Real-world deployment of lateral flow SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection in the emergency department to provide rapid, accurate and safe diagnosis of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care (POC) SARS-CoV-2 lateral-flow antigen detection (LFD) testing in the emergency department (ED) could inform rapid infection control decisions but requirements for safe deployment have not been fully defined. METHODS: Review of LFD test results, laboratory and POC-RT-PCR results and ED-performance metrics during a two-week high SARS-CoV-2 prevalence period followed by several months of falling prevalence. AIM: Determine whether LFD testing can be safely deployed in ED to provide an effective universal SARS-CoV-2 testing capability. FINDINGS: 93% (345/371) of COVID-19 patients left ED with a virological diagnosis during the 2-week universal LFD evaluation period compared to 77% with targeted POC-RT-PCR deployment alone, on background of approximately one-third having an NHS Track and Trace RT-PCR test-result at presentation. LFD sensitivity and specificity was 70.7% and 99.1% respectively providing a PPV of 97.7% and NPV of 86.4% with disease prevalence of 34.7%. ED discharge-delays (breaches) attributable to COVID-19 fell to 33/3532 (0.94%) compared with the preceding POC-RT-PCR period (107/4114 (2.6%); p=<0.0001). Importantly, LFD testing identified 1 or 2 clinically-unsuspected COVID-19 patients/day. Three clinically-confirmed LFD false positive patients were appropriately triaged based on LFD action-card flowchart, and only 5 of 95 false-negative LFD results were inappropriately admitted to non-COVID-19 areas where no onward-transmission was identified. LFD testing was restricted to asymptomatic patients when disease prevalence fell below 5% and detected 1-3 cases/week. CONCLUSION: Universal SARS-CoV-2 LFD testing can be safely and effectively deployed in ED alongside POC-RT-PCR testing during periods of high and low disease prevalence.

Use of multilocus sequence typing for the investigation of colonisation by Candida albicans in intensive care unit patients.

A prospective study was performed to determine the prevalence of candidal colonisation on the general intensive care unit at a large teaching hospital. Colonisation with Candida spp. was found to be common, occurring in 79% of patients on the unit. C. albicans was the commonest species, colonising 64% of patients, followed by C. glabrata (18%) and C. parapsilosis (14%). Most of the members of staff tested carried Candida spp. at some point, although carriage appeared to be transient. C. parapsilosis was the most commonly isolated species from staff hands, whereas C. albicans was the most commonly isolated species from the mouth. The molecular epidemiology of C. albicans was investigated using Ca3 typing and multilocus sequence typing (MLST). MLST proved to be a reproducible typing method and a useful tool for the investigation of the molecular epidemiology of C. albicans. The results of the molecular typing provided evidence for the presence of an endemic strain on the unit, which was isolated repeatedly from patients and staff. This finding suggests horizontal transmission of C. albicans on the unit though it may also reflect the relative frequency of C. albicans strain types colonising patients on admission. This study has important implications for the epidemiology of systemic candidal infections.

Two-step glutamate dehydrogenase antigen real-time polymerase chain reaction assay for detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile.

Current diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) relies upon detection of toxins A/B in stool by enzyme immunoassay [EIA(A/B)]. This strategy is unsatisfactory because it has a low sensitivity resulting in significant false negatives. We investigated the performance of a two-step algorithm for diagnosis of CDI using detection of glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH). GDH-positive samples were tested for C. difficile toxin B gene (tcdB) by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The performance of the two-step protocol was compared with toxin detection by the Meridian Premier EIA kit in 500 consecutive stool samples from patients with suspected CDI. The reference standard among samples that were positive by either EIA(A/B) or GDH testing was culture cytotoxin neutralisation (culture/CTN). Thirty-six (7%) of 500 samples were identified as true positives by culture/CTN. EIA(A/B) identified 14 of the positive specimens with 22 false negatives and two false positives. The two-step protocol identified 34 of the positive samples with two false positives and two false negatives. EIA(A/B) had a sensitivity of 39%, specificity of 99%, positive predictive value of 88% and negative predictive value of 95%. The two-step algorithm performed better, with corresponding values of 94%, 99%, 94% and 99% respectively. Screening for GDH before confirmation of positives by PCR is cheaper than screening all specimens by PCR and is an effective method for routine use. Current EIA(A/B) tests for CDI are of inadequate sensitivity and should be replaced; however, this may result in apparent changes in CDI rates that would need to be explained in national surveillance statistics.