The role of rapid diagnostic point of care IgG/IgM antibody tests in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection
Journal of Respiratory Infections, Vol: 4, Issue: 1
2020
- 303Usage
- 3Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage303
- Downloads244
- Abstract Views59
- Captures3
- Readers3
Article Description
Background: Current testing of symptomatic patients for SARS-CoV-2 involves the use of nucleic acid amplification tests, also known as genetic, RNA, or polymerase chain reaction (PCR), to detect viral RNA. The initial use of point of care (POC) antibody tests, also known as serological tests, in the management of SARS-CoV-2 infection was limited. In this review, we determine the significance of POC antibody serological tests and explore their possible role in the diagnosis and management of patients infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus.Methods: A literature search was conducted in Google Scholar, PubMed, and Embase, supplemented by searching the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) websites. We identified seven articles published in the last six months pertaining to our search. The sensitivity and specificity statistics of IgG/IgM antibody tests obtained from these studies were compared and used to determine the clinical importance of rapid diagnostic antibody tests for SARS-CoV-2.Results: Through the literature review, it was found that POC diagnostic antibody tests can be used as an adjuvant with nucleic acid amplification tests in determining both active and post-exposure antibodies. These rapid antibody IgG/IgM tests had high sensitivity—the ability of a test to correctly identify those with the disease—and high specificity, the ability of a test to correctly identify those without the disease.Conclusion: Emerging studies indicate the importance of POC antibody serological testing as a diagnostic tool in the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Considering the limitations of the molecular methods of testing, POC antibody tests can help reduce dependency on molecular assays when used in conjunction with them.
Bibliographic Details
University of Louisville - DC Journals
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know