自行进行的 SARS-CoV-2 快速抗原检测的性能：系统评价和荟萃分析。
Performance of self-performed SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
机构信息
Department of Anatomy and Histology, School of Preclinical Medicine, Chengdu University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Clinical Medical College & Affiliated Hospital of Chengdu University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
出版信息
Front Public Health. 2024 Oct 18;12:1402949. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1402949. eCollection 2024.
BACKGROUND
The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of self-tested SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests.
METHODS
Databases of Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for original studies investigating accuracy of self-tested SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests, with RT-PCR as "gold standard."
RESULTS
Forty-five eligible studies were found after database searching and screening using pre-defined criteria. The accuracy results from 50,897 suspected COVID-19 patients were pooled, and the overall sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio were 0.77, 1.00, and 625.95, respectively. Subgroup analysis showed higher sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in subgroups of Abbott Panbio, self-collected nasal swab samples, and use of nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swab and lower Ct cutoff value in RT-PCR.
CONCLUSION
Fully self-performed SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests showed overall high accuracy compared to "gold standard," and are reliable surrogates for the standard test of COVID-19 using nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal samples and RT-PCR.
背景
本研究旨在调查自我检测 SARS-CoV-2 快速抗原检测的准确性。
方法
在 Pubmed、Embase 和 Cochrane Library 数据库中搜索了原始研究，这些研究调查了自我检测 SARS-CoV-2 快速抗原检测的准确性，以 RT-PCR 为“金标准”。
结果
经过数据库搜索和使用预定义标准进行筛选后，发现了 45 项符合条件的研究。汇总了来自 50897 名疑似 COVID-19 患者的准确性结果，总体敏感性、特异性和诊断比值比分别为 0.77、1.00 和 625.95。亚组分析显示，在 Abbott Panbio、自我采集的鼻腔拭子样本、使用鼻咽或口咽拭子以及较低的 RT-PCR Ct 值 cutoff 值的亚组中，快速抗原检测的敏感性更高。
结论
与“金标准”相比，完全自我执行的 SARS-CoV-2 快速抗原检测总体上具有较高的准确性，是使用鼻咽或口咽样本和 RT-PCR 进行 COVID-19 标准检测的可靠替代方法。
Zotero 插件