Search

Background We aimed to review the evidence from studies relating severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) culture with the results of reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and other variables that may influence the interpretation of the test, such as time from symptom onset. Methods We searched LitCovid, medRxiv, Google Scholar, and the World Health Organization coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) database for COVID-19 up to 10 September 2020. We included studies attempting to culture or observe SARS-CoV-2 in specimens with RT-PCR positivity. Studies were dual-extracted and the data summarized narratively by specimen type. Where necessary, we contacted corresponding authors of included papers for additional information. We assessed quality using a modified Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS 2) risk-of-bias tool. Results We included 29 studies reporting attempts at culturing, or observing tissue infection by, SARS-CoV-2 in sputum, nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal, urine, stool, blood, and environmental specimens. The quality of the studies was moderate with lack of standardized reporting. The data suggest a relationship between the time from onset of symptom to the timing of the specimen test, cycle threshold (Ct), and symptom severity. Twelve studies reported that Ct values were significantly lower and log copies higher in specimens producing live virus culture. Two studies reported that the odds of live virus culture were reduced by approximately 33% for every 1-unit increase in Ct. Six of 8 studies reported detectable RNA for >14 days, but infectious potential declined after day 8 even among cases with ongoing high viral loads. Four studies reported viral culture from stool specimens. Conclusions Complete live viruses are necessary for transmission, not the fragments identified by PCR. Prospective routine testing of reference and culture specimens and their relationship to symptoms, signs, and patient co-factors should be used to define the reliability of PCR for assessing infectious potential. Those with high Ct are unlikely to have infectious potential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article explores rapid identification of infected individuals in the early stages of an outbreak in order to isolate and prevent further transmission is of utmost importance. Public health responses utilized to accomplish this goal include identification and isolation of infected individuals based on symptom presentation then monitoring of contacts for symptoms before proceeding with further isolation.

Background: The epidemiology and clinical manifestation of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the pediatric population is different from the adult population. The purpose of this study is to identify effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on laboratory test utilization in a pediatric hospital. Methods: We performed retrospective analysis on test utilization data from Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago, an academic pediatric medical center. Data between two 100-day periods prior to (prepandemic) and during the pandemic (mid-pandemic) were analyzed to evaluate changes in test volume, lab utilization, and test positivity rate. We also evaluated these metrics based on in- vs outpatient testing and performed modeling to determine what variables significantly impact the test positivity rate. Results: During the pandemic period, there was an expected surge in COVID-19 testing, while over 84% of lab tests studied decreased in ordering volume. The average number of tests ordered per patient was not significantly different during the pandemic for any of the laboratories (adjusted P value > 0.05). Thirty-three studied tests showed significant change in positivity rate during the pandemic. Linear modeling revealed test volume and inpatient status as the key variables associated with change in test positivity rate. Conclusions: Excluding severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 tests, the COVID-19 pandemic has generally led to decreased test ordering volume and laboratory utilization. However, at this pediatric hospital, the average number of tests performed per patient and test positivity rates were comparable between pre- and mid-pandemic periods. These results suggest that, overall, clinical test utilization at this site remained consistent during the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests have great potential to help combat the COVID-19 pandemic. In the performance of a rapid, antigen-based SARS-CoV-2 test (RAT), our study had 3 main objectives: to determine the accuracy of nasal swabs, the accuracy of using nasopharyngeal swabs for nasal collection (nasalNP), and the effectiveness of using residual extraction buffer for real-time reverse-transcriptase PCR (RT–PCR) confirmation of positive RAT (rPan). Methods: Symptomatic adults recently diagnosed with COVID-19 in the community were recruited into the study. Nasal samples were collected using either a nasalNP or nasal swab and tested immediately with the RAT in the individual's home by a health care provider. 500 µL of universal transport media was added to the residual extraction buffer after testing and sent to the laboratory for SARS-CoV-2 testing using RT–PCR. Parallel throat swabs tested with RT–PCR were used as the reference comparators. Results: One hundred and fifty-five individuals were included in the study (99 nasal swabs, 56 nasalNP). Sensitivities of nasal samples tested on the RAT using either nasal or nasalNP were 89.0% [95% confidence interval (CI) 80.7%–94.6%] and 90.2% (95% CI 78.6%–96.7%), respectively. rPan positivity agreement compared to throat RT–PCR was 96.2%. Conclusions: RAT reliably detect SARS-CoV-2 from symptomatic adults in the community presenting within 7 days of symptom onset using nasal swabs or nasalNP. High agreement with rPan can avoid the need for collecting a second swab for RT–PCR confirmation or testing of variants of concern from positive RAT in this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Care homes have been severely affected by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Rapid antigen testing could identify most SARS-CoV-2 infected staff and visitors before they enter homes. We explored implementation of staff and visitor testing protocols using lateral flow devices (LFDs). Methods An evaluation of a SARS-CoV-2 LFD-based testing protocol in 11 care homes in Liverpool, UK, including staff and visitor testing, plus a qualitative exploratory study in nine of these homes. The proportion of pilot homes with outbreaks, and outbreak size, were compared to non-pilot homes in Liverpool. Adherence to testing protocols was evaluated. Fifteen staff were interviewed, and transcript data were thematically coded using an iterative analysis to identify and categorize factors influencing testing implementation. Results In total, 1,638 LFD rapid tests were performed on 407 staff. Protocol adherence was poor with 8.6% of staff achieving >75% protocol adherence, and 25.3% achieving |$\ge$| 50%. Six care homes had outbreaks during the study. Compared to non-pilot care homes, there was no evidence of significant difference in the proportion of homes with outbreaks, or the size of outbreaks. Qualitative data showed difficulty implementing testing strategies due to excessive work burden. Factors influencing adherence related to test integration and procedural factors, socio-economic factors, cognitive overload and the emotional value of testing. Conclusion Implementation of staff and visitor care home LFD testing protocols was poorly adhered to and consequently did not reduce the number or scale of COVID-19 outbreaks. More focus is needed on the contextual and behavioural factors that influence protocol adherence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]