Back

Detection of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections among healthcare workers: results from a large-scale screening program based on rapid serological testing.

Carozzi, F. M.; Cusi, M. G.; Pistello, M.; Galli, L.; Bartoloni, A.; Anichini, G.; Azzari, C.; Emdin, M.; Gandolfo, C.; Maggi, F.; Mantengoli, E.; Moriondo, M.; Moscato, G.; Paganini, I.; Passino, C.; Profili, F.; Voller, F.; Zappa, M.; Quattrone, F.; Rossolini, G. M.; Francesconi, P.; SARS-CoV-2 Serosurvey Tuscan Working Group,

2020-08-04 infectious diseases
10.1101/2020.07.30.20149567 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveTo evaluate the performance of two available rapid immunological tests for identification of severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies and their subsequent application to a regional screening of health care workers (HCW) in Tuscany (Italy). Designmeasures of accuracy and HCW serological surveillance Setting6 major health facilities in Tuscany, Italy. Participants17,098 HCW of the Tuscany Region. Measures of accuracy were estimated to assess sensitivity in 176 hospitalized Covid-19 clinical subjects at least 14 days after a diagnostic PCR-positive assay result. Specificity was assessed in 295 sera biobanked in the pre-Covid-19 era in winter or summer 2013-14 Main outcome measuresSensitivity and specificity, and 95% confidence intervals, were measured using two serological tests, named T-1 and T-2. Positive and Negative predictive values were estimated at different levels of prevalence. HCW of the health centers were tested using the serological tests, with a follow-up nasopharyngeal PCR-test swab in positive tested cases. ResultsSensitivity was estimated as 99% (95%CI: 95%-100%) and 97% (95% CI: 90%-100%), whereas specificity was the 95% and 92%, for Test T-1 and T-2 respectively. In the historical samples IgM cross-reactions were detected in sera collected during the winter period, probably linked to other human coronaviruses. Out of the 17,098 tested, 3.1% have shown the presence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies, among them 6.8% were positive at PCR follow-up test on nasopharyngeal swabs. ConclusionBased on the low prevalence estimate observed in this survey, the use of serological test as a stand-alone test is not justified to assess the individual immunity status. Serological tests showed good performance and might be useful in an integrated surveillance, for identification of infected subjects and their contacts as required by the policy of contact tracing, with the aim to reduce the risk of dissemination, especially in health service facilities.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Clinical Microbiology and Infection
60 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.4%
2
Infectious Diseases
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.0%
3
Journal of Clinical Virology
62 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.8%
4
Eurosurveillance
80 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.8%
5
BMJ
49 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.8%
6
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 36%
3.9%
7
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 6%
3.6%
50% of probability mass above
8
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.6%
9
Journal of Infection
71 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.9%
10
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.7%
11
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
2.1%
12
Journal of Medical Virology
137 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
13
Epidemiology and Infection
84 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.9%
14
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
126 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
15
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 59%
1.7%
16
Emerging Infectious Diseases
103 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
17
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.7%
18
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
19
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.3%
20
Infection
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
21
European Respiratory Journal
54 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
22
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
182 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.2%
23
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 57%
1.2%
24
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
120 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
25
European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.9%
26
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
134 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
27
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
28
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
29
Microbiology Spectrum
435 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
30
The Lancet Microbe
43 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%