Abstract
Results of three rapid immunochromatographic tests (ICTs) were compared with those obtained with two automated immunoassays for evaluation of their usefulness. One hundred fifty-nine patients and 67 healthy volunteers were included. Different assays demonstrate 41–45% of diagnostic sensitivities and 91–98% of specificities, with substantial agreement (89.3–91.2%), but a high percentage of weak positive results (13–22%) was observed with ICTs. ICTs performances were comparable to those of automated immunoassays. ICTs could have a role as screening approach due to their easy usability. Subjective interpretation, significant rate of uncertain results, uncertainty on viral antigens source are undoubtedly drawbacks.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
