· A wide range of tests are available for detection of viral RNA as well as serological and immunoassays for antibodies developed due to exposure to SARS CoV-2 in infected persons. Despite the emerging research, information about clinical validity of tests is limited.
· Multiple factors affect test performance including the nature of the specific test, type of specimen and its quality, severity and duration of illness at the time of testing. These individual variations hamper assessment of diagnostic accuracy and suggest that a combination of tests on multiple types of specimens at serial time points might be needed to confirm a COVID 19 diagnosis.
· Point of care tests are desirable and needed to scale up testing in low resource settings; however, tests are of variable quality and more research is needed before they can be relied on for clinical decision making.
Notes
No search conducted by SHA librarians. Search Alerts set up.
Williams-Roberts, H; Waldener, C. What is the accuracy of diagnostic tests for COVID-19 detection? 2020 May 12; Document no.: EPM051201 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. (CEST rapid review report)
The overall ‘clinical’ false negative rate (1 – sensitivity) of rt-PCR in the detection of SAR-CoV-2 in the respiratory tract is estimated to be 30%, although estimates vary from 3.5 – 50%. This rate is higher when the technique of clinical sampling is poor, higher in nasopharyngeal and oral swabs than lower respiratory tract secretions, and higher early in the course of disease (prior to symptom development) and following the first week of symptoms.
The performance of the rt-PCR test can be maximized by:
1. Timing and collecting specimens in the optimal manner
2. Applying the test in those individuals with a high pre-test probability of having COVID-19; this includes individuals living in communities with a high prevalence of disease, those with an epidemiological history linking them to a confirmed case, and those with symptoms associated with COVID-19, potentially identified with the aid of a clinical prediction rule
3. Serial testing with a repeat rt-PCR test after a specific interval such as 24-48 hours
4. In the clinical setting, the additional assessment of blood biomarkers, IgM/IgG serology and chest CT scan
These considerations apply to the decision to conduct initial rt-PCR testing as well as to the decision to re-test individuals with an initial negative result.
Badea, A; Reeder, B; Young, C; Dalidowicz, M; Miller, L. What factors can be used to identify negative PCR tests that are ‘false negatives’? 2020 May 25; Document no.: EOC052101 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 12 p. (CEST rapid review report)
· Diagnostic accuracy of tests for SARS CoV-2 varies based on the type of test, target antigen, type of sample and time of testing.
· There is heterogeneity in clinical performance of rapid antigen tests; however, clinical sensitivity is lower than amplification-based assays.
· Information is limited about test strategies that combine multiple approaches (e.g. molecular and serological methods) but may add value by increasing sensitivity and specificity.
Williams-Roberts, H; Waldner, C; Dalidowicz, M; Howell-Spooner, B. What is the accuracy of diagnostic tests for the detection of SARS-CoV-2? 2020 Jul 23; Document no.: EPM072101 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 13 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Several references provide estimates of the proportion of HCW infected with SARS-CoV2 that range from 0.9% -20%. A recent review from Alberta Health Services that examined the COVID-19 rt-PCR test results among HCW indicates that in that province 2.4% of physicians and 0.9% of non-MD HCW who were tested were positive for SARS-CoV-2 compared to 3.5% of the general population.
In the studies reviewed, the majority of cases are confirmed by RT-PCR, while only one reference also used serology testing.
Vanstone, J; Reeder, B; Duncan, V; Howell-Spooner, B. What proportion of healthcare workers are rt-PCR positive and IgM or IgG positive? 2020 Jun 2; Document no.: LAB040802v3 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 10 p. (CEST rapid review report)
