Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Performance Evaluation of Two Kinds of Rapid Antigen Test Kits for Detection of COVID-19 Infection.
Clin Lab ; 69(3)2023 Mar 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2268266
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

The diagnostic standard for COVID-19 infection is real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) of nasopharyngeal swab and oropharyngeal swab specimens. Rapid antigen tests are cheaper and easier to use than the rRT-PCR method. Although the COVID-19 pandemic is settling down, seasonal epi¬demic is expected. In this study, the performance of two rapid antigen test kits was evaluated based on rRT-PCR test results.

METHODS:

A total of 346 residual samples was tested by the PowerChek SARS-CoV-2 Real-time PCR Kit or STAN-DARD M nCoV Real-Time-Detection kit, STANDARD Q COVID-19 Ag test kit (SQ RAT), and ND COVID-19 Ag test kit (ND RAT).

RESULTS:

Compared to rRT-PCR as the standard method, the SQ RAT test kit yielded 77.1% sensitivity (101/131) and 100% specificity (215/215), and the ND RAT yielded 89.3% sensitivity (117/131) and 100% specificity (215/ 215). Both RATs showed sensitivity greater than 85% in samples with RdRp gene Ct value less than 25. There was a false-negative case suspected of prozone phenomenon.

CONCLUSIONS:

Both RATs showed significant performance, but users should beware of the prozone phenomenon.
Subject(s)

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: COVID-19 Type of study: Diagnostic study / Experimental Studies Limits: Humans Language: English Journal subject: Laboratory Techniques and procedures Year: 2023 Document Type: Article

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: COVID-19 Type of study: Diagnostic study / Experimental Studies Limits: Humans Language: English Journal subject: Laboratory Techniques and procedures Year: 2023 Document Type: Article