Key result
The rate of rotavirus detection in children with acute gastroenteritis was significantly greater using bulk stool specimens compared to rectal swabs by enzyme immunoassay (49% vs 27%, P=0.01).
Why the study?
Does RT-PCR compared to EIA improve the accuracy of rotavirus detection in clinical specimens?
Population
Patients tested for rotavirus, including healthy controls
Comparison
Reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) vs Enzyme immunoassay (EIA)
Design
Other
Authors
Loading...
Bulk stool specimens may improve EIA yield for rotavirus detection; supports optimization of surveillance protocols pending further validation.
Cross-Sectional (n=145)
No
Does RT-PCR compared to EIA improve the accuracy of rotavirus detection in clinical specimens?
Absolute Event Rate: 49% vs 27%
p-value: p=0.01
Testing of bulk stools by EIA appears to be the optimum method for routine rotavirus surveillance due to asymptomatic detection or false positives by RT-PCR in healthy controls.
Stockman et al. (2008) conducted a cross-sectional in Rotavirus infection / Acute gastroenteritis (n=145). Bulk stool specimen vs. Rectal swab specimen was evaluated on Rate of detection of rotavirus by enzyme immunoassay (EIA) (p=0.01). The rate of rotavirus detection in children with acute gastroenteritis was significantly greater using bulk stool specimens compared to rectal swabs by enzyme immunoassay (49% vs 27%, P=0.01).