The clinical usefulness of the SD bioline influenza antigen test® for detecting the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) virus

Wonseok Choi, Ji Yun Noh, Joong Yeon Huh, Sae Yoon Kee, Hye Won Jeong, Jacob Lee, Joon-Young Song, Hee-Jin Cheong, Woo Joo Kim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Though the 2009 worldwide influenza A (H1N1) pandemic has been declared to have ended, the influenza virus is expected to continue to circulate from some years as a seasonal influenza. A rapid antigen test (RAT) can aid in rapid diagnosis and allow for early antiviral treatment. We evaluated the clinical usefulness of RAT using SD Bioline Influenza Antigen Test® kit to detect the influenza virus, considering various factors. From August 1, 2009 to October 10, 2009, a total of 938 patients who visited the outpatient clinic at Korea University Guro Hospital with influenza-like illnesses were enrolled in the study. Throat or nasopharyngeal swab specimens were obtained from each of the patients. Using these specimens, we evaluated the influenza detection rate by rapid antigen test based on the real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) method. In comparison with rRT-PCR, the sensitivity and specificity of the R AT were 44.0% and 99.9%, respectively. The cyclic threshold values of RAT negative specimens were higher than RAT positive specimens (30.1±3.1 vs. 28.3±3.9, p=0.031). The sensitivity of the RAT kit was higher in patients who visited clinics within two days of symptom onset (60.4% vs. 11.1%, p=0.026). The results of this study show that the RAT cannot be recommended for general use in all patients with influenza-like illness because of its low sensitivity. The RAT may be used, only in the settings with limited diagnostic resources, for patients who visit a clinic within two days of symptom onset.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)683-685
Number of pages3
JournalYonsei Medical Journal
Volume52
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2011 Jul 1

Fingerprint

H1N1 Subtype Influenza A Virus
Influenza A virus
Human Influenza
Antigens
Orthomyxoviridae
Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction
Pandemics
Korea
Ambulatory Care
Pharynx
Ambulatory Care Facilities
Antiviral Agents
Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction
Sensitivity and Specificity

Keywords

  • Diagnosis
  • Influenza
  • Sensitivity
  • Specificity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

The clinical usefulness of the SD bioline influenza antigen test® for detecting the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) virus. / Choi, Wonseok; Noh, Ji Yun; Huh, Joong Yeon; Kee, Sae Yoon; Jeong, Hye Won; Lee, Jacob; Song, Joon-Young; Cheong, Hee-Jin; Kim, Woo Joo.

In: Yonsei Medical Journal, Vol. 52, No. 4, 01.07.2011, p. 683-685.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{9f6705aaa27a4d1f80a4b6bb96bf7e63,
title = "The clinical usefulness of the SD bioline influenza antigen test{\circledR} for detecting the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) virus",
abstract = "Though the 2009 worldwide influenza A (H1N1) pandemic has been declared to have ended, the influenza virus is expected to continue to circulate from some years as a seasonal influenza. A rapid antigen test (RAT) can aid in rapid diagnosis and allow for early antiviral treatment. We evaluated the clinical usefulness of RAT using SD Bioline Influenza Antigen Test{\circledR} kit to detect the influenza virus, considering various factors. From August 1, 2009 to October 10, 2009, a total of 938 patients who visited the outpatient clinic at Korea University Guro Hospital with influenza-like illnesses were enrolled in the study. Throat or nasopharyngeal swab specimens were obtained from each of the patients. Using these specimens, we evaluated the influenza detection rate by rapid antigen test based on the real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) method. In comparison with rRT-PCR, the sensitivity and specificity of the R AT were 44.0{\%} and 99.9{\%}, respectively. The cyclic threshold values of RAT negative specimens were higher than RAT positive specimens (30.1±3.1 vs. 28.3±3.9, p=0.031). The sensitivity of the RAT kit was higher in patients who visited clinics within two days of symptom onset (60.4{\%} vs. 11.1{\%}, p=0.026). The results of this study show that the RAT cannot be recommended for general use in all patients with influenza-like illness because of its low sensitivity. The RAT may be used, only in the settings with limited diagnostic resources, for patients who visit a clinic within two days of symptom onset.",
keywords = "Diagnosis, Influenza, Sensitivity, Specificity",
author = "Wonseok Choi and Noh, {Ji Yun} and Huh, {Joong Yeon} and Kee, {Sae Yoon} and Jeong, {Hye Won} and Jacob Lee and Joon-Young Song and Hee-Jin Cheong and Kim, {Woo Joo}",
year = "2011",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3349/ymj.2011.52.4.683",
language = "English",
volume = "52",
pages = "683--685",
journal = "Yonsei Medical Journal",
issn = "0513-5796",
publisher = "Yonsei University College of Medicine",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The clinical usefulness of the SD bioline influenza antigen test® for detecting the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) virus

AU - Choi, Wonseok

AU - Noh, Ji Yun

AU - Huh, Joong Yeon

AU - Kee, Sae Yoon

AU - Jeong, Hye Won

AU - Lee, Jacob

AU - Song, Joon-Young

AU - Cheong, Hee-Jin

AU - Kim, Woo Joo

PY - 2011/7/1

Y1 - 2011/7/1

N2 - Though the 2009 worldwide influenza A (H1N1) pandemic has been declared to have ended, the influenza virus is expected to continue to circulate from some years as a seasonal influenza. A rapid antigen test (RAT) can aid in rapid diagnosis and allow for early antiviral treatment. We evaluated the clinical usefulness of RAT using SD Bioline Influenza Antigen Test® kit to detect the influenza virus, considering various factors. From August 1, 2009 to October 10, 2009, a total of 938 patients who visited the outpatient clinic at Korea University Guro Hospital with influenza-like illnesses were enrolled in the study. Throat or nasopharyngeal swab specimens were obtained from each of the patients. Using these specimens, we evaluated the influenza detection rate by rapid antigen test based on the real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) method. In comparison with rRT-PCR, the sensitivity and specificity of the R AT were 44.0% and 99.9%, respectively. The cyclic threshold values of RAT negative specimens were higher than RAT positive specimens (30.1±3.1 vs. 28.3±3.9, p=0.031). The sensitivity of the RAT kit was higher in patients who visited clinics within two days of symptom onset (60.4% vs. 11.1%, p=0.026). The results of this study show that the RAT cannot be recommended for general use in all patients with influenza-like illness because of its low sensitivity. The RAT may be used, only in the settings with limited diagnostic resources, for patients who visit a clinic within two days of symptom onset.

AB - Though the 2009 worldwide influenza A (H1N1) pandemic has been declared to have ended, the influenza virus is expected to continue to circulate from some years as a seasonal influenza. A rapid antigen test (RAT) can aid in rapid diagnosis and allow for early antiviral treatment. We evaluated the clinical usefulness of RAT using SD Bioline Influenza Antigen Test® kit to detect the influenza virus, considering various factors. From August 1, 2009 to October 10, 2009, a total of 938 patients who visited the outpatient clinic at Korea University Guro Hospital with influenza-like illnesses were enrolled in the study. Throat or nasopharyngeal swab specimens were obtained from each of the patients. Using these specimens, we evaluated the influenza detection rate by rapid antigen test based on the real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) method. In comparison with rRT-PCR, the sensitivity and specificity of the R AT were 44.0% and 99.9%, respectively. The cyclic threshold values of RAT negative specimens were higher than RAT positive specimens (30.1±3.1 vs. 28.3±3.9, p=0.031). The sensitivity of the RAT kit was higher in patients who visited clinics within two days of symptom onset (60.4% vs. 11.1%, p=0.026). The results of this study show that the RAT cannot be recommended for general use in all patients with influenza-like illness because of its low sensitivity. The RAT may be used, only in the settings with limited diagnostic resources, for patients who visit a clinic within two days of symptom onset.

KW - Diagnosis

KW - Influenza

KW - Sensitivity

KW - Specificity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79958066977&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79958066977&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3349/ymj.2011.52.4.683

DO - 10.3349/ymj.2011.52.4.683

M3 - Article

C2 - 21623614

AN - SCOPUS:79958066977

VL - 52

SP - 683

EP - 685

JO - Yonsei Medical Journal

JF - Yonsei Medical Journal

SN - 0513-5796

IS - 4

ER -