Respiratory screening assays lacking Sample Adequacy Controls (SAC) may result in inadequate sample quality and thus false negative results. The non-adequate samples might represent a significant proportion of the total performed tests, thus resulting in sub-optimal infection control measures with implications that may be critical during pandemic times. The quantitative sample adequacy threshold can be established empirically, measuring the change in the frequency of positive results, as a function of the numerical value of "sample adequacy". Establishing a quantitative threshold for SAC requires a big number/volume of tests to be analyzed in order to have a statistically valid result. Herein, we are offering for the first time clear clinical evidence that a subset of results, which did not pass minimal sample adequacy criteria, have a significantly lower frequency of positivity compared with the "adequate" samples. Flagging these results and/or re-sampling them is a mitigation strategy, which can dramatically improve infection control measures.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8700483PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11122373DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

infection control
12
sample adequacy
12
control measures
8
adequate qpcr
4
qpcr controls
4
controls infection
4
control respiratory
4
respiratory screening
4
screening assays
4
assays lacking
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!