alexa Comparison of a laboratory-developed RT-PCR and the CDC RT-PCR protocol with rapid immunodiagnostic testing during the 2009 H1N1 influenza A pandemic.
Psychiatry

Psychiatry

Clinical Depression

Author(s): Liao RS, Landt O, Hill JT

Abstract Share this page

Abstract We evaluated the performance of a laboratory-developed multiplex real-time reverse transcription-PCR assay (LDT rRT-PCR), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 2009 H1N1 rRT-PCR protocol using the LightCycler 480 II, the multiplex xTAG Respiratory Virus Panel (xTAG RVP), and rapid immunodiagnostic testing (RIDT) using the BinaxNOW Influenza A & B to detect 2009 H1N1 with 426 nasopharyngeal swab specimens during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic. The specificity of the methods tested was ≥98\%, and the individual test sensitivities were RIDT at 42.3\% [95\% confidence interval (CI), 31.4-54.0], LDT rRT-PCR at 98.9\% (95\% CI, 92.9-99.9), CDC 2009 H1N1 rRT-PCR at 78.2\% (95\% CI, 67.8-86.0), and xTAG RVP at 93.1\% (95\% CI, 85.0-97.2). A negative RIDT result should not be used to make decisions with respect to treatment or infection prevention. rRT-PCR is the preferred first-line diagnostic test for detecting 2009 H1N1 influenza A. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. This article was published in Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis and referenced in Clinical Depression

Relevant Expert PPTs

Relevant Speaker PPTs

Recommended Conferences

Peer Reviewed Journals
 
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2017-18
 
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

 
© 2008-2017 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version
adwords