OBJECTIVE: To assess the use of a 'near patient' test for rapid antigen detection to obtain the more timely acquisition of data for the surveillance of influenza epidemics. METHODS: To the classical cell culture system used for the surveillance of influenza, a 'near patient' test was added. The cell culture method was applied for the detection of influenza virus in specimens sent to our laboratory. In contrast, the 'near patient' test was used directly by practitioners in their practices to screen patients for the presence of influenza virus antigen. RESULTS: The results for two seasons are presented. The 'near patient' test was able to detect a developing influenza epidemic with the same reliability as clinical consultation reports for influenza-like illness or the conventional culture method. However, the results obtained were available 9 days earlier on average, compared with cell culture. Because of this, results concerning the epidemics could be announced via the internet more rapidly. Although the 'near patient' test demonstrated a lower sensitivity than detection by conventional cell culture, the sensitivity was still sufficiently high to reveal the characteristics of the epidemics in the community. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid influenza testing is a reliable tool for influenza surveillance and, compared with traditional methods (virus detection on cell culture and monitoring of influenza-like illness), provides faster results. Although the 'near patient' test has limited sensitivity compared with cell culture, results were consistent over two seasons, and suggest that rapid testing should be part of a surveillance program.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the use of a 'near patient' test for rapid antigen detection to obtain the more timely acquisition of data for the surveillance of influenza epidemics. METHODS: To the classical cell culture system used for the surveillance of influenza, a 'near patient' test was added. The cell culture method was applied for the detection of influenza virus in specimens sent to our laboratory. In contrast, the 'near patient' test was used directly by practitioners in their practices to screen patients for the presence of influenza virus antigen. RESULTS: The results for two seasons are presented. The 'near patient' test was able to detect a developing influenza epidemic with the same reliability as clinical consultation reports for influenza-like illness or the conventional culture method. However, the results obtained were available 9 days earlier on average, compared with cell culture. Because of this, results concerning the epidemics could be announced via the internet more rapidly. Although the 'near patient' test demonstrated a lower sensitivity than detection by conventional cell culture, the sensitivity was still sufficiently high to reveal the characteristics of the epidemics in the community. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid influenza testing is a reliable tool for influenza surveillance and, compared with traditional methods (virus detection on cell culture and monitoring of influenza-like illness), provides faster results. Although the 'near patient' test has limited sensitivity compared with cell culture, results were consistent over two seasons, and suggest that rapid testing should be part of a surveillance program.
Authors: Young Yoo; Jang Wook Sohn; Dae Won Park; Jeong Yeon Kim; Hye Kyung Shin; Yoon Lee; Ji Tae Choung; Chang Kyu Lee; Min Ja Kim Journal: Clin Vaccine Immunol Date: 2007-06-13
Authors: Matthew R Kasper; Shannon D Putnam; Ly Sovann; Chadwick Y Yasuda; Patrick J Blair; Thomas F Wierzba Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: Yu Bin Seo; Joon Young Song; Hee Jin Cheong; Young Duck Cho; Seong-Heon Wie; Hye Won Jeong; Woo Joo Kim Journal: Influenza Other Respir Viruses Date: 2013-09-11 Impact factor: 4.380
Authors: J Chen; K Yang; M Zhang; C Shen; J Chen; G Wang; S Huang; M Zhang; H Xiong; H Chen; Y Chen; N Xia Journal: Clin Microbiol Infect Date: 2017-06-03 Impact factor: 8.067