• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

CIDRAP- Study: COVID-19 rapid home tests not highly sensitive for Omicron

Lance

MPH, CSP & CIT Retired, CHMM Emeritus
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-per...rapid-home-tests-not-highly-sensitive-omicron

Study: COVID-19 rapid home tests not highly sensitive for Omicron


Filed Under:
COVID-19

Dutch researchers reveal that the sensitivities of three commonly used rapid antigen tests, when used in asymptomatic people in the Omicron period, were very low and suggest repeat testing after a negative test. The study is published in Clinical Microbiology and Infection.

The study was conducted between Jan 2 to Mar 30, 2022, when Omicron accounted for 90% to 99.5% of all cases in the Netherlands. A total of 3,600 asymptomatic people with suspected COVID-19 were tested using one of three at-home rapid antigen tests and a reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. Home tests were provided within 3 hours of taking an RT-PCR test.

Overall sensitivities for the three home tests were 27.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 21.3% to 34.3%) for Flowflex, 20.9% (95% CI, 13.9% to 29.4%) for MPBio, and 25.6% (95% CI, 19.1% to 33.1%) for Clinitest. After applying a viral load cut-off, sensitivities increased to 48.3% (95% CI, 37.6% to 59.2%), 37.8% (95% CI, 22.5% to 55.2%), and 40.0% (95% CI, 29.5% to 51.2%), respectively.

Participants with negative tests also filled out a questionnaire, which showed 54.8% retested in the 10 days following a negative test, with 24.6% testing positive.

The positive predictive values were greater than 92%, and negative predictive values were greater than 88% for all self-tests. The authors said previous studies on self-tests conducted before Omicron yielded better sensitivities, at 52.5% in asymptomatic individuals.

"We conclude that SARS-CoV-2 self-testing has limited value for asymptomatic individuals wishing to protect vulnerable persons and may even lead to a false sense of security," the authors concluded. "The high SARS-CoV-2 infection rate within 10 days of a negative RT-PCR test that we found in our study emphasizes the importance of re-testing over time, especially when symptoms develop, to reduce missed infections as much as possible."
 
Back
Top Bottom