Assessment of the utility of a screening tool for COVID-19 diagnosis in an accident and emergency department in Lagos, Nigeria: A pilot study

IF 0.8 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Nigerian Postgraduate Medical Journal Pub Date : 2022-04-01 DOI:10.4103/npmj.npmj_779_21
E. Otrofanowei, I. Akase, B. Olopade, P. Akintan, U. Ima-Edomwonyi, Y. Akinbolagbe, O. Agabi, Danladi Nmadu, G. Akinbode, A. Opawoye, C. Olasope, A. Ogundare, B. Bolarinwa, Oluwakemi Awojumobi-Otokiti, P. Enajeroh, M. Karami, C. Esezobor, G. Olorunfemi, Y. Oshodi, A. Oluwole, W. Adeyemo, C. Bode
{"title":"Assessment of the utility of a screening tool for COVID-19 diagnosis in an accident and emergency department in Lagos, Nigeria: A pilot study","authors":"E. Otrofanowei, I. Akase, B. Olopade, P. Akintan, U. Ima-Edomwonyi, Y. Akinbolagbe, O. Agabi, Danladi Nmadu, G. Akinbode, A. Opawoye, C. Olasope, A. Ogundare, B. Bolarinwa, Oluwakemi Awojumobi-Otokiti, P. Enajeroh, M. Karami, C. Esezobor, G. Olorunfemi, Y. Oshodi, A. Oluwole, W. Adeyemo, C. Bode","doi":"10.4103/npmj.npmj_779_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The use of reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is the gold standard laboratory test for diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, it has the disadvantage of a long turnaround time and cost. The Nigeria Centre for Disease Control (NCDC) formulated a case definition for COVID-19. We sought to determine the utility of a 14-item, point-weighted clinical screening questionnaire adapted from the NCDC case definition in identifying patients more likely to have the disease. This was to aid prompt clinical decision-making. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the data of 113 non-surgical patients presenting to the Accident and Emergency Department (A and E) of Lagos University Teaching Hospital, Lagos, Nigeria. Patients were stratified based on screening scores into low (0–2), moderate (3–5) and high (6) pre-test categories. Patients with low and high scores ≥6 were admitted to the A and E and the COVID-19 holding ward, respectively, while the moderate group had chest computed tomography scans to aid further decision-making, pending the outcome of their RT-PCR results. The validity of the triage score as compared to the RT-PCR test result was calculated and the kappa score of agreement was utilised to evaluate the concordance between two triage scores. The optimum cut-off score was also obtained based on the maximal Younden's index. Results: The frequencies of low, moderate and high pre-test scores were 34 (30%), 43 (38.1%) and 36 (31.9%), respectively. Overall, 38.1% (43/113) were RT-PCR positive. RT-PCR was positive in 26.5% (9/34) with low screening scores, 55.8% (24/43) with moderate scores and 27.8% (10/36) with high scores. The sensitivity and specificity of a high score of 6 were 25% and 92.86%, while the lower score of 3 had sensitivity and specificity of 62.5% and 58.6%, respectively. Conclusion: The screening tool showed a high specificity in its initial design, which suggests that anyone with a low score using this tool has a high probability of testing negative. We recommend a cut-off score of 4 (score A) or 6 (score B) of the current screening tool be used to increase the chances of identifying persons with COVID-19 for RT-PCR testing.","PeriodicalId":19720,"journal":{"name":"Nigerian Postgraduate Medical Journal","volume":"29 1","pages":"96 - 101"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nigerian Postgraduate Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/npmj.npmj_779_21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The use of reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is the gold standard laboratory test for diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, it has the disadvantage of a long turnaround time and cost. The Nigeria Centre for Disease Control (NCDC) formulated a case definition for COVID-19. We sought to determine the utility of a 14-item, point-weighted clinical screening questionnaire adapted from the NCDC case definition in identifying patients more likely to have the disease. This was to aid prompt clinical decision-making. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the data of 113 non-surgical patients presenting to the Accident and Emergency Department (A and E) of Lagos University Teaching Hospital, Lagos, Nigeria. Patients were stratified based on screening scores into low (0–2), moderate (3–5) and high (6) pre-test categories. Patients with low and high scores ≥6 were admitted to the A and E and the COVID-19 holding ward, respectively, while the moderate group had chest computed tomography scans to aid further decision-making, pending the outcome of their RT-PCR results. The validity of the triage score as compared to the RT-PCR test result was calculated and the kappa score of agreement was utilised to evaluate the concordance between two triage scores. The optimum cut-off score was also obtained based on the maximal Younden's index. Results: The frequencies of low, moderate and high pre-test scores were 34 (30%), 43 (38.1%) and 36 (31.9%), respectively. Overall, 38.1% (43/113) were RT-PCR positive. RT-PCR was positive in 26.5% (9/34) with low screening scores, 55.8% (24/43) with moderate scores and 27.8% (10/36) with high scores. The sensitivity and specificity of a high score of 6 were 25% and 92.86%, while the lower score of 3 had sensitivity and specificity of 62.5% and 58.6%, respectively. Conclusion: The screening tool showed a high specificity in its initial design, which suggests that anyone with a low score using this tool has a high probability of testing negative. We recommend a cut-off score of 4 (score A) or 6 (score B) of the current screening tool be used to increase the chances of identifying persons with COVID-19 for RT-PCR testing.
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
评估尼日利亚拉各斯事故和急诊科COVID-19诊断筛查工具的效用:一项试点研究
逆转录聚合酶链反应(RT-PCR)是诊断SARS-CoV-2感染的金标准实验室检测方法。然而,它的缺点是周转时间长,成本高。尼日利亚疾病控制中心(NCDC)制定了COVID-19病例定义。我们试图确定从NCDC病例定义改编的14项点加权临床筛查问卷在识别更可能患有该疾病的患者中的效用。这是为了帮助快速的临床决策。方法:回顾性分析尼日利亚拉各斯大学教学医院急诊科(A和E)收治的113例非手术患者的资料。根据筛查得分将患者分为低(0-2)、中(3-5)和高(6)预试类别。评分≥6分的低分和高分患者分别入住A、E和COVID-19监护病房,中等评分组接受胸部计算机断层扫描,以帮助进一步决策,等待RT-PCR结果。计算分诊评分与RT-PCR检测结果的效度,并使用一致性kappa评分来评估两个分诊评分之间的一致性。并根据最大Younden's指数得到最佳分值。结果:前测低、中、高分别为34例(30%)、43例(38.1%)、36例(31.9%)。总体上,38.1%(43/113)为RT-PCR阳性。低评分组阳性占26.5%(9/34),中等评分组阳性占55.8%(24/43),高评分组阳性占27.8%(10/36)。高分6分的敏感性和特异性分别为25%和92.86%,低分3分的敏感性和特异性分别为62.5%和58.6%。结论:筛选工具在最初的设计中显示出很高的特异性,这表明任何使用该工具得分低的人都有很高的阴性概率。我们建议使用当前筛查工具的临界值为4分(a分)或6分(B分),以增加在RT-PCR检测中识别COVID-19患者的机会。
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
Nigerian Postgraduate Medical Journal
Nigerian Postgraduate Medical Journal MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
52
期刊最新文献
An Exploratory Case-Control Study for Mitochondrial DNA G10398A in Bipolar I Disorder Patients with a Family History of Affective Disorders. Comparison of the Ultrasonography Features of the Breast in Women with Fibroadenoma and Those with Other Breast Lumps. Determination of Anterior Fontanelle Size among Apparently Healthy Term Newborns in North Central Nigeria. Exploring the Effect of Exercise versus Metformin on Insulin Resistance amongst Nigerians with Pre-diabetes: A Randomised Controlled Trial. Factors Associated with the Outcome of 2023 Diphtheria Outbreak in Jigawa State, Nigeria: A Retrospective Review of the Surveillance Data.
×
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