当前位置: X-MOL 学术Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
How many are we missing with ID NOW COVID-19 assay using direct nasopharyngeal swabs? Findings from a mid-sized academic hospital clinical microbiology laboratory.
Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease ( IF 2.9 ) Pub Date : 2020-07-04 , DOI: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2020.115123
Phyu M Thwe 1 , Ping Ren 1
Affiliation  

Here, we retrospectively analyzed the comparative results of 182 paired dry nasopharyngeal swabs tested by Abbott ID NOW and nasopharyngeal swabs in viral transport medium by real-time RT-PCR methods. While the overall agreement was 96.2%, we found that of 15 samples that were tested positive with RT-PCR methods, 7 were missed by ID NOW, resulting in a false-negative rate of 47%.



中文翻译:

使用直接鼻咽拭子进行ID NOW COVID-19分析时,我们丢失了多少?中型学术医院临床微生物学实验室的发现。

在这里,我们通过实时RT-PCR方法回顾性分析了由Abbott ID NOW测试的182对配对鼻干拭子和鼻咽拭子在病毒运输培养基中的比较结果。虽然总体一致性为96.2%,但我们发现15个使用RT-PCR方法检测为阳性的样品中,ID NOW漏检了7个,假阴性率为47%。

更新日期:2020-07-14
down
wechat
bug