Suppr超能文献

快速流感诊断检测的准确性:一项荟萃分析。

Accuracy of rapid influenza diagnostic tests: a meta-analysis.

机构信息

CHU Sainte-Justine, Université de Montréal, Montreal Chest Institute, Quebec, Canada.

出版信息

Ann Intern Med. 2012 Apr 3;156(7):500-11. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-156-7-201204030-00403. Epub 2012 Feb 27.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Timely diagnosis of influenza can help clinical management.

PURPOSE

To examine the accuracy of rapid influenza diagnostic tests (RIDTs) in adults and children with influenza-like illness and evaluate factors associated with higher accuracy.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed and EMBASE through December 2011; BIOSIS and Web of Science through March 2010; and citations of articles, guidelines, reviews, and manufacturers.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies that compared RIDTs with a reference standard of either reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (first choice) or viral culture.

DATA EXTRACTION

Reviewers abstracted study data by using a standardized form and assessed quality by using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies criteria.

DATA SYNTHESIS

159 studies evaluated 26 RIDTs, and 35% were conducted during the H1N1 pandemic. Failure to report whether results were assessed in a blinded manner and the basis for patient recruitment were important quality concerns. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 62.3% (95% CI, 57.9% to 66.6%) and 98.2% (CI, 97.5% to 98.7%), respectively. The positive and negative likelihood ratios were 34.5 (CI, 23.8 to 45.2) and 0.38 (CI, 0.34 to 0.43), respectively. Sensitivity estimates were highly heterogeneous, which was partially explained by lower sensitivity in adults (53.9% [CI, 47.9% to 59.8%]) than in children (66.6% [CI, 61.6% to 71.7%]) and a higher sensitivity for influenza A (64.6% [CI, 59.0% to 70.1%) than for influenza B (52.2% [CI, 45.0% to 59.3%).

LIMITATION

Incomplete reporting limited the ability to assess the effect of important factors, such as specimen type and duration of influenza symptoms, on diagnostic accuracy.

CONCLUSION

Influenza can be ruled in but not ruled out through the use of RIDTs. Sensitivity varies across populations, but it is higher in children than in adults and for influenza A than for influenza B.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

摘要

背景

及时诊断流感有助于临床管理。

目的

检验快速流感诊断检测(RIDT)在流感样疾病的成人和儿童中的准确性,并评估与更高准确性相关的因素。

资料来源

通过 2011 年 12 月的 PubMed 和 EMBASE;通过 2010 年 3 月的 BIOSIS 和 Web of Science;以及文章、指南、综述和制造商的引文。

研究选择

将 RIDT 与逆转录聚合酶链反应(首选)或病毒培养的参考标准进行比较的研究。

数据提取

审查员使用标准化表格提取研究数据,并使用诊断准确性研究质量评估标准评估质量。

数据综合

159 项研究评估了 26 种 RIDT,其中 35%是在 H1N1 大流行期间进行的。未报告结果是否以盲法评估以及患者招募的依据是重要的质量问题。汇总的敏感性和特异性分别为 62.3%(95%CI,57.9%至 66.6%)和 98.2%(CI,97.5%至 98.7%)。阳性和阴性似然比分别为 34.5(CI,23.8 至 45.2)和 0.38(CI,0.34 至 0.43)。敏感性估计值存在高度异质性,这部分解释了成人(53.9%[CI,47.9%至 59.8%])的敏感性低于儿童(66.6%[CI,61.6%至 71.7%]),以及甲型流感(64.6%[CI,59.0%至 70.1%])的敏感性高于乙型流感(52.2%[CI,45.0%至 59.3%])。

局限性

不完全报告限制了评估重要因素(例如标本类型和流感症状持续时间)对诊断准确性的影响的能力。

结论

RIDT 可用于诊断流感,但不能排除流感。敏感性在人群中有所不同,但在儿童中高于成人,在甲型流感中高于乙型流感。

主要资金来源

加拿大卫生研究院。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验