Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Questionnaire-based vs universal PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 in women admitted for delivery.
Mei-Dan, Elad; Satkunaratnam, Abheha; Cahan, Tal; Leung, Marian; Katz, Kevin; Aviram, Amir.
  • Mei-Dan E; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, North York General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
  • Satkunaratnam A; Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
  • Cahan T; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, North York General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
  • Leung M; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, North York General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
  • Katz K; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, North York General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
  • Aviram A; Infection Prevention and Control, North York General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Birth ; 48(1): 96-103, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-953804
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

It has been suggested that women admitted for delivery should have universal PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2. Yet, the considerable difference in the incidence of COVID-19 between different geographic regions may affect screening strategies. Therefore, we aimed to compare questionnaire-based testing versus universal PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 in women admitted for delivery.

METHODS:

A prospective cohort study of women admitted for delivery at a single center during a four-week period (April 22-May 25, 2020). All women completed a questionnaire about COVID-19 signs, symptoms, or risk factors, and a nasopharyngeal swab for PCR for SARS-CoV-2. Women who were flagged as suspected COVID-19 by the questionnaire (questionnaire-positive) were compared with women who were not flagged by the questionnaire (questionnaire-negative).

RESULTS:

Overall, 446 women were eligible for analysis, of which 54 (12.1%) were questionnaire-positive. PCR swab detected SARS-CoV-2 in four (0.9%) women 3 of 392 (0.8%) in the questionnaire-negative group, and 1 of 54 (1.9%) in the questionnaire-positive group (P = .43), yielding a number needed to screen of 92 (95% CI 62-177). In 96% of the cases, the PCR results were obtained only in the postpartum period. No positive PCR results were obtained from neonatal testing for SARS-CoV-2. The sensitivity of the questionnaire was 75.0%, and the negative predictive value was 99.7%.

CONCLUSIONS:

Although the rate of positive PCR results was not significantly different between the groups, the number needed to screen is considerably high. The use of questionnaire-based PCR testing in areas with low incidence of COVID-19 allows for a reasonable allocation of resources and is easy to implement.
Subject(s)
Keywords

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Pregnancy Complications, Infectious / Carrier State / Mass Screening / Surveys and Questionnaires / COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing / COVID-19 Type of study: Cohort study / Diagnostic study / Experimental Studies / Observational study / Prognostic study / Randomized controlled trials Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Pregnancy Country/Region as subject: North America Language: English Journal: Birth Year: 2021 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: Birt.12520

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Pregnancy Complications, Infectious / Carrier State / Mass Screening / Surveys and Questionnaires / COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing / COVID-19 Type of study: Cohort study / Diagnostic study / Experimental Studies / Observational study / Prognostic study / Randomized controlled trials Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Pregnancy Country/Region as subject: North America Language: English Journal: Birth Year: 2021 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: Birt.12520