SARS-CoV-2 infection: use and effectiveness of antigenic swab for the health surveillance of healthcare workers.
Journal
La Medicina del lavoro
ISSN: 0025-7818
Titre abrégé: Med Lav
Pays: Italy
ID NLM: 0401176
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
23 Dec 2021
23 Dec 2021
Historique:
received:
06
08
2021
accepted:
09
11
2021
entrez:
23
12
2021
pubmed:
24
12
2021
medline:
25
12
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The gold standard to identify SARS-CoV-2 infections is the Reverse Transcriptase-Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) on rhino-pharyngeal swabs, but faster and cheaper methods such as antigenic swabs have been developed. A retrospective observational study on antigenic swabs included in the extraordinary health surveillance protocol of a large Hospital in Turin was aimed to assess their performance validity. Methods: From 30 October 2020 to 4 May 2021, 4000 antigenic swabs were carried out in three groups of healthcare workers (HCWs), respectively (i) asymptomatic, (ii) cohabiting with a positive case, and (iii) not recently exposed to the virus. Results: Overall sensitivity and specificity associated with a prevalence of 1.30% were 26.9%, 97.2%, respectively, the corresponding positive (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) being 11.29% and 99.02% [95% IC (99.00 - 99.04)] respectively; a prevalence of 0.29% was observed in the asymptomatic group, among whom sensitivity and specificity were 25.0% and 98.9%, respectively, the corresponding PPV and NPV being 6.25% and 99.78% [95% IC (99.76 - 99.81)], respectively; the cohabitant group showed a prevalence of 21.11%, sensitivity and specificity were 47.4%, 81.7%, respectively, giving rise to a PPV of 40.91% and NPV of 85.29% [95% IC (85.18 - 85.41)] respectively. The prevalence in the not exposed group was 0.77%, sensitivity and specificity were 29.2%, 97.4%, respectively, and PPV and NPV 8.05% and 99.44% [95% IC (99.42 - 99.46)] respectively. Conclusions: Antigenic swabs reduced costs and provided reliable diagnostic results. In the cohabitant group, the higher-prevalence groups showed poor test performances, likely because of the high prevalence of pre-symptomatic illness in this group. Owing to the relatively low NPV, a negative result would still require confirmation with a molecular test to be acceptable for a surveillance program that effectively reduces the virus's intra-hospital spread.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The gold standard to identify SARS-CoV-2 infections is the Reverse Transcriptase-Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) on rhino-pharyngeal swabs, but faster and cheaper methods such as antigenic swabs have been developed. A retrospective observational study on antigenic swabs included in the extraordinary health surveillance protocol of a large Hospital in Turin was aimed to assess their performance validity. Methods: From 30 October 2020 to 4 May 2021, 4000 antigenic swabs were carried out in three groups of healthcare workers (HCWs), respectively (i) asymptomatic, (ii) cohabiting with a positive case, and (iii) not recently exposed to the virus. Results: Overall sensitivity and specificity associated with a prevalence of 1.30% were 26.9%, 97.2%, respectively, the corresponding positive (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) being 11.29% and 99.02% [95% IC (99.00 - 99.04)] respectively; a prevalence of 0.29% was observed in the asymptomatic group, among whom sensitivity and specificity were 25.0% and 98.9%, respectively, the corresponding PPV and NPV being 6.25% and 99.78% [95% IC (99.76 - 99.81)], respectively; the cohabitant group showed a prevalence of 21.11%, sensitivity and specificity were 47.4%, 81.7%, respectively, giving rise to a PPV of 40.91% and NPV of 85.29% [95% IC (85.18 - 85.41)] respectively. The prevalence in the not exposed group was 0.77%, sensitivity and specificity were 29.2%, 97.4%, respectively, and PPV and NPV 8.05% and 99.44% [95% IC (99.42 - 99.46)] respectively. Conclusions: Antigenic swabs reduced costs and provided reliable diagnostic results. In the cohabitant group, the higher-prevalence groups showed poor test performances, likely because of the high prevalence of pre-symptomatic illness in this group. Owing to the relatively low NPV, a negative result would still require confirmation with a molecular test to be acceptable for a surveillance program that effectively reduces the virus's intra-hospital spread.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34939621
doi: 10.23749/mdl.v112i6.12125
pmc: PMC8759044
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
444-452Références
N Engl J Med. 2020 Feb 20;382(8):727-733
pubmed: 31978945
Med Lav. 2021 Oct 28;112(5):331-339
pubmed: 34726663
J Clin Virol. 2021 Jun;139:104838
pubmed: 33946040
Nat Microbiol. 2020 Apr;5(4):536-544
pubmed: 32123347
Med Lav. 2021 Jun 15;112(3):183-193
pubmed: 34142672
Int J Mol Med. 2021 Jun;47(6):
pubmed: 33846767
Med Lav. 2021 Oct 28;112(5):340-345
pubmed: 34726662
J Virol Methods. 2021 Sep;295:114201
pubmed: 34058287
Med Lav. 2020 Jun 26;111(3):184-194
pubmed: 32624560
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2021 May 14;70(19):702-706
pubmed: 33983916
Rev Esp Quimioter. 2020 Dec;33(6):466-484
pubmed: 33070578
Infect Dis Ther. 2021 Jun;10(2):753-761
pubmed: 33629225