在 SARS-CoV-2 爆发期间,对第一反应人员进行快速血清学检测和实验室血清学检测的比较:这两种检测是否可以互换?

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q4 MICROBIOLOGY New Microbiologica Pub Date : 2024-11-01
Simone Murganti, Edoardo Cavalieri d'Oro, Matteo Villa, Antonio Papagni, Andrea Malizia
{"title":"在 SARS-CoV-2 爆发期间,对第一反应人员进行快速血清学检测和实验室血清学检测的比较:这两种检测是否可以互换?","authors":"Simone Murganti, Edoardo Cavalieri d'Oro, Matteo Villa, Antonio Papagni, Andrea Malizia","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The SARS-CoV-2 virus appeared and was discovered in the year 2019, marking its significance. The spread of the virus also had serious consequences for national safety; members of the Police and Fire Brigade contracted the infection and therefore the efficiency of their operational activity decreased. Since the beginning of 2020, the biological laboratory of the Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear (CBRN) unit of Milan's Fire Brigade headquarters performed thousands of serological tests to monitor the health of the Fire Brigade and various branches of the Police Forces. The aim of this study is to evaluate the degree of concordance and interchangeability between a lateral flow immunochromatographic assay (LFIA) and an automated laboratory immunoassay with different viral targets by comparing the data gathered from a sample group of firemen and policemen participating in a serological screening campaign. The serological tests used in this study are the LYHER® Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) IgM/IgG Antibody Combo Test Kit and the Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2. The degree of concordance was computed using Cohen's kappa, with a result of 0.78 (CI 95%, 0.661-0.898), which is equivalent to a substantial agreement measured between the two tests. Additionally, the sensitivity of both serological tests was found to be 97%.</p>","PeriodicalId":54723,"journal":{"name":"New Microbiologica","volume":"47 3","pages":"276-285"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison between rapid and laboratory serological tests in the context of the first responders during the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak: are the two tests interchangeable?\",\"authors\":\"Simone Murganti, Edoardo Cavalieri d'Oro, Matteo Villa, Antonio Papagni, Andrea Malizia\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The SARS-CoV-2 virus appeared and was discovered in the year 2019, marking its significance. The spread of the virus also had serious consequences for national safety; members of the Police and Fire Brigade contracted the infection and therefore the efficiency of their operational activity decreased. Since the beginning of 2020, the biological laboratory of the Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear (CBRN) unit of Milan's Fire Brigade headquarters performed thousands of serological tests to monitor the health of the Fire Brigade and various branches of the Police Forces. The aim of this study is to evaluate the degree of concordance and interchangeability between a lateral flow immunochromatographic assay (LFIA) and an automated laboratory immunoassay with different viral targets by comparing the data gathered from a sample group of firemen and policemen participating in a serological screening campaign. The serological tests used in this study are the LYHER® Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) IgM/IgG Antibody Combo Test Kit and the Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2. The degree of concordance was computed using Cohen's kappa, with a result of 0.78 (CI 95%, 0.661-0.898), which is equivalent to a substantial agreement measured between the two tests. Additionally, the sensitivity of both serological tests was found to be 97%.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54723,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New Microbiologica\",\"volume\":\"47 3\",\"pages\":\"276-285\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"New Microbiologica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MICROBIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Microbiologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

SARS-CoV-2 病毒在 2019 年出现并被发现,这标志着它的重要性。病毒的传播也对国家安全造成了严重后果;警察和消防队成员感染了病毒,因此他们的业务活动效率下降。自 2020 年初以来,米兰消防队总部化学、生物、放射、核(CBRN)部门的生物实验室进行了数千次血清学检测,以监测消防队和警察部队各部门的健康状况。本研究的目的是通过比较从参加血清学筛查活动的消防员和警察样本组收集到的数据,评估采用不同病毒目标的侧流免疫层析(LFIA)和自动实验室免疫测定之间的一致性和互换性。本研究中使用的血清学检测方法是 LYHER® 新型冠状病毒(2019-nCoV)IgM/IgG 抗体组合检测试剂盒和 Elecsys® 抗 SARS-CoV-2 检测试剂盒。使用科恩卡帕(Cohen's kappa)计算的吻合度为 0.78(CI 95%,0.661-0.898),这相当于测得两种检测方法的吻合度非常高。此外,两种血清检验的灵敏度均为 97%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison between rapid and laboratory serological tests in the context of the first responders during the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak: are the two tests interchangeable?

The SARS-CoV-2 virus appeared and was discovered in the year 2019, marking its significance. The spread of the virus also had serious consequences for national safety; members of the Police and Fire Brigade contracted the infection and therefore the efficiency of their operational activity decreased. Since the beginning of 2020, the biological laboratory of the Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear (CBRN) unit of Milan's Fire Brigade headquarters performed thousands of serological tests to monitor the health of the Fire Brigade and various branches of the Police Forces. The aim of this study is to evaluate the degree of concordance and interchangeability between a lateral flow immunochromatographic assay (LFIA) and an automated laboratory immunoassay with different viral targets by comparing the data gathered from a sample group of firemen and policemen participating in a serological screening campaign. The serological tests used in this study are the LYHER® Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) IgM/IgG Antibody Combo Test Kit and the Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2. The degree of concordance was computed using Cohen's kappa, with a result of 0.78 (CI 95%, 0.661-0.898), which is equivalent to a substantial agreement measured between the two tests. Additionally, the sensitivity of both serological tests was found to be 97%.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
New Microbiologica
New Microbiologica 生物-微生物学
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
5.60%
发文量
40
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The publication, diffusion and furtherance of research and study on all aspects of basic and clinical Microbiology and related fields are the chief aims of the journal.
期刊最新文献
Analysis of infection indicators and risk factors for influenza A after the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinical Pharmacology of the Single Tablet Regimen Bictegravir/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Alafenamide in the evolving era of antiretroviral therapies. Comparison between rapid and laboratory serological tests in the context of the first responders during the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak: are the two tests interchangeable? Critical insights into the ocular surface microbiome: the need to standardize. Epidemiological characteristics and related risk factors of mixed infection in children with mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia.
×
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