%0 Journal Article %1 RN50 %A Gallardo-Alfaro, L. %A Lorente-Montalvo, P. %A Cañellas, M. %A Carandell, E. %A Oliver, A. %A Rojo, E. %A Riera, B. %A Llobera, J. %A Bulilete, O. %D 2023 %J BMC Pediatr %K grapp-caib %N 1 %P 433 %R 10.1186/s12887-023-04201-z %T Diagnostic accuracy of Panbio™ rapid antigen test for SARS-CoV-2 in paediatric population %V 23 %X BACKGROUND: Rapid antigen-detection tests (Ag-RDTs) are used to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infection. Real-world studies of Ag-RDTs are necessary to evaluate their diagnostic yield in paediatric patients. Our aim was to evaluate the accuracy of the Panbio™ Rapid Antigen Test for SARS-CoV-2 in the setting of a primary health care centre (PHC), with use of the Reverse Transcription-Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) as gold standard. METHODS: This prospective diagnostic study was conducted at PHCs in Mallorca, Spain. Patients were ≤ 18 years-old that attended sites for RT-PCR testing due to symptoms suggestive of infection (fever, headache, nasal congestion and dry cough, among others) or epidemiological exposure (close contacts). Two samples were collected: a nasal mid-turbinate sample for Ag-RDTs and a nasopharyngeal swab for RT-PCR testing. The sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of the AgRDT were calculated using the RT-PCR results as the reference. RESULTS: We examined 1142 participants from 0 to 18 years (47.5% female, mean age 8.9 ± 4.8 years, median 9.0 5.0-13.0). There were 84 positive RT-PCR results (pre-test probability of 7.3%) and 52 positive Ag-RDT results. The sensitivity of the Ag-RDT was 59.5% (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 48.2-69.9%), the specificity was 99.8% (95%CI: 99.2-99.9%), the positive predictive value was 96.1% (95%CI: 85.6-99.4%), and the negative predictive value was 96.8% (95%CI: 95.6-97.7%). The sensitivity for individuals referred by a general practitioner (GP) or paediatrician due to symptoms was 71.4% (95%CI: 51.5-86.0%) and for asymptomatic individuals was 50.0% (95%CI: 9.1-90.8%). The specificity was greater than 98.9% overall and in all subgroups. The sensitivity was 73.0% (95%CI: 52.0-87.5%) for referred patients due to symptoms and who were tested within 5 days since symptom onset. No significant statistical differences between any groups were found. There were 34 false-negative Ag-RDT results (40.5%) and 2 false-positive Ag-RDT results (0.2%). CONCLUSION: The sensitivity of the Panbio™ Test in paediatric individuals is below the minimum of 80% recommended by the World Health Organization for Ag-RDTs. This test had better accuracy in individuals referred by a GP or paediatrician due to symptoms, rather than those who were asymptomatic or referred due to epidemiological exposure. The RT-PCR test using a nasopharyngeal swab is accurate, but a less invasive alternative that has better sensitivity than the Panbio™ Test is needed for paediatric populations.

@article{RN50, abstract = {BACKGROUND: Rapid antigen-detection tests (Ag-RDTs) are used to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infection. Real-world studies of Ag-RDTs are necessary to evaluate their diagnostic yield in paediatric patients. Our aim was to evaluate the accuracy of the Panbio™ Rapid Antigen Test for SARS-CoV-2 in the setting of a primary health care centre (PHC), with use of the Reverse Transcription-Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) as gold standard. METHODS: This prospective diagnostic study was conducted at PHCs in Mallorca, Spain. Patients were ≤ 18 years-old that attended sites for RT-PCR testing due to symptoms suggestive of infection (fever, headache, nasal congestion and dry cough, among others) or epidemiological exposure (close contacts). Two samples were collected: a nasal mid-turbinate sample for Ag-RDTs and a nasopharyngeal swab for RT-PCR testing. The sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of the AgRDT were calculated using the RT-PCR results as the reference. RESULTS: We examined 1142 participants from 0 to 18 years (47.5% female, mean age 8.9 ± 4.8 years, median 9.0 [5.0-13.0]). There were 84 positive RT-PCR results (pre-test probability of 7.3%) and 52 positive Ag-RDT results. The sensitivity of the Ag-RDT was 59.5% (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 48.2-69.9%), the specificity was 99.8% (95%CI: 99.2-99.9%), the positive predictive value was 96.1% (95%CI: 85.6-99.4%), and the negative predictive value was 96.8% (95%CI: 95.6-97.7%). The sensitivity for individuals referred by a general practitioner (GP) or paediatrician due to symptoms was 71.4% (95%CI: 51.5-86.0%) and for asymptomatic individuals was 50.0% (95%CI: 9.1-90.8%). The specificity was greater than 98.9% overall and in all subgroups. The sensitivity was 73.0% (95%CI: 52.0-87.5%) for referred patients due to symptoms and who were tested within 5 days since symptom onset. No significant statistical differences between any groups were found. There were 34 false-negative Ag-RDT results (40.5%) and 2 false-positive Ag-RDT results (0.2%). CONCLUSION: The sensitivity of the Panbio™ Test in paediatric individuals is below the minimum of 80% recommended by the World Health Organization for Ag-RDTs. This test had better accuracy in individuals referred by a GP or paediatrician due to symptoms, rather than those who were asymptomatic or referred due to epidemiological exposure. The RT-PCR test using a nasopharyngeal swab is accurate, but a less invasive alternative that has better sensitivity than the Panbio™ Test is needed for paediatric populations.}, added-at = {2023-09-04T07:47:04.000+0200}, author = {Gallardo-Alfaro, L. and Lorente-Montalvo, P. and Cañellas, M. and Carandell, E. and Oliver, A. and Rojo, E. and Riera, B. and Llobera, J. and Bulilete, O.}, biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/29e53f607764a0af177e2e66674e008e9/nachoricci}, doi = {10.1186/s12887-023-04201-z}, interhash = {344475db3fdd085def0746d2934255a1}, intrahash = {9e53f607764a0af177e2e66674e008e9}, issn = {1471-2431}, journal = {BMC Pediatr}, keywords = {grapp-caib}, number = 1, pages = 433, timestamp = {2023-09-04T07:47:04.000+0200}, title = {Diagnostic accuracy of Panbio™ rapid antigen test for SARS-CoV-2 in paediatric population}, type = {Journal Article}, volume = 23, year = 2023 }