A Field Evaluation of the Covid-19 Antigen Testing Regimen at a Primary Hospital in Ghana

Prince Kenneth Homiah^1, , Bernice Ameyaw¹, Ebenezer Mensah Turkson¹, Valerie Asare-Baffour¹, Dr George T. Tidakabi², Michael Muogai³, Kwamena Kwentsir Daniels¹, Martha Kunlamore⁴, Lydia Abena Bonney¹, Michael Korabo¹ and Emmanuella Mensah-Quainoo¹

¹Laboratory, Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority, Takoradi, Ghana

²Administration, Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority, Takoradi, Ghana

³Records, Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority, Takoradi, Ghana

⁴Laboratory, Synlab Ghana Ltd, Takoradi, Ghana

Cite this paper:
Prince Kenneth Homiah, Bernice Ameyaw, Ebenezer Mensah Turkson, Valerie Asare-Baffour, Dr George T. Tidakabi, Michael Muogai, Kwamena Kwentsir Daniels, Martha Kunlamore, Lydia Abena Bonney, Michael Korabo and Emmanuella Mensah-Quainoo. A Field Evaluation of the Covid-19 Antigen Testing Regimen at a Primary Hospital in Ghana. American Journal of Infectious Diseases and Microbiology. 2022; 10(1):1-6. doi: 10.12691/ajidm-10-1-1

Abstract

Background: Accurate, reliable and rapid diagnostic tools for COVID-19 are essential for tackling the ongoing pandemic, especially in the developing world. This study aimed to assess the performance and viability of the testing regimen at a district-level hospital testing centre where both nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal samples are taken simultaneously but the samples are tested separately. The nasopharyngeal samples are tested using the SD Biosensor Standard F Covid-19 FIA antigen test kit whiles RT-PCR is conducted on the oropharyngeal samples. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 314 paired samples taken from March to August 2021 whereby the dual testing scheme was applied. The field diagnostic performance of the Standard F Antigen test was compared with Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) results. The sensitivity, specificity and expected predictive values were then evaluated. The RT-PCR is the gold standard for Covid-19 testing. Results: A total of 314 matched Covid-19 Antigen Rapid Diagnostic Test (Ag-RDT) and RT-PCR samples were analysed retrospectively. The sensitivity and specificity of the Ag-RDT was 80.85% (95% Confidence interval of 66.74% – 90.85%) and 98.9% (95% Confidence interval of 96.74% – 99.77%) respectively. The overall accuracy was determined to be 96.2% with a Cohen’s Kappa score of 0.84 indicating an almost perfect agreement. Conclusion: The results of samples taken from the different anatomical sites have an almost perfect agreement. Therefore, the performance of the Standard F Covid-19 antigen test kit is optimal and the testing regimen at the hospital is adequate. It can thus be replicated at other testing sites. However, adequate training in the sampling procedure, storage, transport as well as stringent monitoring and supervision is required.

Keywords:
Covid-19 antigen testing Sars-Cov 2

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]	Bianca Bruzzone, V. De Pace, P. Caligiuri et al. Comparative diagnostic performance of rapid antigen detection tests for COVID-19 in a hospital setting, 2021. International Journal of Infectious Diseases 107 (2021) 215-218 216.
[2]	Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2021; 3: CD013705. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33760236/ [Accessed 29 June 2021].
[3]	Dinnes J, Deeks JJ, Berhane S, Taylor M, Adriano A, Davenport C, et al. Rapid, point-of-care antigen and molecular-based tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. 2020. Rapid, point-of-care antigen and molecular-based tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection - Dinnes, J - 2021 | Cochrane Library.
[4]	Elisabeth Toverud Landaas, Margrethe Larsdatter Storm, Mette Christophersen Tollånes, Regine Barlinn, Anne-Marte Bakken Kran, Karoline Bragstad, Andreas Christensen, Trude Andreassen. Diagnostic performance of a SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test in a large, Norwegian cohort. Journal of Clinical Virology 2021 1st March.
[5]	European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Options for the use of rapid antigen tests for COVID-19 in the EU/EEA and the UK. 2020 19 November 2020. Available from: https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/Options-use-of-rapid-antigen-tests-for-COVID-19.pdf. [Accessed 29 June 2021].
[6]	Food and Drug Authority (FDA). Covid Tests at KIA Reliable; FDA Dismisses Dr Bonneys’s Claims. 2020. 1st September 2020. Available: https://www.fdaghana.gov.gh/newsmedia.php?page=31. [Accessed 29 August 2021].
[7]	Food and Drug Authority (FDA). Guidelines for the Authorisation of Emergency use Antigen/Antibody Rapid Diagnostics Test Kits for Sars-Cov-2 Virus. 2020. 15 May 2020. Available from: https://fdaghana.gov.gh/img/organisation/GUIDELINES %20FOR%20AUTHORISATION%20%20FOR%20EMERGENCY%20USE%20%20RDTs%20FOR%20SARS-CoV-2%20VIRUS(1).pdf
[8]	Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics (FIND). Comparative evaluation of lateral flow assay tests that directly detect antigens of SARS-CoV-2. 2020. Available from: https://www.finddx.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/20200421-COVID-Ag-RDT-Evaluation-Synopsis.pdf. [Accessed 29 June 2021].
[9]	Graphic Online. 34 Covid-19 Rapid Test Kits fail Validation Test-FDA. 2020. 29TH July 2020. Available from: https://www.graphic.com.gh/news/general-news/34-covid-19-rapid-test-kits-fail-validation-test-fda.html. [Accessed 29 August 2021].
[10]	Greene CJ, Burleson SL, Crosby JC, Heimann MA, Pigott DC. Coronavirus disease 2019: International public health considerations. J Am Coll Emerg Phys Open 2020; 1(February (2)): 70-7.
[11]	Hitzenbichler, F.; Bauernfeind, S.; Salzberger, B.; Schmidt, B.; Wenzel, J.J. Comparison of Throat Washings, Nasopharyngeal Swabs and Oropharyngeal Swabs for Detection of SARS-CoV-2. Viruses 2021, 13, 653.
[12]	Hu B, Guo H, Zhou P, Shi ZL, Characteristics of SARS-CO-V-2 and COVID-19. Nat Rev Microbiol 2021; 19(3): 141-54
[13]	Jean Marc Schwob, Alix Miauton, Dusan Petrovic, Jean Perdrix, Nicolas Senn, Katia Jaton, Opota Onya, Alain Maillard, Gianni Minghelli, Jacques Cornuz, Gilbert Greub, Blaise Genton, Valérie D’Acremont. Title: Antigen rapid tests, nasopharyngeal PCR and saliva PCR to detect SARS-CoV-2: a prospective comparative clinical trial. November 24, 2020.
[14]	Kupferschmidt K. Fast-spreading U.K. virus variant raises alarms. Science 2021; 371 (6524): 9-10.
[15]	Mahase E. Covid-19: what new variants are emerging and how are they being investigated?. BMJ 2021; 372: n158.
[16]	McArthur L, Sakthivel D, Ataide R, Chan F, Richards JS, Narh CA. Review of burden, clinical definitions, and management of COVID-19 cases. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2020; 103(2): 625-38.
[17]	Medcalc. Diagnostic Test Evaluation Calculator. 2021. Available from: https://www.medcalc.org/calc/diagnostic_test.php. [Accessed 2 September 2021]
[18]	Mede calculator software. Diagnostic Test Calculator. 2006. Available from: http://araw.mede.uic.edu/cgi-bin/testcalc.pl. [Accessed 2 September 2021].
[19]	Rahimi F, Talebi Bezmin Abadi A. Tackling the COVID-19 pandemic. Arch Med Res 2020; 51(5): 468-70.
[20]	Russo A, Minichini C, Starace M, Astorri R, Calò F, Coppola N, et al. Current status of laboratory diagnosis for COVID-19: a narrative review. Infect Drug Resist 2020; 13: 2657-65.
[21]	Van Walle I, Leitmeyer K, Broberg EK. Meta-analysis of the clinical performance of commercial SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid, antigen and antibody tests up to 22 August 2020. medRxiv 2020.
[22]	Venter M, Richter K. Towards effective diagnostic assays for COVID-19: a review. J Clin Pathol 2020; 73(7): 370-7. World Health Organization (WHO). Antigen-detection in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection using rapid immunoassays: interim guidance. 2020, Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/antigen-detection-in-the-di-agnosis-of-sars-cov-2infection-using-rapid-immunoassays. [Accessed 29 March 2021].
[23]	World Health Organization (WHO). Laboratory testing for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in suspected human cases: interim guidance. 2020 19 March 2020. Available from: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/331501. [Accessed 29 March 2021].
[24]	Xiong Wang, Li Tanb, Xu Wang, Weiyong Liua, Yanjun Lua, Liming Chenga, Ziyong Suna, Comparison of nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 detection in 353 patients received tests with both specimens simultaneously. 2020 8th April.