Abstract
Background Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are increasingly adopting low-cost Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) rapid antigen tests to meet the high demand for SARS-CoV-2 testing. Whilst testing using real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is the current gold standard, its widespread use in LMICs is limited by high costs, turnaround times and is not readily available in most places. COVID-19 antigen tests (Ag-RDT) provide a suitable alternative due to their low cost, rapid turnaround time and easy to set up and use. This study aimed to assess the field performance of the NowCheck COVID-19 antigen kit (Ag-RDT) as a point of care test (POCT) in select healthcare facilities in western Kenya.
Methods We conducted a prospective multi-facility field evaluation study of the NowCheck COVID-19 rapid antigen test (Ag-RDT) compared to SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR (RT-PCR). After obtaining informed consent, trained laboratory technicians collected two pairs of oropharyngeal and nasopharyngeal swabs, both antigen and RT-PCR testing, first for Ag-RDT and next for RT-PCR. We performed Ag-RDTs on-site and shared the results with both the study participants and their healthcare providers within 15-30 minutes. We carried out all RT-PCR tests in a central referral laboratory. The turnaround time for RT-PCR results was typically 24-48 hours. We captured the results of both methods using an electronic digital application.
Findings Between December 2020 and March 2021, we enrolled 997 participants who met the Kenyan Ministry of Health COVID-19 case definition. The median age of study participants was 39 years (range one to 80 years), with 54% male. Ag-RDT had a sensitivity of 84.5% (76.0-90.8) and a specificity of 94.4% (95% CI: 92.7-95.8) with an accuracy of 94.2% (92.5-95.6) when a cycle threshold value (Ct value) of ≤35 was used. The highest sensitivity of 87.7% (77.2-94.5) was observed in samples with Ct values ≤ 30 and the highest specificity of 97.5% (96.2-98.5) at Ct value of <40.
Interpretation The NowCheck COVID-19 Ag-RDT showed good performance in field evaluation in multiple healthcare facilities in a developing country. The sensitivity of the kit exceeded the minimum recommended cut-off of 80% as recommended by WHO1. The high specificity of this kit at 94.4% at Ct values ≤33 and 97.5% at Ct values <40 matched that of real-time PCR, making it a good rule-out test for symptomatic patients with COVID-19-like symptoms. The faster turnaround time to results, lower cost, simple analytical steps requiring no equipment or infrastructure makes antigen testing an attractive field-screening method to meet the high demand for COVID-19 testing.
Funding Achmea Foundation, Pfizer Foundation, Dimagi and the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs supported this project. The funding sources did not have any role in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, summarizing the data or decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Achmea Foundation, Pfizer Foundation, Dimagi and the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs supported this project. The funding sources did not have any role in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, summarizing the data or decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
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:
Research and ethical approval from Jaramogi Oginga Odinga Teaching & Referral Hospital (JOOTRH) under IERC.IB/VOL.II/355/20, and Research License from National Commission for Science, Technology, and Innovation, license number ABS/P/20/7959.
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 data relating to this manuscript is available
