Selected article for: "detection limit and high throughput"

Author: Olearo, Flaminia; Nörz, Dominik; Hoffman, Armin; Grunwald, Moritz; Gatzemeyer, Kimani; Christner, Martin; Both, Anna; Campos, Cristina Elena Belmar; Braun, Platon; Andersen, Gabriele; Pfefferle, Susanne; Zapf, Antonia; Aepfelbacher, Martin; Knobloch, Johannes K.M.; Lütgehetmann, Marc
Title: Clinical performance and accuracy of a qPCR-based SARS-CoV-2 mass-screening workflow for healthcare-worker surveillance using pooled self-sampled gargling solutions: a cross-sectional study
  • Cord-id: 8h3ibufj
  • Document date: 2021_9_6
  • ID: 8h3ibufj
    Snippet: INTRODUCTION: The large number of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections necessitates general screening of employees. We evaluate the performance of a SARS-CoV-2 screening program in asymptomatic healthcare-workers (HCW), utilizing self-sampled gargling-solution and sample pooling for RT-qPCR. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional retrospective study to collect real-life data on the performance of a screening-workflow based on automated-pooling and high-throughput qPCR testing over a 3-month-perio
    Document: INTRODUCTION: The large number of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections necessitates general screening of employees. We evaluate the performance of a SARS-CoV-2 screening program in asymptomatic healthcare-workers (HCW), utilizing self-sampled gargling-solution and sample pooling for RT-qPCR. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional retrospective study to collect real-life data on the performance of a screening-workflow based on automated-pooling and high-throughput qPCR testing over a 3-month-period at the University Hospital Hamburg. RESULTS: Matrix validation reveals that lower limit of detection for SARS-CoV-2 RNA in gargling-solution was 180 copies/mL (5-sample-pool). A total of 55,122 self-collected gargle samples (=7,513 HCWs) was analyzed. The median time to result was 8.5 hours (IQR 7.2-10.8). Of 11,192 pools analyzed, 11,041 (98.7%) were negative, 69 (0.6%) were positive and 82 (0.7%) were invalid. Individual testing of pool participants revealed 57 SARS-CoV-2 previously unrecognized infections. All 57 HCWs were either pre-symptomatic or asymptomatic (prevalence 0.76%,CI95%0.58-0.98%). Accuracy based on HCWs with gargle-solution and NP-swab available within 3-day-interval (N=521) was 99.5% (CI95%98.3-99.9%), sensitivity 88.9% (CI95%65.3-98.6%) while specificity 99.8% (CI95%98.9-99.9). CONCLUSION: This workflow was highly effective in identifying SARS-CoV-2 positive HCWs, thereby lowering the potential of inter-HCW and HCW-patient transmissions. Automated-sample-pooling helped to conserve qPCR reagents and represents a promising alternative strategy to antigen testing in mass-screening programs.

    Search related documents:
    Co phrase search for related documents
    • accuracy analysis and low sensitivity: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6