IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pgph00/0000358.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Diagnostic accuracy of antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests for diagnosis of COVID-19 in low-and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Sagar Pandey
  • Arisa Poudel
  • Dikshya Karki
  • Jeevan Thapa

Abstract

Antigen detection rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) used for detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleocapsid protein are inexpensive, faster and easy to use alternative of Nucleic Acid Amplification Test (NAAT) for diagnosis of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we assessed the diagnostic accuracy of Ag-RDTs in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). We included studies that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of Ag-RDTs (sensitivity and specificity) against reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) as a reference standard. The study population comprised of people living in LMICs irrespective of age and gender, who had undergone testing for COVID-19. We included peer reviewed prospective or retrospective cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, case control studies, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) as well as non-randomized experimental studies which addressed the review question. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar to identify studies published between 1 January, 2020 and 15 August, 2021. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2 tool was used to assess the methodological quality of studies. The analysis was done using Review Manager 5.4 and R software 4.0.2. From the total of 12 diagnostic accuracy studies with 4,817 study participants, pooled sensitivity and specificity were 78.2% and 99.5% respectively. Sensitivity was marginally higher in subgroup analysis based on studies with low risk of bias and applicability concerns (78.9%) and studies using SD Biosensor Ag-RDT (79.4%). However, an inverse relation between cycle threshold (Ct) and sensitivity of Ag-RDT was not seen. The review demonstrated pooled sensitivity value approaching the minimum performance requirement for diagnosis of COVID-19 by WHO with specificity value meeting the specified requirement. Ag-RDTs, therefore have the potential to be used as a screening tool for SARS-CoV-2 detection in low resource settings where RT-PCR might not be readily accessible. However, false negative results need to be interpreted with caution.

Suggested Citation

  • Sagar Pandey & Arisa Poudel & Dikshya Karki & Jeevan Thapa, 2022. "Diagnostic accuracy of antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests for diagnosis of COVID-19 in low-and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS Global Public Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(4), pages 1-15, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0000358
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0000358
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0000358
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0000358&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pgph.0000358?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0000358. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: globalpubhealth (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.