Added value of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing in a Flemish nursing home during an acute COVID-19 outbreak in April 2020
Objectives To examine the added value of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing in a nursing home during an acute COVID-19 outbreak. RT-PCR is the gold standard, but can be false-negative. Methods 119 residents and 93 staff members were tested with RT-PCR test and/or a rapid IgM/IgG test. Of these participants, 176 had both tests, 24 only RT-PCR, and 12 only IgM/IgG in the period April 14 to 16 April 2020. Results 40 (34%) residents and 11 (13%) staff were PCR-positive. Using a rapid IgM/IgG test, 17 (17%) residents and 18 (20%) staff were positive for IgM and/or IgG (IgM/IgG). Thirty-two PCR-positi... Mehr ...
Verfasser: | |
---|---|
Dokumenttyp: | Artikel |
Erscheinungsdatum: | 2022 |
Reihe/Periodikum: | Buntinx , F , Claes , P , Gulikers , M , Verbakel , J , Jan , D L , Van der Elst , M , Van Elslande , J , Van Ranst , M & Vernneersch , P 2022 , ' Added value of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing in a Flemish nursing home during an acute COVID-19 outbreak in April 2020 ' , Acta Clinica Belgica , vol. 77 , no. 2 , pp. 295-300 . https://doi.org/10.1080/17843286.2020.1834285 |
Schlagwörter: | COVID-19 / disease outbreaks / immunoassay / point-of-care testing / sensitivity and specificity |
Sprache: | Englisch |
Permalink: | https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-26703898 |
Datenquelle: | BASE; Originalkatalog |
Powered By: | BASE |
Link(s) : | https://cris.maastrichtuniversity.nl/en/publications/e5cb79ed-3cb5-43b3-9da1-6aad37ce957d |
Objectives To examine the added value of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing in a nursing home during an acute COVID-19 outbreak. RT-PCR is the gold standard, but can be false-negative. Methods 119 residents and 93 staff members were tested with RT-PCR test and/or a rapid IgM/IgG test. Of these participants, 176 had both tests, 24 only RT-PCR, and 12 only IgM/IgG in the period April 14 to 16 April 2020. Results 40 (34%) residents and 11 (13%) staff were PCR-positive. Using a rapid IgM/IgG test, 17 (17%) residents and 18 (20%) staff were positive for IgM and/or IgG (IgM/IgG). Thirty-two PCR-positive residents had an IgM/IgG test: 9 (28%), 11 (34%), and 13 (41%) were positive for IgM, IgG, and IgM/IgG. Ten PCR-positive staff had an IgM/IgG test: 3 (30%), 6 (60%), and 6 (60%) were positive for IgM, IgG, and IgM/IgG. Additional IgM/IgG tests were performed in 9 residents 11 to 14 days after the positive RT-PCR test. Of those, 7 (78%) tested positive for IgM/IgG. When retested 3 weeks later, the 2 remaining residents also tested positive. Of the 134 PCR-negative participants who had an IgM/IgG test, 15 were positive for IgM/IgG (8% of the 200 participants tested with RT-PCR). Conclusions During an acute outbreak in a nursing home, 26% of residents and staff were PCR-positive. An additional 8% was diagnosed using IgM/IgG antibody testing. The use of RT-PCR alone as the sole diagnostic method for surveillance during an acute outbreak is insufficient to grab the full extent of the outbreak.