Abstract
Introduction Timely diagnosis is essential for the containment of the disease and breaks in the chain of transmission of SARS-CoV-2. The present situation demands countries to scale up their testing and design innovative strategies to conserve diagnostic kits and reagents. The pooling of samples saves time, manpower, and most importantly diagnostic kits and reagents. In the present study, we tried to define the pool size that could be applied with acceptable confidence for testing.
Material and methods We used repeatedly tested positive clinical sample elutes having different levels of SARS CoV 2 RNA and negative sample elutes to prepare seven series of 11 pools each, having pool sizes ranging from 2 to 48 samples to estimate the optimal pool size. Each pool had one positive sample elute in different compositions. All the pools were tested by SARS CoV 2 RT-qPCR.
Results Out of the 77 pools, only 53 (68.8%) were found positive. The sensitivity of pools of 2 to 48 samples was decreased from 100% (95% CL; 98.4-100) to 41.41% (95% CL; 34.9-48.1). The maximum size of the pool with acceptable sensitivity (>95%) was found to be of 6 samples. For the pool size of 6 samples, the sensitivity was 97.8% and the efficiency of pooling was 0.38.
Conclusion The pooling of samples is a practical way for scaling up testing and ultimately containing the further spread of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No external funding was received
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study has been approved by the institutional ethics review board
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All the data has been mentioned in the manuscript.
