Validation of the Panbio COVID-19 Antigen Rapid Test (Abbott) to screen for SARS-CoV-2 infection in Sint Maarten: a diagnostic accuracy study
King, C.; Lista-de Weever, E.; Henry, M.; Steingrover, R.; Fleming, C.; Panneflek, R.; van Kampen, S.
10.1101/2021.09.23.21260526 medRxivShow abstract
ObjectivesControl of the pandemic has required countries to look for other forms of tests besides the gold standard real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Rapid antigen tests (RAT), though less sensitive than RT-PCR, offer the possibility of rapid, inexpensive and early detection of the most infectious COVID-19 cases. Only very few studies have assessed the performance of the Abbott Panbio COVID-19 RAT among asymptomatic people or in Latin America. This study set out to validate this test among people attending the public test street in Sint Maarten, Dutch Caribbean. MethodsPeople of all ages were recruited from the public COVID-19 test street regardless of COVID-19 symptoms. They received a nasopharyngeal swab for the Abbott Panbio COVID-19 RAT and the RT-PCR Qtower. Diagnostic accuracy of the RAT was compared to the RT-PCR among the overall study population and for subgroups with/without symptoms, with/without close contact and different Ct values. ResultsUsing a RT-PCR Ct cut-off value of <33, 119 out of 1,411 people (8.4%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Most were asymptomatic (59%). The overall sensitivity and specificity of the RAT was 84% (95% CI 76.2-90.1) and 99.9% (95% CI 99.6-100) respectively. The sensitivity reduced to 67.6% (95% CI: 49.5%, 82.6%) among people without symptoms, regardless of whether they were in close contact with a known COVID-19 case. Sensitivity reduced considerably with a Ct cut-off value of <35. ConclusionsThe Abbott Panbio RAT is a valid and cheaper alternative to RT-PCR when used on symptomatic individuals among the general population. However, among asymptomatic people it should not be used as a stand-alone test and negative results should be confirmed with RT-PCR.
Matching journals
The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Performance Evaluation Of A SARS-COV-2 Rapid Antigentest: Test Performance In The Community In The Netherlands 98%
- An optimized stepwise algorithm combining rapid antigen and RT-qPCR for screening of COVID-19 patients 96%
- Evaluation of the accuracy and ease-of-use of Abbott PanBio - A WHO emergency use listed, rapid, antigen-detecting point-of-care diagnostic test for SARS-CoV-2 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Age significantly influences the sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antibody assays 96%
- Performance of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test compared with real-time RT-PCR in asymptomatic individuals 95%
- Self-collected oral, nasal and saliva samples yield sensitivity comparable to professional-collected oro-nasopharyngeal swabs in SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Screening for SARS-CoV-2 infection in asymptomatic individuals using the Panbio™ COVID-19 Antigen Rapid Test (Abbott) compared to RT-qPCR 97%
- Meta-Analysis of Robustness of COVID-19 Diagnostic Kits During Early Pandemic 94%
- Antibody response in individuals affected with Sars-Cov-2 infection: temporal trends and qualitative and quantitative differences in symptomatic and asymptomatic subjects. A Cross Sectional Analysis. Ab-Covid Study 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Acceptable Performance of the Abbott ID NOW Among Symptomatic Individuals with Confirmed COVID-19 96%
- Evaluation of the ID NOW Among Symptomatic Individuals During the Omicron Wave 96%
- Combined oropharyngeal/nares and nasopharyngeal swab sampling remain effective for molecular detection of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation of the Panbio™ rapid antigen test for SARS-CoV-2 in primary health care centers and test sites 97%
- Comparison between mid-nasal swabs and buccal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 detection in mild COVID-19 patients 96%
- The performance of the SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test as a tool for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection in the population: A survey of routine laboratory RT-PCR test results from the region of Münster, Germany 95%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.