Clinical evaluation of two immunoassay methods for the rapid detection of chlamydia trachomatis : antigen in endocervical specimens from high risk female patients

2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/2336/68374
Title:
Clinical evaluation of two immunoassay methods for the rapid detection of chlamydia trachomatis : antigen in endocervical specimens from high risk female patients
Authors:
Ólafur Steingrímsson; Jón Hjaltalín Ólafsson; Sigfús M. Karlsson; Dolphin, Lauren; Steingrímur Davíðsson; Pawlak, Catherine; Pronovost, Allan; Rannveig Pálsdóttir 1952
Citation:
Læknablaðið 1995, 81(7):541-4
Issue Date:
1-Jul-1995
Abstract:
Two rapid immunoassay methods, QuickVue-Chlamydia (Quidel Corp., San Diego California) and Kodak Surecell (Kodak Corp. Rochester, N.Y.) were evaluated for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis antigen in endocervical swabs from high risk females attending a sexually transmitted disease clinic. The results were compared to McCoy cell culture and a polymerase chain reaction assay (Amplicor®-PCR, Roche Molecular Systems). Of the 240 females enrolled in the study 45 were considered infected (18.8%). Sensitivity, specificity, predictive value of a positive (PVP) and predictive value of a negative (PVN) of the QuickVue-Chlamydia assay were 96%, 99%, 96% and 99% respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, PVP and PVN of the Surecell assay were 96%, 100%, 100% and 99% respectively. The performance of the two immunoassay methods was similar, the sensitivity was the same and the specificity of the Kodak Surecell was slightly better than that of the QuickVue. On the other hand, the QuickWVL&-Chlamydia assay was considerably simpler to perform (fewer steps) than the Kodak Surecell assay and took significantly less of technologists time.
Description:
Neðst á síðunni er hægt að nálgast greinina í heild sinni með því að smella á hlekkinn View/Open
Additional Links:
http://www.laeknabladid.is

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorÓlafur Steingrímsson-
dc.contributor.authorJón Hjaltalín Ólafsson-
dc.contributor.authorSigfús M. Karlsson-
dc.contributor.authorDolphin, Lauren-
dc.contributor.authorSteingrímur Davíðsson-
dc.contributor.authorPawlak, Catherine-
dc.contributor.authorPronovost, Allan-
dc.contributor.authorRannveig Pálsdóttir 1952-
dc.date.accessioned2009-05-15T14:52:01Z-
dc.date.available2009-05-15T14:52:01Z-
dc.date.issued1995-07-01-
dc.date.submitted2009-05-15-
dc.identifier.citationLæknablaðið 1995, 81(7):541-4en
dc.identifier.issn0023-7213-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2336/68374-
dc.descriptionNeðst á síðunni er hægt að nálgast greinina í heild sinni með því að smella á hlekkinn View/Openen
dc.description.abstractTwo rapid immunoassay methods, QuickVue-Chlamydia (Quidel Corp., San Diego California) and Kodak Surecell (Kodak Corp. Rochester, N.Y.) were evaluated for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis antigen in endocervical swabs from high risk females attending a sexually transmitted disease clinic. The results were compared to McCoy cell culture and a polymerase chain reaction assay (Amplicor®-PCR, Roche Molecular Systems). Of the 240 females enrolled in the study 45 were considered infected (18.8%). Sensitivity, specificity, predictive value of a positive (PVP) and predictive value of a negative (PVN) of the QuickVue-Chlamydia assay were 96%, 99%, 96% and 99% respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, PVP and PVN of the Surecell assay were 96%, 100%, 100% and 99% respectively. The performance of the two immunoassay methods was similar, the sensitivity was the same and the specificity of the Kodak Surecell was slightly better than that of the QuickVue. On the other hand, the QuickWVL&-Chlamydia assay was considerably simpler to perform (fewer steps) than the Kodak Surecell assay and took significantly less of technologists time.en
dc.language.isoisen
dc.publisherLæknafélag Íslands, Læknafélag Reykjavíkuren
dc.relation.urlhttp://www.laeknabladid.isen
dc.subjectKynsjúkdómaren
dc.subjectKlamýdíaen
dc.subject.meshChlamydia Infectionsen
dc.subject.meshChlamydia trachomatisen
dc.subject.meshFemaleen
dc.subject.meshBacteriological Techniquesen
dc.subject.meshImmunoenzyme Techniquesen
dc.titleClinical evaluation of two immunoassay methods for the rapid detection of chlamydia trachomatis : antigen in endocervical specimens from high risk female patientsis
dc.typeArticleen
dc.identifier.journalLæknablaðiðen
All Items in Hirsla are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.