Role of Rapid Antigen Testing in Population-Based SARS-CoV-2 Screening
This study evaluates a population-based screening of asymptomatic people, using a rapid antigen diagnostic test (RADT), in areas of high transmission. To detect sources of SARS-CoV-2 infection, nasopharyngeal samples were taken and were tested using RADT. Confirmatory RT-qPCR tests were performed in...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of clinical medicine 2021-08, Vol.10 (17), p.3854 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | 17 |
container_start_page | 3854 |
container_title | Journal of clinical medicine |
container_volume | 10 |
creator | Martín-Sánchez, Vicente Fernández-Villa, Tania Carvajal Urueña, Ana Rivero Rodríguez, Ana Reguero Celada, Sofía Sánchez Antolín, Gloria Fernández-Vázquez, José Pedro |
description | This study evaluates a population-based screening of asymptomatic people, using a rapid antigen diagnostic test (RADT), in areas of high transmission. To detect sources of SARS-CoV-2 infection, nasopharyngeal samples were taken and were tested using RADT. Confirmatory RT-qPCR tests were performed in both positive and negative cases. The internal validity of the RADT, the prevalence of infection, and the positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) were estimated, based on the percentages of confirmed cases with 95% confidence interval. Of the 157,920 people registered, 50,492 participated in the screening; 50,052 were negative, and 440 were positive on the RADT (0.87%). A total of 221 positive RADT samples were reanalysed using RT-qPCR and 214 were confirmed as positive (96.8%; 95% CI: 93.5-98.7%), while 657 out of 660 negative RADT samples were confirmed as RT-qPCR negative (99.5%; 95% CI 98.7-99.9%). The sensitivity obtained was 65.1% (38.4-90.2%) and the specificity was 99.97% (99.94-99.99%). The prevalence of infection was 1.30% (0.95-2.13%). The PPVs were 95.4% (85.9-98.9%) and 97.9% (93.3-99.5%), respectively, while the NPVs were 99.7% (99.4-100%) and 99.2% (98.7-100%), respectively. The high specificity found allow us to report a high screening performance in asymptomatic patients, even in areas where the prevalence of infection was less than 2%. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3390/jcm10173854 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8432187</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2571921240</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c409t-af2b7e9873faec6a1687b2fa974c0736c63547b5bded19dc8308a06ae1b6cae73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkc1Lw0AQxRdRbKk9eZeAF0Gi-5FkNxehFquCoLTV67LZTOqWdDdmE8H_3tTWUp3LDMyPx3s8hE4JvmIsxddLvSKYcCbi6AD1KeY8xEyww727h4beL3E3QkSU8GPUY1GMCU15H02mroTAFcFUVSYPRrYxC7DBHHxj7CIwNnhxVVuqxjgb3ioPeTAbTWfh2L2FNJjpGsB24Ak6KlTpYbjdA_Q6uZuPH8Kn5_vH8egp1BFOm1AVNOOQCs4KBTpRJBE8o4VKeaQxZ4lOWBzxLM5yyEmaa8GwUDhRQLJEK-BsgG42ulWbrSDXYJtalbKqzUrVX9IpI_9-rHmXC_cpRcQoEWuBi61A7T7aLqVcGa-hLJUF13pJY05SSmiEO_T8H7p0bW27eD8UIwklSUddbihdO-9rKHZmCJbriuReRR19tu9_x_4Wwr4B98SK3w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2571316216</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Role of Rapid Antigen Testing in Population-Based SARS-CoV-2 Screening</title><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Martín-Sánchez, Vicente ; Fernández-Villa, Tania ; Carvajal Urueña, Ana ; Rivero Rodríguez, Ana ; Reguero Celada, Sofía ; Sánchez Antolín, Gloria ; Fernández-Vázquez, José Pedro</creator><creatorcontrib>Martín-Sánchez, Vicente ; Fernández-Villa, Tania ; Carvajal Urueña, Ana ; Rivero Rodríguez, Ana ; Reguero Celada, Sofía ; Sánchez Antolín, Gloria ; Fernández-Vázquez, José Pedro</creatorcontrib><description>This study evaluates a population-based screening of asymptomatic people, using a rapid antigen diagnostic test (RADT), in areas of high transmission. To detect sources of SARS-CoV-2 infection, nasopharyngeal samples were taken and were tested using RADT. Confirmatory RT-qPCR tests were performed in both positive and negative cases. The internal validity of the RADT, the prevalence of infection, and the positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) were estimated, based on the percentages of confirmed cases with 95% confidence interval. Of the 157,920 people registered, 50,492 participated in the screening; 50,052 were negative, and 440 were positive on the RADT (0.87%). A total of 221 positive RADT samples were reanalysed using RT-qPCR and 214 were confirmed as positive (96.8%; 95% CI: 93.5-98.7%), while 657 out of 660 negative RADT samples were confirmed as RT-qPCR negative (99.5%; 95% CI 98.7-99.9%). The sensitivity obtained was 65.1% (38.4-90.2%) and the specificity was 99.97% (99.94-99.99%). The prevalence of infection was 1.30% (0.95-2.13%). The PPVs were 95.4% (85.9-98.9%) and 97.9% (93.3-99.5%), respectively, while the NPVs were 99.7% (99.4-100%) and 99.2% (98.7-100%), respectively. The high specificity found allow us to report a high screening performance in asymptomatic patients, even in areas where the prevalence of infection was less than 2%.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2077-0383</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2077-0383</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/jcm10173854</identifier><identifier>PMID: 34501297</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Switzerland: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Age groups ; Antigens ; Asymptomatic ; Clinical medicine ; Contact tracing ; Coronaviruses ; COVID-19 ; COVID-19 diagnostic tests ; Disease transmission ; Infections ; Population ; Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 ; Validity ; Values</subject><ispartof>Journal of clinical medicine, 2021-08, Vol.10 (17), p.3854</ispartof><rights>2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2021 by the authors. 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c409t-af2b7e9873faec6a1687b2fa974c0736c63547b5bded19dc8308a06ae1b6cae73</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c409t-af2b7e9873faec6a1687b2fa974c0736c63547b5bded19dc8308a06ae1b6cae73</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-0552-2804 ; 0000-0002-9049-3026</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8432187/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8432187/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34501297$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Martín-Sánchez, Vicente</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fernández-Villa, Tania</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carvajal Urueña, Ana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rivero Rodríguez, Ana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reguero Celada, Sofía</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sánchez Antolín, Gloria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fernández-Vázquez, José Pedro</creatorcontrib><title>Role of Rapid Antigen Testing in Population-Based SARS-CoV-2 Screening</title><title>Journal of clinical medicine</title><addtitle>J Clin Med</addtitle><description>This study evaluates a population-based screening of asymptomatic people, using a rapid antigen diagnostic test (RADT), in areas of high transmission. To detect sources of SARS-CoV-2 infection, nasopharyngeal samples were taken and were tested using RADT. Confirmatory RT-qPCR tests were performed in both positive and negative cases. The internal validity of the RADT, the prevalence of infection, and the positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) were estimated, based on the percentages of confirmed cases with 95% confidence interval. Of the 157,920 people registered, 50,492 participated in the screening; 50,052 were negative, and 440 were positive on the RADT (0.87%). A total of 221 positive RADT samples were reanalysed using RT-qPCR and 214 were confirmed as positive (96.8%; 95% CI: 93.5-98.7%), while 657 out of 660 negative RADT samples were confirmed as RT-qPCR negative (99.5%; 95% CI 98.7-99.9%). The sensitivity obtained was 65.1% (38.4-90.2%) and the specificity was 99.97% (99.94-99.99%). The prevalence of infection was 1.30% (0.95-2.13%). The PPVs were 95.4% (85.9-98.9%) and 97.9% (93.3-99.5%), respectively, while the NPVs were 99.7% (99.4-100%) and 99.2% (98.7-100%), respectively. The high specificity found allow us to report a high screening performance in asymptomatic patients, even in areas where the prevalence of infection was less than 2%.</description><subject>Age groups</subject><subject>Antigens</subject><subject>Asymptomatic</subject><subject>Clinical medicine</subject><subject>Contact tracing</subject><subject>Coronaviruses</subject><subject>COVID-19</subject><subject>COVID-19 diagnostic tests</subject><subject>Disease transmission</subject><subject>Infections</subject><subject>Population</subject><subject>Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2</subject><subject>Validity</subject><subject>Values</subject><issn>2077-0383</issn><issn>2077-0383</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkc1Lw0AQxRdRbKk9eZeAF0Gi-5FkNxehFquCoLTV67LZTOqWdDdmE8H_3tTWUp3LDMyPx3s8hE4JvmIsxddLvSKYcCbi6AD1KeY8xEyww727h4beL3E3QkSU8GPUY1GMCU15H02mroTAFcFUVSYPRrYxC7DBHHxj7CIwNnhxVVuqxjgb3ioPeTAbTWfh2L2FNJjpGsB24Ak6KlTpYbjdA_Q6uZuPH8Kn5_vH8egp1BFOm1AVNOOQCs4KBTpRJBE8o4VKeaQxZ4lOWBzxLM5yyEmaa8GwUDhRQLJEK-BsgG42ulWbrSDXYJtalbKqzUrVX9IpI_9-rHmXC_cpRcQoEWuBi61A7T7aLqVcGa-hLJUF13pJY05SSmiEO_T8H7p0bW27eD8UIwklSUddbihdO-9rKHZmCJbriuReRR19tu9_x_4Wwr4B98SK3w</recordid><startdate>20210827</startdate><enddate>20210827</enddate><creator>Martín-Sánchez, Vicente</creator><creator>Fernández-Villa, Tania</creator><creator>Carvajal Urueña, Ana</creator><creator>Rivero Rodríguez, Ana</creator><creator>Reguero Celada, Sofía</creator><creator>Sánchez Antolín, Gloria</creator><creator>Fernández-Vázquez, José Pedro</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><general>MDPI</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>COVID</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0552-2804</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9049-3026</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210827</creationdate><title>Role of Rapid Antigen Testing in Population-Based SARS-CoV-2 Screening</title><author>Martín-Sánchez, Vicente ; Fernández-Villa, Tania ; Carvajal Urueña, Ana ; Rivero Rodríguez, Ana ; Reguero Celada, Sofía ; Sánchez Antolín, Gloria ; Fernández-Vázquez, José Pedro</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c409t-af2b7e9873faec6a1687b2fa974c0736c63547b5bded19dc8308a06ae1b6cae73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Age groups</topic><topic>Antigens</topic><topic>Asymptomatic</topic><topic>Clinical medicine</topic><topic>Contact tracing</topic><topic>Coronaviruses</topic><topic>COVID-19</topic><topic>COVID-19 diagnostic tests</topic><topic>Disease transmission</topic><topic>Infections</topic><topic>Population</topic><topic>Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2</topic><topic>Validity</topic><topic>Values</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Martín-Sánchez, Vicente</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fernández-Villa, Tania</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carvajal Urueña, Ana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rivero Rodríguez, Ana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reguero Celada, Sofía</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sánchez Antolín, Gloria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fernández-Vázquez, José Pedro</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Coronavirus Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of clinical medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Martín-Sánchez, Vicente</au><au>Fernández-Villa, Tania</au><au>Carvajal Urueña, Ana</au><au>Rivero Rodríguez, Ana</au><au>Reguero Celada, Sofía</au><au>Sánchez Antolín, Gloria</au><au>Fernández-Vázquez, José Pedro</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Role of Rapid Antigen Testing in Population-Based SARS-CoV-2 Screening</atitle><jtitle>Journal of clinical medicine</jtitle><addtitle>J Clin Med</addtitle><date>2021-08-27</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>10</volume><issue>17</issue><spage>3854</spage><pages>3854-</pages><issn>2077-0383</issn><eissn>2077-0383</eissn><abstract>This study evaluates a population-based screening of asymptomatic people, using a rapid antigen diagnostic test (RADT), in areas of high transmission. To detect sources of SARS-CoV-2 infection, nasopharyngeal samples were taken and were tested using RADT. Confirmatory RT-qPCR tests were performed in both positive and negative cases. The internal validity of the RADT, the prevalence of infection, and the positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) were estimated, based on the percentages of confirmed cases with 95% confidence interval. Of the 157,920 people registered, 50,492 participated in the screening; 50,052 were negative, and 440 were positive on the RADT (0.87%). A total of 221 positive RADT samples were reanalysed using RT-qPCR and 214 were confirmed as positive (96.8%; 95% CI: 93.5-98.7%), while 657 out of 660 negative RADT samples were confirmed as RT-qPCR negative (99.5%; 95% CI 98.7-99.9%). The sensitivity obtained was 65.1% (38.4-90.2%) and the specificity was 99.97% (99.94-99.99%). The prevalence of infection was 1.30% (0.95-2.13%). The PPVs were 95.4% (85.9-98.9%) and 97.9% (93.3-99.5%), respectively, while the NPVs were 99.7% (99.4-100%) and 99.2% (98.7-100%), respectively. The high specificity found allow us to report a high screening performance in asymptomatic patients, even in areas where the prevalence of infection was less than 2%.</abstract><cop>Switzerland</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><pmid>34501297</pmid><doi>10.3390/jcm10173854</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0552-2804</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9049-3026</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2077-0383 |
ispartof | Journal of clinical medicine, 2021-08, Vol.10 (17), p.3854 |
issn | 2077-0383 2077-0383 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8432187 |
source | PubMed Central Open Access; MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central |
subjects | Age groups Antigens Asymptomatic Clinical medicine Contact tracing Coronaviruses COVID-19 COVID-19 diagnostic tests Disease transmission Infections Population Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 Validity Values |
title | Role of Rapid Antigen Testing in Population-Based SARS-CoV-2 Screening |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T03%3A00%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Role%20of%20Rapid%20Antigen%20Testing%20in%20Population-Based%20SARS-CoV-2%20Screening&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20clinical%20medicine&rft.au=Mart%C3%ADn-S%C3%A1nchez,%20Vicente&rft.date=2021-08-27&rft.volume=10&rft.issue=17&rft.spage=3854&rft.pages=3854-&rft.issn=2077-0383&rft.eissn=2077-0383&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/jcm10173854&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2571921240%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2571316216&rft_id=info:pmid/34501297&rfr_iscdi=true |