ABSTRACT
Objectives It has been suggested that rapid antigen detection assays (RADT) may perform suboptimally in terms of sensitivity for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant infection. To address this issue, we conducted a prospective study in primary health centers to evaluate the clinical performance of the Panbio™ COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test Device in nasopharyngeal specimens (NP) carried out at the point of care.
Methods We recruited 244 patients (median age, 40 years; range 2–96; 141 female) with clinical suspicion of COVID-19 (232 adults and 12 children). 228/244 patients had been fully vaccinated (two doses) with licensed COVID-19 vaccines prior to recruitment. Most patients (222/244) were SARS-CoV-2 naïve prior to enrollment. Patients were tested by RT-PCR and RADT within 5 days since symptoms onset.
Results 126 patients (51.6%) tested positive by both RT-PCR and RADT, 90 patients (36.8%) returned negative results by both assays and 28 patients (11.4%) yielded discordant results (RT-PCR+/RADT-). No patients tested RT-PCR-/RADT+. Overall specificity and sensitivity of RADT was 100% (95% CI, 95.9–100%) and 81.8% (95% CI, 75–87.1%) respectively. The sensitivity of the assay increased from 79.6% (95% CI, 66.4–88.5) when considering specimens collected at days 0–1 after symptoms onset, to 86.4% (95% CI, 66.7–95.3) when grouping the specimens obtained on days 4–5.
Conclusion The Panbio™ COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test Device perform well (≥80% sensitivity) as a point-of-care test for early diagnosis of COVID-19 due to the Omicron variant in primary healthcare centers.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This research received no public or private financial support.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study was approved by the Hospital Clinico de Valencia (HCU) INCLIVA Research Ethics Committee. Since the testing strategy was considered as regular clinical practice according to local health authorities, written informed consent was waived by this committee.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author
