The following is a summary of “Diagnostic accuracy of rapid diagnostic tests for Ebola virus disease: a systematic review,” published in the February 2023 issue of Clinical Microbiology and Infections Disease by Dagens et al.

Each gadget type’s diagnostic accuracy was estimated in a synthesis. The subsequent subgroup analyses used several types of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) and specimen materials. Finally, it was determined how much trial design and bias mattered by doing a sensitivity analysis.

About 15 papers on the precision of diagnoses were considered. Overall, lateral flow assays were estimated to have a sensitivity of 86.1% (95% CI, 86.2%) and a specificity of 97.0% (95% CI, 96.1-98.0%). Overall, quick PCR machines were estimated to have a sensitivity of 96.2% (95% CI, 95.3-97.9%) and a specificity of 96.8% (95% CI, 95.3-97.9%). RDTs were shown to be successful across a variety of specimen types in pre-specified subgroup studies. 

The overall risk of bias in the trials considered was modest; nevertheless, it was quite high in patient selection and flow and timing uncertainty. Among Ebola patients presenting with symptoms, RDTs have higher sensitivity and specificity than RT-PCR. Our research lends credence to using RDTs as a “rule in” test before administering medication or a vaccine.

Source: sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1198743X2200502X