tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
Clin Infect Dis. 2017 May 17. doi: 10.1093/cid/cix461. [Epub ahead of print]
[h=1]Rapid tests for influenza, respiratory syncytial virus, and other respiratory viruses: a systematic review and meta-analysis.[/h] Bruning A[SUP]1[/SUP], Leeflang M[SUP]2[/SUP], Vos J[SUP]1[/SUP], Spijker R[SUP]3[/SUP], de Jong MD[SUP]4[/SUP], Wolthers KC[SUP]4[/SUP], Pajkrt D[SUP]1[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h]
[h=3]Abstract[/h] Rapid diagnosis of respiratory virus infections contributes to patient care. This systematic review evaluates the diagnostic accuracy of rapid tests for the detection of respiratory viruses. We searched Medline and EMBASE for studies evaluating these tests against PCR as reference standard. 179 studies were included of which 134 evaluated rapid tests for influenza viruses, 32 for RSV, and 13 for other respiratory viruses. We used the bivariate random effects model for quantitative meta-analysis of the results. Most tests detected only influenza viruses or RSV. Summary sensitivity- and specificity-estimates of tests for influenza were 61.1% and 98.9%. For RSV, summary sensitivity was 75.3% and specificity 98.7%. Quality of studies was assessed using the QUADAS-checklist. Because of incomplete reporting, risk of bias was often unclear. Despite their intended use at the point-of-care, 26.3% were evaluated in a laboratory-setting. Although newly developed tests seem more sensitive, high-quality evaluations of these tests are lacking.
? The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
[h=4]KEYWORDS:[/h] Point-of-care test; influenza; meta-analysis; rapid test; respiratory syncytial virus; respiratory tract infection; respiratory virus
PMID: 28520858 DOI: 10.1093/cid/cix461
[h=1]Rapid tests for influenza, respiratory syncytial virus, and other respiratory viruses: a systematic review and meta-analysis.[/h] Bruning A[SUP]1[/SUP], Leeflang M[SUP]2[/SUP], Vos J[SUP]1[/SUP], Spijker R[SUP]3[/SUP], de Jong MD[SUP]4[/SUP], Wolthers KC[SUP]4[/SUP], Pajkrt D[SUP]1[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h]
[h=3]Abstract[/h] Rapid diagnosis of respiratory virus infections contributes to patient care. This systematic review evaluates the diagnostic accuracy of rapid tests for the detection of respiratory viruses. We searched Medline and EMBASE for studies evaluating these tests against PCR as reference standard. 179 studies were included of which 134 evaluated rapid tests for influenza viruses, 32 for RSV, and 13 for other respiratory viruses. We used the bivariate random effects model for quantitative meta-analysis of the results. Most tests detected only influenza viruses or RSV. Summary sensitivity- and specificity-estimates of tests for influenza were 61.1% and 98.9%. For RSV, summary sensitivity was 75.3% and specificity 98.7%. Quality of studies was assessed using the QUADAS-checklist. Because of incomplete reporting, risk of bias was often unclear. Despite their intended use at the point-of-care, 26.3% were evaluated in a laboratory-setting. Although newly developed tests seem more sensitive, high-quality evaluations of these tests are lacking.
? The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
[h=4]KEYWORDS:[/h] Point-of-care test; influenza; meta-analysis; rapid test; respiratory syncytial virus; respiratory tract infection; respiratory virus
PMID: 28520858 DOI: 10.1093/cid/cix461