Follow-up COVID-19 PCR result up to day 5 with clinical features predicts positivity for inconclusive results

IF 1.6 Q4 INFECTIOUS DISEASES Journal of clinical virology plus Pub Date : 2022-08-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jcvp.2022.100100
Sung‐Soo Park , Duck‐Jin Hong , Katrine K Gatchalian , Hye-Young Oh
{"title":"Follow-up COVID-19 PCR result up to day 5 with clinical features predicts positivity for inconclusive results","authors":"Sung‐Soo Park ,&nbsp;Duck‐Jin Hong ,&nbsp;Katrine K Gatchalian ,&nbsp;Hye-Young Oh","doi":"10.1016/j.jcvp.2022.100100","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>False-positive inconclusive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) results against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 were not low and have potentially harmful effects. We aimed to find parameters to differentiate positive cases from false-positive ones, and suggest an optimal scheme and follow-up period for inconclusive results.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Cases with inconclusive PCR tests among healthcare personnel from February 2020 to June 2021 were classified as confirmed positive, clinically positive, and clinically negative groups, which were compared. The diagnostic accuracy of follow-up tests and composites of clinical and laboratory data were analyzed.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Symptoms, contact history, and lower cycle threshold of the N gene were more common in the COVID-19 positive group. The scoring schemes combining symptom and contact history with follow-up PCR results had higher sensitivities than the PCR tests only modality. Follow-up tests up to 5 days combined with symptoms and contact history could discriminate between positive and negative cases.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>A follow-up PCR test up to day 5 with clinical features might predict positivity and shorten the quarantine period in most healthcare personnel.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":73673,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical virology plus","volume":"2 3","pages":"Article 100100"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9308491/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical virology plus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667038022000394","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

False-positive inconclusive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) results against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 were not low and have potentially harmful effects. We aimed to find parameters to differentiate positive cases from false-positive ones, and suggest an optimal scheme and follow-up period for inconclusive results.

Methods

Cases with inconclusive PCR tests among healthcare personnel from February 2020 to June 2021 were classified as confirmed positive, clinically positive, and clinically negative groups, which were compared. The diagnostic accuracy of follow-up tests and composites of clinical and laboratory data were analyzed.

Results

Symptoms, contact history, and lower cycle threshold of the N gene were more common in the COVID-19 positive group. The scoring schemes combining symptom and contact history with follow-up PCR results had higher sensitivities than the PCR tests only modality. Follow-up tests up to 5 days combined with symptoms and contact history could discriminate between positive and negative cases.

Conclusion

A follow-up PCR test up to day 5 with clinical features might predict positivity and shorten the quarantine period in most healthcare personnel.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
随访至第5天的COVID-19 PCR结果与临床特征预测阳性,结果不确定
对严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2型的聚合酶链反应(PCR)假阳性不确定结果不低,具有潜在的有害影响。我们的目的是找到区分阳性病例和假阳性病例的参数,并为不确定的结果提出最佳方案和随访时间。方法将2020年2月至2021年6月卫生保健人员PCR检测结果不确定的病例分为确诊阳性、临床阳性和临床阴性三组,进行比较。分析了随访检查及临床和实验室资料综合诊断的准确性。结果COVID-19阳性组的症状、接触史和N基因低周期阈值更为常见。症状、接触史与随访PCR结果相结合的评分方案的敏感性高于单纯PCR检测的评分方案。长达5天的随访检测结合症状和接触史可区分阳性和阴性病例。结论对大多数医务人员进行随访至第5天具有临床特征的PCR检测可预测阳性,缩短隔离时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of clinical virology plus
Journal of clinical virology plus Infectious Diseases
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
66 days
期刊最新文献
Performance evaluation of the Qiagen BK virus ASR on the NeuMoDx system Environmental surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 for outbreak detection in hospital: A single centre prospective study Correlation of cytokine storm with ocular fundus abnormalities in critically ill patients with severe viral pneumonia A prospective study to evaluate the clinical specificity of the cobas® MPX test kit for screening for HIV RNA, HCV RNA, and HBV DNA in blood donation samples using the cobas® 6800 system in HBV endemic areas A rapid review of the epidemiology and combating strategies of hepatitis C virus infection in Ghana
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1