Clinical Ordering Practices of the SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Test at a Large Academic Medical Center

被引:4
|
作者
Wiencek, Joesph R. [1 ,2 ]
Head, Carter L. [3 ]
Sifri, Costi D. [4 ,5 ]
Parsons, Andrew S. [6 ]
机构
[1] Univ Virginia, Sch Med, Dept Pathol, Charlottesville, VA 22908 USA
[2] Univ Virginia Hlth, Lab Stewardship Comm, Charlottesville, VA USA
[3] Univ Virginia, Sch Med, Charlottesville, VA 22908 USA
[4] Univ Virginia, Div Infect Dis & Int Hlth, Sch Med, Dept Med, Charlottesville, VA USA
[5] Univ Virginia Hlth, Off Hosp Epidemiol, Charlottesville, VA USA
[6] Univ Virginia, Sect Hosp Med, Dept Med, Sch Med, Charlottesville, VA USA
来源
OPEN FORUM INFECTIOUS DISEASES | 2020年 / 7卷 / 10期
关键词
antibody; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; serology; stewardship; utilization; GUIDELINES; COVID-19;
D O I
10.1093/ofid/ofaa406
中图分类号
R392 [医学免疫学]; Q939.91 [免疫学];
学科分类号
100102 ;
摘要
Background. The novel severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) originated in December 2019 and has now infected almost 5 million people in the United States. In the spring of 2020, private laboratories and some hospitals began antibody testing despite limited evidence-based guidance. Methods. We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients who received SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing from May 14, 2020, to June 15, 2020, at a large academic medical center, 1 of the first in the United States to provide antibody testing capability to individual clinicians in order to identify clinician-described indications for antibody testing compared with current expert-based guidance from the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Results. Of 444 individual antibody test results, the 2 most commonly described testing indications, 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 for asymptomatic patients believed to have had a past exposure to 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 < .0001) among those indications inconsistent with such guidance. Testing inconsistent with current expert-based guidance accounted for almost half of testing costs. 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 2 groups. Clinical curiosity and patient preference appear to have played a significant role in testing decisions and substantially contributed to testing costs.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Practical Considerations for Implementation of SARS-CoV-2 Serological Testing in the Clinical Laboratory: Experience at an Academic Medical Center
    Humble, Robert M.
    Merrill, Anna E.
    Ford, Bradley A.
    Diekema, Daniel J.
    Krasowski, Matthew D.
    ACADEMIC PATHOLOGY, 2021, 8
  • [2] Outcomes of a home telemonitoring program for SARS-CoV-2 viral infection at a large academic medical center
    Bryant, Andrew D.
    Robinson, Tommy J.
    Gutierrez-Perez, Jeydith T.
    Manning, Bradley L.
    Glenn, Kevin
    Imborek, Katherine L.
    Kuperman, Ethan F.
    JOURNAL OF TELEMEDICINE AND TELECARE, 2024, 30 (04) : 675 - 680
  • [3] SARS-CoV-2 antibody kinetics in blood donors with a previously positive SARS-CoV-2 antibody test within a seroprevalence survey
    Levring, Mette B.
    Holm, Dorte K.
    Nilsson, Anna C.
    Bauer, Joschka M.
    Jensen, Iben S.
    Davidsen, Jesper R.
    Rasmussen, Line D.
    Sprogoe, Ulrik
    Lillevang, Soren T.
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL VIROLOGY, 2022, 94 (04) : 1711 - 1716
  • [4] The Antibody Response to SARS-CoV-2 Infection
    Hueston, Linda
    Kok, Jen
    Guibone, Ayla
    McDonald, Damien
    Hone, George
    Goodwin, James
    Carter, Ian
    Basile, Kerri
    Sandaradura, Indy
    Maddocks, Susan
    Sintchenko, Vitali
    Gilroy, Nicole
    Chen, Sharon
    Dwyer, Dominic E.
    O'Sullivan, Matthew V. N.
    OPEN FORUM INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2020, 7 (09):
  • [5] Clinical Performance of a Lateral Flow SARS-CoV-2 Total Antibody Assay
    Cobb, Beth L.
    Lloyd, Matthew
    Hock, Karl G.
    Farnsworth, Christopher W.
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED LABORATORY MEDICINE, 2022, 7 (04) : 827 - 833
  • [6] Dynamic Change and Clinical Relevance of Postinfectious SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Responses
    Mallon, Patrick W. G.
    Tinago, Willard
    Leon, Alejandro Garcia
    McCann, Kathleen
    Kenny, Grace
    McGettrick, Padraig
    Green, Sandra
    Inzitari, Rosanna
    Cottere, Aoife G.
    Feeney, Eoin R.
    Savinelli, Stefano
    Doran, Peter
    OPEN FORUM INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2021, 8 (08):
  • [7] The Role of Antibody Testing for SARS-CoV-2: Is There One?
    Theel, Elitza S.
    Slev, Patricia
    Wheeler, Sarah
    Couturier, Marc Roger
    Wong, Susan J.
    Kadkhoda, Kamran
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 2020, 58 (08)
  • [8] Performance Evaluation of the Siemens SARS-CoV-2 Total Antibody and IgG Antibody Test
    Florin, Lisa
    Maelegheer, Karel
    Vandewal, Wouter
    Bernard, Dirk
    Robbrecht, Johan
    LABORATORY MEDICINE, 2021, 52 (06) : E147 - E153
  • [9] How can we interpret SARS-CoV-2 antibody test results?
    Fons, Sofie
    Krogfelt, Karen A.
    PATHOGENS AND DISEASE, 2021, 79 (01):
  • [10] Assessment of commercial SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays, Jamaica
    Butterfield, Tiffany R.
    Bruce-Mowatt, Alrica
    Phillips, Yakima Z. R.
    Brown, Nicole
    Francis, Keisha
    Brown, Jabari
    Walker, Jerome P.
    McKnight, Niel A. L.
    Ehikhametalor, Kelvin
    Taylor, Devon K.
    Bruce, Carl A.
    McGrowder, Donovan
    Wharfe, Gilian
    Sandiford, Simone L.
    Thompson, Tamara K.
    Anzinger, Joshua J.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2021, 105 : 333 - 336