Imperial College London
Dr Bethan Davies

DrBethanDavies

Faculty of Medicine, School of Public Health

Clinical Senior Lecturer in Epidemiology
 
 
 
//

Contact

 

bethan.davies06

 
 
//

Location

 

Medical SchoolSt Mary's Campus

//

Summary

 

Publications

Citation

BibTex format

@unpublished{Davies:2021:10.1101/2021.06.21.21259254,
author = {Davies, B and Araghi, M and Moshe, M and Gao, H and Bennet, K and Jenkins, J and Atchison, C and Darzi, A and Ashby, D and Riley, S and Barclay, W and Elliott, P and Ward, H and Cooke, G},
doi = {10.1101/2021.06.21.21259254},
publisher = {Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory},
title = {Acceptability, usability and performance of lateral flow immunoassay tests for SARSCoV-2 antibodies: REACT-2 study of self-testing in non-healthcare key workers},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2021.06.21.21259254},
year = {2021}
}
Download

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)

TY  - UNPB
AB  - BackgroundSeroprevalence studies in key worker populations are essential to understand the epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2. Various technologies, including laboratory assays and pointof-care self-tests, are available for antibody testing. The interpretation of seroprevalence studies requires comparative data on the performance of antibody tests.MethodsIn June 2020, current and former members of the UK Police forces and Fire service performed a self-test lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) and provided a saliva sample, nasopharyngeal swab, venous blood samples for Abbott ELISA and had a nurse performed LFIA. We present the prevalence of PCR positivity and antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in this cohort following the first wave of infection in England; the acceptability and usability of selftest LFIAs (defined as use of the LFIA kit and provision of a valid result, respectively); and determine the sensitivity and specificity of LFIAs compared to laboratory ELISAs.ResultsIn this cohort of non-healthcare key workers, 7.4% (396/5,348; 95% CI, 6.7-8.1) were antibody positive. Seroprevalence was 8.9% (6.9-11.4) in those under 40 years, 11.5% (8.8-15.0) in those of non-white British ethnicity and 7.8% (7.1-8.7) in those currently working.The self-test LFIA had an acceptability of 97.7% and a usability of 90.0%. There was substantial agreement between within-participant LFIA results (kappa 0.80; 0.77-0.83). The LFIAs (self-test and nurse-performed) had a similar performance: compared to ELISA, sensitivity was 82.1% (77.7-86.0) self-test and 76.4% (71.9-80.5) nurse-performed with specificity of 97.8% (97.3-98.2) and 98.5% (98.1-98.8) respectively.ConclusionA greater proportion of the non-healthcare key worker cohort showed evidence of previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 than the general population at 6.0% (5.8-6.1) following the first wave in England. The high acceptability and usability reported by participants and the similar performance of self-test and nurse-performed LFIAs indicate that t
AU  - Davies,B
AU  - Araghi,M
AU  - Moshe,M
AU  - Gao,H
AU  - Bennet,K
AU  - Jenkins,J
AU  - Atchison,C
AU  - Darzi,A
AU  - Ashby,D
AU  - Riley,S
AU  - Barclay,W
AU  - Elliott,P
AU  - Ward,H
AU  - Cooke,G
DO  - 10.1101/2021.06.21.21259254
PB  - Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
PY  - 2021///
TI  - Acceptability, usability and performance of lateral flow immunoassay tests for SARSCoV-2 antibodies: REACT-2 study of self-testing in non-healthcare key workers
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2021.06.21.21259254
UR  - https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.21.21259254v2
UR  - http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/90044
ER  -
Download