Jackie Boxer, Sarah Weddell, David Broomhead, C. Hogg, Sarah Johnson
{"title":"Home pregnancy tests in the hands of the intended user","authors":"Jackie Boxer, Sarah Weddell, David Broomhead, C. Hogg, Sarah Johnson","doi":"10.1080/15321819.2019.1671861","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The objectives of this study were to investigate the usability and performance of seven visual home pregnancy tests, available in Europe. Part one of the study was home-based and involved volunteers testing a selection of four home pregnancy tests. The tests used and order of use were randomized. Part two, performed at a study site, involved volunteers reading and interpreting the results of the same selection of home pregnancy tests used in part one, but using urine standards representing early pregnancy (25 mIU/mL human chorionic gonadotropin) or a ‘not pregnant’ (0 mIU/mL human chorionic gonadotropin) sample. The volunteers completed a questionnaire after each test in both parts. Three of the seven tests met their accuracy/reliability claims: tests A (99.8%), B (100%), and F (97.6%) (not statistically different from the claimed 99% accuracy). The remaining four tests had accuracies/reliabilities of <99% at 81.6% (C), 89.0% (E), 92.5% (D), and 95.9% (G), respectively. Test A was the highest-rated test for each attribute tested in both settings. Test D was ranked the lowest in part one and test C was ranked lowest overall for part two. Home pregnancy tests vary in performance and usability, therefore requiring better standardization and performance evaluation in Europe. Clinical Trials Reference Number: NCT03589534","PeriodicalId":15987,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Immunoassay and Immunochemistry","volume":"6 1","pages":"642 - 652"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Immunoassay and Immunochemistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15321819.2019.1671861","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7
Abstract
ABSTRACT The objectives of this study were to investigate the usability and performance of seven visual home pregnancy tests, available in Europe. Part one of the study was home-based and involved volunteers testing a selection of four home pregnancy tests. The tests used and order of use were randomized. Part two, performed at a study site, involved volunteers reading and interpreting the results of the same selection of home pregnancy tests used in part one, but using urine standards representing early pregnancy (25 mIU/mL human chorionic gonadotropin) or a ‘not pregnant’ (0 mIU/mL human chorionic gonadotropin) sample. The volunteers completed a questionnaire after each test in both parts. Three of the seven tests met their accuracy/reliability claims: tests A (99.8%), B (100%), and F (97.6%) (not statistically different from the claimed 99% accuracy). The remaining four tests had accuracies/reliabilities of <99% at 81.6% (C), 89.0% (E), 92.5% (D), and 95.9% (G), respectively. Test A was the highest-rated test for each attribute tested in both settings. Test D was ranked the lowest in part one and test C was ranked lowest overall for part two. Home pregnancy tests vary in performance and usability, therefore requiring better standardization and performance evaluation in Europe. Clinical Trials Reference Number: NCT03589534