OBJECTIVE: The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that all negative rapid diagnostic tests for Streptococcus pyogenes pharyngitis be backed up by culture, which creates a dilemma for clinicians who must make treatment decisions without complete diagnostic information at the time of visit. The use of a follow-up serial rapid antigen test instead of a follow-up culture would provide a more timely result. METHODS: Two swabs were collected from children who were suspected of having S pyogenes pharyngitis. Each swab was used for a culture and an OSOM Ultra Strep A Test rapid antigen test. The gold standard of comparison was defined as the identification of S pyogenes on either of the 2 culture plates. Three diagnostic strategies were evaluated: a single rapid antigen test, a rapid antigen test with follow-up rapid antigen test (rapid-rapid), and a rapid antigen test with follow-up culture (rapid-culture). RESULTS: A total of 210 (23.7%) of 887 throat cultures with matched data were identified with S pyogenes. A single rapid antigen test had a sensitivity of 87.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 83.2%-92.1%), the sensitivity of the rapid-rapid follow-up was 91.4% (95% CI: 87.6%-95.2%), and the sensitivity of the rapid-culture follow-up was 95.7% (95% CI: 93.0%-98.5%), which was significantly higher than the others. As shown in Fig 1, when these test strategies were evaluated on a subgroup with clinical symptoms commonly associated with S pyogenes pharyngitis, the sensitivities all increased and were no longer significantly different. None of the strategies reliably exceeded a 95% sensitivity threshold. CONCLUSIONS: The American Academy of Pediatrics strategy for S pyogenes detection in children with pharyngitis, requiring a backup culture for those with negative antigen tests, was not exceeded by any other test strategy; however, a rapid-rapid diagnostic strategy may approximate it with the use of judicious clinical selection of patients.
OBJECTIVE: The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that all negative rapid diagnostic tests for Streptococcus pyogenespharyngitis be backed up by culture, which creates a dilemma for clinicians who must make treatment decisions without complete diagnostic information at the time of visit. The use of a follow-up serial rapid antigen test instead of a follow-up culture would provide a more timely result. METHODS: Two swabs were collected from children who were suspected of having S pyogenes pharyngitis. Each swab was used for a culture and an OSOM Ultra Strep A Test rapid antigen test. The gold standard of comparison was defined as the identification of S pyogenes on either of the 2 culture plates. Three diagnostic strategies were evaluated: a single rapid antigen test, a rapid antigen test with follow-up rapid antigen test (rapid-rapid), and a rapid antigen test with follow-up culture (rapid-culture). RESULTS: A total of 210 (23.7%) of 887 throat cultures with matched data were identified with S pyogenes. A single rapid antigen test had a sensitivity of 87.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 83.2%-92.1%), the sensitivity of the rapid-rapid follow-up was 91.4% (95% CI: 87.6%-95.2%), and the sensitivity of the rapid-culture follow-up was 95.7% (95% CI: 93.0%-98.5%), which was significantly higher than the others. As shown in Fig 1, when these test strategies were evaluated on a subgroup with clinical symptoms commonly associated with S pyogenes pharyngitis, the sensitivities all increased and were no longer significantly different. None of the strategies reliably exceeded a 95% sensitivity threshold. CONCLUSIONS: The American Academy of Pediatrics strategy for S pyogenes detection in children with pharyngitis, requiring a backup culture for those with negative antigen tests, was not exceeded by any other test strategy; however, a rapid-rapid diagnostic strategy may approximate it with the use of judicious clinical selection of patients.
Authors: Hannah Fraser; Daniel Gallacher; Felix Achana; Rachel Court; Sian Taylor-Phillips; Chidozie Nduka; Chris Stinton; Rebecca Willans; Paramjit Gill; Hema Mistry Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2020-06 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Michael D Abràmoff; Brad Cunningham; Bakul Patel; Malvina B Eydelman; Theodore Leng; Taiji Sakamoto; Barbara Blodi; S Marlene Grenon; Risa M Wolf; Arjun K Manrai; Justin M Ko; Michael F Chiang; Danton Char Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2021-08-31 Impact factor: 14.277
Authors: Emily H Stewart; Brian Davis; B Lee Clemans-Taylor; Benjamin Littenberg; Carlos A Estrada; Robert M Centor Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-11-04 Impact factor: 3.240