RT Journal Article SR Electronic T1 Evaluation of the Panbio™ rapid antigen test for COVID-19 diagnosis in symptomatic health care workers JF medRxiv FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press SP 2021.06.21.21259234 DO 10.1101/2021.06.21.21259234 A1 Bruins, Marjan J. A1 dos Santos, Claudy Oliveira A1 Spoelman-Lunsche, Marjan A1 van den Bos-Kromhout, Marieke I. A1 Debast, Sylvia B. YR 2021 UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/06/25/2021.06.21.21259234.abstract AB If a health care workers (HCW) experiences COVID-19 associated symptoms, SARS-CoV-2 testing must be performed as soon as possible, to prevent transmission of the virus and to guarantee continuity of care. The gold standard for the detection of SARS-CoV-2, RT-PCR, has a high sensitivity but usually takes 6-8 hours. Lateral flow antigen assays take only 15-30 minutes and do not need any high tech equipment.In a prospective study of our hospital’s HCWs, we evaluated the sensitivity of the Panbio™ COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test (Abbott) against the molecular test Aptima™ SARS-CoV-2 Assay (Hologic) which uses Transcription Mediated Amplification (TMA). TMA positive samples were further subjected to a quantitative real-time SARS-CoV-2 PCR to obtain Ct values as an indication of the viral load.Of 1101 HCWs included in the study between November 2020 and February 2021, 84 (7.6%) were TMA positive, of which 48 (57.1%) were antigen test positive. Most false negative antigen test results occurred if the duration of symptoms had been ≤1 day or ≥7 days. Sensitivities for symptom onset of ≤1, 2 or 3 days were 47.1%, 63.0% and 66.7% respectively.The Panbio™ rapid test is fast and easy to perform, but is not a suitable SARS-CoV-2 test to confirm or exclude COVID-19 in HCWs with a very recent onset of symptoms.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThere was no funding.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The Isala Medical Research Ethics Committee in Zwolle, the Netherlands, considered the study not subject to the Dutch Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (WMO) and declared it to be exempted from further review on November 2, 2020. All participants signed a written informed consent form.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesAll data are available on request.