Literature DB >> 36260547

Evaluating diagnostic accuracies of Panbio™ test and RT-PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia using Bayesian Latent-Class Models (BLCM).

Abay Sisay1,2, Sonja Hartnack3, Abebaw Tiruneh1,4, Yasin Desalegn4, Abraham Tesfaye1,5, Adey Feleke Desta2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Rapid diagnostics are vital for curving the transmission and control of the COVID-19 pandemic. Although many commercially available antigen-based rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 are recommended by the WHO, their diagnostic performance has not yet been assessed in Ethiopia. So far, the vast majority of studies assessing diagnostic accuracies of rapid antigen tests considered RT-PCR as a reference standard, which inevitably leads to bias when RT-PCR is not 100% sensitive and specific. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of Panbio™ jointly with the RT-PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.
METHODS: A prospective cross-sectional study was done from July to September 2021 in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, during the third wave of the pandemic involving two health centers and two hospitals. Diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of Panbio™ and RT-PCR were obtained using Bayesian Latent-Class Models (BLCM).
RESULTS: 438 COVID-19 presumptive clients were enrolled, 239 (54.6%) were females, of whom 196 (44.7%) had a positive RT-PCR and 158 (36.1%) were Panbio™ positive. The Panbio™ and RT-PCR had a sensitivity (95% CrI) of 99.6 (98.4-100) %, 89.3 (83.2-97.6) % and specificity (95% CrI) of 93.4 (82.3-100) %, and 99.1 (97.5-100) %, respectively. Most of the study participants, 318 (72.6%) exhibited COVID-19 symptoms; the most reported was cough 191 (43.6%).
CONCLUSION: As expected the RT-PCR performed very well with a near-perfect specificity and a high, but not perfect sensitivity. The diagnostic performance of Panbio™ is coherent with the WHO established criteria of having a sensitivity ≥80% for Ag-RDTs. Both tests displayed high diagnostic accuracies in patients with and without symptoms. Hence, we recommend the use of the Panbio™ for both symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals in clinical settings for screening purposes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 36260547      PMCID: PMC9581363          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268160

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.752


  35 in total

1.  STARD-BLCM: Standards for the Reporting of Diagnostic accuracy studies that use Bayesian Latent Class Models.

Authors:  Polychronis Kostoulas; Søren S Nielsen; Adam J Branscum; Wesley O Johnson; Nandini Dendukuri; Navneet K Dhand; Nils Toft; Ian A Gardner
Journal:  Prev Vet Med       Date:  2017-01-12       Impact factor: 2.670

2.  Estimating the error rates of diagnostic tests.

Authors:  S L Hui; S D Walter
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1980-03       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Field evaluation of a rapid antigen test (Panbio™ COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test Device) for COVID-19 diagnosis in primary healthcare centres.

Authors:  Eliseo Albert; Ignacio Torres; Felipe Bueno; Dixie Huntley; Estefanía Molla; Miguel Ángel Fernández-Fuentes; Mireia Martínez; Sandrine Poujois; Lorena Forqué; Arantxa Valdivia; Carlos Solano de la Asunción; Josep Ferrer; Javier Colomina; David Navarro
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Infect       Date:  2020-11-13       Impact factor: 8.067

4.  Panbio™ rapid antigen test for SARS-CoV-2 has acceptable accuracy in symptomatic patients in primary health care.

Authors:  Oana Bulilete; Patricia Lorente; Alfonso Leiva; Eugenia Carandell; Antonio Oliver; Estrella Rojo; Pau Pericas; Joan Llobera
Journal:  J Infect       Date:  2021-02-13       Impact factor: 6.072

Review 5.  Readiness and early response to COVID-19: achievements, challenges and lessons learnt in Ethiopia.

Authors:  Betty Lanyero; Zewdu Assefa Edea; Emmanuel Onuche Musa; Shambel Habebe Watare; Mayur Lalji Mandalia; Martin Chibueze Livinus; Faiqa Kassim Ebrahim; Abiy Girmay; Aggrey Kaijuka Bategereza; Aschalew Abayneh; Boureima Hama Sambo; Ebba Abate
Journal:  BMJ Glob Health       Date:  2021-06

6.  Clinical performance evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen testing in point of care usage in comparison to RT-qPCR.

Authors:  Isabell Wagenhäuser; Kerstin Knies; Vera Rauschenberger; Michael Eisenmann; Miriam McDonogh; Nils Petri; Oliver Andres; Sven Flemming; Micha Gawlik; Michael Papsdorf; Regina Taurines; Hartmut Böhm; Johannes Forster; Dirk Weismann; Benedikt Weißbrich; Lars Dölken; Johannes Liese; Oliver Kurzai; Ulrich Vogel; Manuel Krone
Journal:  EBioMedicine       Date:  2021-06-26       Impact factor: 8.143

7.  Diagnostic accuracy of Panbio rapid antigen tests on oropharyngeal swabs for detection of SARS-CoV-2.

Authors:  Marie Thérèse Ngo Nsoga; Ilona Kronig; Francisco Javier Perez Rodriguez; Pascale Sattonnet-Roche; Diogo Da Silva; Javan Helbling; Jilian A Sacks; Margaretha de Vos; Erik Boehm; Angèle Gayet-Ageron; Alice Berger; Frédérique Jacquerioz-Bausch; François Chappuis; Laurent Kaiser; Manuel Schibler; Adriana Renzoni; Isabella Eckerle
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-06-24       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  False negative of RT-PCR and prolonged nucleic acid conversion in COVID-19: Rather than recurrence.

Authors:  Ai Tang Xiao; Yi Xin Tong; Sheng Zhang
Journal:  J Med Virol       Date:  2020-07-11       Impact factor: 20.693

9.  A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China, 2019.

Authors:  Na Zhu; Dingyu Zhang; Wenling Wang; Xingwang Li; Bo Yang; Jingdong Song; Xiang Zhao; Baoying Huang; Weifeng Shi; Roujian Lu; Peihua Niu; Faxian Zhan; Xuejun Ma; Dayan Wang; Wenbo Xu; Guizhen Wu; George F Gao; Wenjie Tan
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2020-01-24       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Diagnostic accuracy of three commercially available one step RT-PCR assays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in resource limited settings.

Authors:  Abay Sisay; Adugna Abera; Boja Dufera; Tujuba Endrias; Geremew Tasew; Abraham Tesfaye; Sonja Hartnack; Dereje Beyene; Adey Feleke Desta
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-01-20       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.