / SARS-CoV-2 / COVID-19 / Models, Theoretical / Antibodies, Viral Type of study: Diagnostic study / Experimental Studies / Observational study / Prognostic study / Qualitative research Limits: Humans Country/Region as subject: Europa Language: English Journal: Epidemiol Prev Journal subject: Epidemiology Year: 2020 Document Type: Article