• Medicine · Aug 2023

    Diagnostic performance of GenBody COVID-19 rapid antigen test for laboratory and non-laboratory medical professionals in real practice: A retrospective study.

    • Pei-Chin Lin, Chun-Jung Huang, Yen-Ming Lu, Huei-Ling Huang, Zong-Ying Wu, Chih-Chun Chang, and Fang-Yeh Chu.
    • Department of Clinical Pathology, Far Eastern Memorial Hospital, New Taipei City, Taiwan.
    • Medicine (Baltimore). 2023 Aug 18; 102 (33): e34927e34927.

    AbstractPoint-of-care tests for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) antigen detection have been widely used for rapid diagnosis in various settings. However, research on the diagnostic performance of the COVID-19 antigen test performed by non-laboratory personnel is limited. In this study, we aimed to elucidate the diagnostic performance of GenBody COVID-19 rapid antigen between laboratory professionals and non-laboratory staff. We retrospectively analyzed the data of patients who underwent both GenBody COVID-19 rapid antigen testing and reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) between November 01, 2021, and June 30, 2022. The diagnostic performance of the antigen test was compared between laboratory and non-laboratory operators, using RT-PCR as the gold standard. Sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were calculated and sensitivity analysis was performed based on the PCR cycle threshold (Ct) value. Of the 11,963 patients, 1273 (10.6%) tested positive using real-time RT-PCR. The sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of the GenBody COVID-19 rapid antigen test with 95% confidence interval were 79.92% (77.26%-82.39%), 99.23% (98.73%-99.57%), 103.25 (62.31-171.11), 0.2 (0.18-0.23), 510.18 (299.81-868.18), 98.11% (96.91%-98.85%), 90.75% (89.64%-91.75%) and 92.76% (91.76%-93.67%), respectively, for non-laboratory staff and 79.80% (74.78%-84.22%), 99.99% (99.94%-100.00%), 6983.92 (983.03-49617.00), 0.2 (0.16-0.25), 34566.45 (4770.30-250474.46) 99.58% (97.09%-99.94%), 99.32% (99.15%-99.46%), and 99.33% (99.13%-99.48%), respectively, for laboratory staff. Notably, when the PCR Ct value exceeded 25, the sensitivity of both the groups decreased to < 40%. The diagnostic performance of GenBody COVID-19 rapid antigen performed by non-laboratory staff was comparable to that of laboratory professionals. However, it should be noted that the sensitivity of the antigen tests decreased when the PCR Ct value exceeded 25. Overall, the GenBody COVID-19 antigen test is a viable option for non-laboratory staff during an epidemic.Copyright © 2023 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.