TY - JOUR T1 - Clinical Ordering Practices of the SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Test at a Large Academic Medical Center JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2020.07.12.20152165 SP - 2020.07.12.20152165 AU - Joesph R. Wiencek AU - Carter L. Head AU - Costi D. Sifri AU - Andrew S. Parsons Y1 - 2020/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/07/14/2020.07.12.20152165.abstract N2 - Background The novel severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that causes COVID-19 originated in December 2019 and has now infected over 3 million people in the United States. In Spring of 2020, private laboratories and some hospitals began antibody testing despite lacking evidence-based guidance.Objective To describe clinician-described indications for SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing, including cost implications, immediately following testing availability.Design Retrospective chart review of patients who received antibody testing from May 14, 2020 to June 15, 2020.Setting A large academic medical center, one of the first in the US to provide antibody testing capability to individual clinicians.Patients 447 consecutive patients who received SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing.Measurements Clinician-described indications for SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing, cost implications, and comparison with current expert-based guidance from the IDSA and CDC.Results Of 444 individual antibody test results meeting inclusion criteria, the two most commonly described indications for ordering the antibody test, apart from public health epidemiology studies (n=223), were for patients with a now resolved COVID-19 compatible illness (n=105) with no previous molecular testing and in asymptomatic patients believed to have had a past exposure or contact with a person with COVID-19 compatible illness (n=60). The rate of positive SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing among those indications consistent with current IDSA and CDC guidance was 17% compared with 5% (p<0.0001) among those indications inconsistent with current IDSA and CDC guidance. Total cost estimates ranged from $57,720 to $97,680, of which 42% was for testing inconsistent with current expert-based guidance.Limitations The duration of antibody response following infection is unclear and asymptomatic individuals may not develop a positive antibody response.Conclusions Our findings demonstrate a dissociation between clinician described indications for testing and expert-based guidance and a significantly different rate of positive testing between these two groups. Clinical curiosity and patient preference appear to have played a significant role in testing decisions and substantially contributed to testing costs.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementFunding: NoneAuthor 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:Chart review was performed under a protocol that was approved by the University of Virginia Institutional Review Board (IRB-HSR #13310).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.YesN/A ER -