Dataset Information

Acceptability, Usability, and Performance of Lateral Flow Immunoassay Tests for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Antibodies: REACT-2 Study of Self-Testing in Nonhealthcare Key Workers

ABSTRACT: Abstract

Background

Seroprevalence studies are essential to understand the epidemiology of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Various technologies, including laboratory assays and point-of-care self-tests, are available for antibody testing. The interpretation of seroprevalence studies requires comparative data on the performance of antibody tests.

Methods

In June 2020, current and former members of the United Kingdom police forces and fire service performed a self-test lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA), had a nurse-performed LFIA, and provided a venous blood sample for enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). We present the prevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 and the acceptability and usability of self-test LFIAs, and we determine the sensitivity and specificity of LFIAs compared with laboratory ELISA.

Results

In this cohort of 5189 current and former members of the police service and 263 members of the fire service, 7.4% (396 of 5348; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.7–8.1) were antibody positive. Seroprevalence was 8.9% (95% CI, 6.9–11.4) in those under 40 years, 11.5% (95% CI, 8.8–15.0) in those of nonwhite ethnicity, and 7.8% (95% CI, 7.1–8.7) in those currently working. Self-test LFIA had an acceptability of 97.7% and a usability of 90.0%. There was substantial agreement between within-participant LFIA results (kappa 0.80; 95% CI, 0.77–0.83). The LFIAs had a similar performance: compared with ELISA, sensitivity was 82.1% (95% CI, 77.7–86.0) self-test and 76.4% (95% CI, 71.9–80.5) nurse-performed with specificity of 97.8% (95% CI, 97.3–98.2) and 98.5% (95% CI, 98.1–98.8), respectively.

Conclusions

A greater proportion of this nonhealthcare key worker cohort showed evidence of previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 than the general population at 6.0% (95% CI, 5.8–6.1) after the first wave in England. The high acceptability and usability reported by participants and similar performance of self-test and nurse-performed LFIAs indicate that the self-test LFIA is fit for purpose for home testing in occupational and community prevalence studies. Self-test lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs) had a high acceptability and usability and similar performance to nurse-performed LFIAs. Self-test LFIAs are suitable for home-testing in SARS-CoV-2 prevalence studies in nonhealthcare worker populations.

SUBMITTER: Davies B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8522420 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundImproving cancer survival in the UK, despite recent significant gains, remains a huge challenge. This can be attributed to, at least in part, patient and diagnostic delays, when patients are unaware they are suffering from a cancerous symptom and therefore do not visit a general practitioner promptly and/or when general practitioners fail to investigate the symptom or refer promptly. To raise awareness of symptoms that may potentially be indicative of underlying cancer among members of the public a symptom-based risk assessment model (developed for medical practitioner use and currently only used by some UK general practitioners) was utilized to develop a risk assessment tool to be offered to the public in community settings. Such a tool could help individuals recognize a symptom, which may potentially indicate cancer, faster and reduce the time taken to visit to their general practitioner. In this paper we report results about the design and development of the REACT (Risk Estimation for Additional Cancer Testing) website, a tool to be used in a community setting allowing users to complete an online questionnaire and obtain personalized cancer symptom-based risk estimation.ObjectiveThe objectives of this study are to evaluate (1) the acceptability of REACT among the public and health care practitioners, (2) the usability of the REACT website, (3) the presentation of personalized cancer risk on the website, and (4) potential approaches to adopt REACT into community health care services in the UK.MethodsOur research consisted of multiple stages involving members of the public (n=39) and health care practitioners (n=20) in the UK. Data were collected between June 2017 and January 2018. User views were collected by (1) the "think-aloud" approach when participants using the website were asked to talk about their perceptions and feelings in relation to the website, and (2) self-reporting of website experiences through open-ended questionnaires. Data collection and data analysis continued simultaneously, allowing for website iterations between different points of data collection.ResultsThe results demonstrate the need for such a tool. Participants suggest the best way to offer REACT is through a guided approach, with a health care practitioner (eg, pharmacist or National Health Service Health Check nurse) present during the process of risk evaluation. User feedback, which was generally consistent across members of public and health care practitioners, has been used to inform the development of the website. The most important aspects were: simplicity, ability to evaluate multiple cancers, content emphasizing an inviting community "feel," use (when possible) of layperson language in the symptom screening questionnaire, and a robust and positive approach to cancer communication relying on visual risk representation both with affected individuals and the entire population at risk.ConclusionsThis study illustrates the benefits of involving public and stakeholders in developing and implementing a simple cancer symptom check tool within community. It also offers insights and design suggestions for user-friendly interfaces of similar health care Web-based services, especially those involving personalized risk estimation.

Project description:Grapevine leafroll-associated virus 3 (GLRaV-3) is one of the main pathogens of grapes, causing a significant loss in yield and decrease in quality for this agricultural plant. For efficient widespread control of this infection, rapid and simple analytical techniques of on-site testing are requested as a complementary addition for the currently applied hybridization (PCR) and immunoenzyme (ELISA) approaches. The given paper presents development and approbation of the immunochromatographic assay (ICA) for rapid detection of GLRaV-3. The ICA realizes a sandwich immunoassay format with the obtaining complexes ((antibody immobilized on immunochromatographic membrane)⁻(virus in the sample)⁻(antibody immobilized on gold nanoparticles (GNP)) during sample flow along the membrane compounds of the test strip. Three preparations of GNPs were compared for detection of GLRaV-3 at different dilutions of virus-containing sample. The GNPs with maximal average diameters of 51.0 ± 7.9 nm provide GLRaV-3 detection for its maximal dilutions, being 4 times more than when using GNPs with a diameter of 28.3 ± 3.3 nm, and 8 times more than when using GNPs with a diameter of 18.5 ± 3.3 nm. Test strips have been manufactured using the largest GNPs conjugated with anti-GLRaV-3 antibodies at a ratio of 1070:1. When testing samples containing other grape wine viruses, the test strips have not demonstrated staining in the test zone, which confirms the ICA specificity. The approbation of the manufactured test strips indicated that when using ELISA as a reference method, the developed ICA is characterized by a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 92%. If PCR is considered as a reference method, then the sensitivity of ICA is 93% and the specificity is 92%. The proposed ICA can be implemented in one stage without the use of any additional reactants or devices. The testing results can be obtained in 10 min and detected visually. It provides significant improvement in GLRaV-3 detection, and the presented approach can be transferred for the development of test systems for other grape wine pathogens.