Healthcare workers are at the forefront against COVID-19, worldwide. Since Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli (FPG) IRCCS was enlisted as a COVID-19 hospital, the healthcare workers deployed to COVID-19 wards were separated from those with limited/no exposure, whereas the administrative staff were designated to work from home. Between 4 June and 3 July 2020, an investigation was conducted to evaluate the seroprevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) immunoglobulin (IgG) antibodies among the employees of the FPG using point-of-care (POC) and venous blood tests. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were determined with reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction on nasal/oropharyngeal swabs as the diagnostic gold standard. The participants enrolled amounted to 4777. Seroprevalence was 3.66% using the POC test and 1.19% using the venous blood test, with a significant difference (p < 0.05). The POC test sensitivity and specificity were, respectively, 63.64% (95% confidence interval (CI): 62.20% to 65.04%) and 96.64% (95% CI: 96.05% to 97.13%), while those of the venous blood test were, respectively, 78.79% (95% CI: 77.58% to 79.94%) and 99.36% (95% CI: 99.07% to 99.55%). Among the low-risk populations, the POC test’s predictive values were 58.33% (positive) and 98.23% (negative), whereas those of the venous blood test were 92.86% (positive) and 98.53% (negative). According to our study, these serological tests cannot be a valid alternative to diagnose COVID-19 infection in progress.
Vetrugno, G., La Milia, D. I., D'Ambrosio, F., Di Pumpo, M., Pastorino, R., Boccia, S., Ricci, R., De Giorgio, F., Cicconi, M., Foti, F., Pascucci, D., Castrini, F., Carini, E., Cambieri, A., D'Alfonso, M. E., Capalbo, G., Fantoni, M., Moscato, U., Staiti, D., De Simone, F. M., Berloco, F., Damiani, G., Zega, M., Cattani Franchi, P., Posteraro, B., Sanguinetti, M., Laurenti, P., Covid-19 seroprevalence among healthcare workers of a large covid-19 hospital in rome reveals strengths and limits of two different serological tests, <<INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH>>, 2021; 18 (5): 1-10. [doi:10.3390/ijerph18052650] [https://hdl.handle.net/10807/205122]
Covid-19 seroprevalence among healthcare workers of a large covid-19 hospital in rome reveals strengths and limits of two different serological tests
Vetrugno, Giuseppe;La Milia, Daniele Ignazio;D'Ambrosio, Floriana;Di Pumpo, Marcello;Pastorino, Roberta;Boccia, Stefania;Ricci, Rosalba;De Giorgio, Fabio;Pascucci, Domenico;Castrini, Francesco;Carini, Elettra;Cambieri, Andrea;D'Alfonso, Maria Elena;Capalbo, Gennaro;Fantoni, Massimo;Moscato, Umberto;Staiti, Domenico;Berloco, Filippo;Damiani, Gianfranco;Zega, Maurizio;Cattani Franchi, Paola;Posteraro, Brunella;Sanguinetti, Maurizio;Laurenti, PatriziaUltimo
2021
Abstract
Healthcare workers are at the forefront against COVID-19, worldwide. Since Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli (FPG) IRCCS was enlisted as a COVID-19 hospital, the healthcare workers deployed to COVID-19 wards were separated from those with limited/no exposure, whereas the administrative staff were designated to work from home. Between 4 June and 3 July 2020, an investigation was conducted to evaluate the seroprevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) immunoglobulin (IgG) antibodies among the employees of the FPG using point-of-care (POC) and venous blood tests. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were determined with reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction on nasal/oropharyngeal swabs as the diagnostic gold standard. The participants enrolled amounted to 4777. Seroprevalence was 3.66% using the POC test and 1.19% using the venous blood test, with a significant difference (p < 0.05). The POC test sensitivity and specificity were, respectively, 63.64% (95% confidence interval (CI): 62.20% to 65.04%) and 96.64% (95% CI: 96.05% to 97.13%), while those of the venous blood test were, respectively, 78.79% (95% CI: 77.58% to 79.94%) and 99.36% (95% CI: 99.07% to 99.55%). Among the low-risk populations, the POC test’s predictive values were 58.33% (positive) and 98.23% (negative), whereas those of the venous blood test were 92.86% (positive) and 98.53% (negative). According to our study, these serological tests cannot be a valid alternative to diagnose COVID-19 infection in progress.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
ijerph-18-02650.pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia file ?:
Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza:
Creative commons
Dimensione
323.23 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
323.23 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.