tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
Front Public Health
. 2024 Oct 18:12:1402949.
doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1402949. eCollection 2024. Performance of self-performed SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Peiling Cai[SUP] #[/SUP][SUP] 1 [/SUP], Junren Wang[SUP] #[/SUP][SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Peng Ye[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Yarong Zhang[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Mengping Wang[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Ronglian Guo[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Hongying Zhao[SUP] 4 [/SUP]
Affiliations
Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of self-tested SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests.
Methods: Databases of Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for original studies investigating accuracy of self-tested SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests, with RT-PCR as "gold standard."
Results: Forty-five eligible studies were found after database searching and screening using pre-defined criteria. The accuracy results from 50,897 suspected COVID-19 patients were pooled, and the overall sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio were 0.77, 1.00, and 625.95, respectively. Subgroup analysis showed higher sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in subgroups of Abbott Panbio, self-collected nasal swab samples, and use of nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swab and lower Ct cutoff value in RT-PCR.
Conclusion: Fully self-performed SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests showed overall high accuracy compared to "gold standard," and are reliable surrogates for the standard test of COVID-19 using nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal samples and RT-PCR.
Keywords: COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; diagnostic accuracy; rapid antigen test; self-test.
. 2024 Oct 18:12:1402949.
doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1402949. eCollection 2024. Performance of self-performed SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Peiling Cai[SUP] #[/SUP][SUP] 1 [/SUP], Junren Wang[SUP] #[/SUP][SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Peng Ye[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Yarong Zhang[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Mengping Wang[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Ronglian Guo[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Hongying Zhao[SUP] 4 [/SUP]
Affiliations
- PMID: 39494084
- PMCID: PMC11527648
- DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1402949
Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of self-tested SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests.
Methods: Databases of Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for original studies investigating accuracy of self-tested SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests, with RT-PCR as "gold standard."
Results: Forty-five eligible studies were found after database searching and screening using pre-defined criteria. The accuracy results from 50,897 suspected COVID-19 patients were pooled, and the overall sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio were 0.77, 1.00, and 625.95, respectively. Subgroup analysis showed higher sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in subgroups of Abbott Panbio, self-collected nasal swab samples, and use of nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swab and lower Ct cutoff value in RT-PCR.
Conclusion: Fully self-performed SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests showed overall high accuracy compared to "gold standard," and are reliable surrogates for the standard test of COVID-19 using nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal samples and RT-PCR.
Keywords: COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; diagnostic accuracy; rapid antigen test; self-test.