Abstract
Reverse
transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing has been
regarded as the gold standard for the diagnosis of coronavirus disease
2019 (COVID-19). In response to the sudden surge in cases that
overwhelmed the healthcare system in Hong Kong, several point-of-care
testing (POCT) methods have been developed for rapid COVID-19 screening.
However, the diagnostic accuracy of these methods remains inadequately
established.
COVID-19–positive
patients and negative control subjects were recruited from a community
isolation centre and individuals under home quarantine. Four nasal swab
samples were collected by trained operators from each subject. Three
swab samples were immediately tested using conventional COVID-19 rapid
antigen test (RAT), fluorescence-based RAT (Fluorescent-RAT) and POCT
quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR). The fourth swab sample
was submitted to a certified laboratory for standard RT-PCR analysis.
The sensitivity and specificity of the three rapid testing methods were
evaluated against the results obtained from the certified
laboratory-based RT-PCR, which served as the reference standard.
The
performance of the three diagnostic methods was assessed in 186 valid
cases, which comprised 86 RT-PCR–confirmed positive cases and 100
negative cases. The participants' age ranged from 3 years to 94 years.
The sensitivity of the Fluorescent-RAT (87.21%, 95% confidence interval
[CI]:80.15%–94.27%) and the POCT qPCR (84.27%, 95% CI:76.71%–91.83%) was
comparable and significantly higher than that of the conventional RAT
(51.69%, 95% CI:41.30%–62.07%). All three methods demonstrated high
specificity. The RAT and POCT qPCR exhibited 100% specificity (95%
CI:100%), and the Fluorescent-RAT showed a specificity of 97.06% (95%
CI:93.78%–100%).
This
study demonstrated that the Fluorescent-RAT and POCT qPCR can serve as
reliable alternatives to RT-PCR for COVID-19 diagnosis, offering
improved performance compared with the conventional RAT.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 100496 |
| Number of pages | 6 |
| Journal | Infection Prevention in Practice |
| Volume | 8 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Early online date | 17 Nov 2025 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Mar 2026 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being
User-Defined Keywords
- Community isolation centre
- Fluorescence-based rapid antigen test
- Home quarantine
- Point-of-care testing
- Rapid antigen test
- Sensitivity and specificity
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care testing methods for SARS-CoV-2 detection in community quarantine and isolation settings'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver