Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
By using a rapid test for respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) detection (Abbott TestPack RSV), a number of patients were observed, showing repeatedly positive results over a period of up to 10 weeks. A prospective study was initiated to compare the rapid test with an antigen capture enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and a nested reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) protocol for detection of RSV serotypes A and B. Only respiratory samples from children exhibiting the prolonged presence of RSV (> or =5 days) as determined by the rapid test were considered. A total of 134 specimens from 24 children was investigated by antigen capture EIA and nested RT-PCR. Using RT-PCR as the reference method, we determined the RSV rapid test to have a specificity of 63% and a sensitivity of 66% and the antigen capture EIA to have a specificity of 96% and a sensitivity of 69% for acute-phase samples and the homologous virus serotype A. In 7 (29%) of 24 patients, the positive results of the RSV rapid test could not be confirmed by either nested RT-PCR or antigen capture EIA. In these seven patients a variety of other respiratory viruses were detected. For general screening the RSV rapid test was found to be a reasonable tool to get quick results. However, its lack of specificity in some patients requires confirmation by additional tests to rule out false-positive results and/or detection of other respiratory viruses.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abels et al. (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: