ISSN: 0973-7510

E-ISSN: 2581-690X

Research Article | Open Access
Neha Singh1 , Nikita Sherwani1, Jyoti Jaiswal2, Tripti Nagaria2, Onkar Khandwal3, Arvind Neral4 and Arti Sahu5
1Virology Lab, Department of Microbiology, Pt. JNM Medical College, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India.
2Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Pt. JNM Medical College, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India.
3Department of Pediatrics, Pt. JNM Medical College, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India.
4Department of Pathology, Pt. JNM Medical College, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India.
5Department of Microbiology, Govt. Nagarjuna P.G. College of Science, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India.
Article Number: 8781 | © The Author(s). 2024
J Pure Appl Microbiol. 2024;18(2):1177-1182. https://doi.org/10.22207/JPAM.18.2.36
Received: 11 June 2023 | Accepted: 02 April 2024 | Published online: 27 May 2024
Issue online: June 2024
Abstract

Reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR)-based assays are extensively being utilized to detect coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, due to a lack of RT-qPCR testing capability, these tests cannot be carried out in community clinics. The intention of our study was to evaluate the specificity and sensitivity of Rapid Antigen Detection (RAT) tests versus those of RT-qPCR using nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal specimens. Respiratory swab specimens were collected from the COVID-19 patients admitted at Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Memorial Hospital, Raipur, CG, India, during March to April 2022. RAT and RT-qPCR were performed using standard methods as per guidebook instructions, and subjects were chosen using a convenience sample technique. 100 swabs from patients, who had earlier verified positive and 100 from who had earlier verified negative for SARS-CoV-2 via RT-qPCR, were taken for study. Study was approved by the institutional ethical committee before data collection and initiation of the study. We evaluated for the sensitivity and specificity of the STANDARD Q COVID-19 Ag test kit (SD Biosensor). On testing, an over-all sensitivity and specificity of the kit was recorded as 74% and 100%, respectively in comparison to the RT-qPCR kit. Further, the assay’s sensitivity was shown to be 100%, 94.87%, 77.27%, and 55.56%, respectively, for samples with cycle thresholds (Ct) of 15-25, 25-30, 30-35, and >35. We draw the conclusion that the RT-qPCR assay has superior sensitivity and specificity to the antigen assay. However, in all situations where RT-qPCR testing is difficult, the antigen assay could serve as a rapid and simple option for separating SARS-CoV-2 contagious from non-contagious patients.

Keywords

Rapid Antigen Detection, RAT, COVID-19, RT-qPCR, Ag-detection, SARS-CoV-2

Article Metrics

Article View: 162

Share This Article

© The Author(s) 2024. Open Access. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License which permits unrestricted use, sharing, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.