The lateral flow tester was purchased by the UK government for comprehensive testing at LiverpoolAnd, perhaps the entire country, it could lose up to half of those infected with Covid-19, according to experts.
The government has it Wonderful expectations Innova test, after signing two contracts with the California-based company. Innova told the Guardian that it now ships more than 1 million tests per day to the UK.
The Guardian understands that the government also hopes to use the test to reduce the duration of self-isolation among people who have been identified as contacts of those infected with the Coronavirus.
The government has released the results of the Lateral Flow evaluation evaluation, which capture the virus antigen from the nose, throat swab or saliva within half an hour. She said it could be used to catch the infection in people without symptoms.
“A comprehensive clinical evaluation from Public Health England and the University of Oxford showed that lateral flow tests are accurate and sensitive enough to be used in the community, including people without symptoms,” the Department of Health and Welfare said in a statement.
She said the tests that are now being published in Liverpool have an accuracy of 99.6%. “The results obtained from PHE Porton Down and the University of Oxford demonstrate that newly published lateral flow tests are highly reliable, sensitive and accurate in multiple settings,” he claimed. It had “an overall sensitivity of 76.8% for all PCR-positive individuals but detects over 95% of individuals with high viral loads”. PCR is the gold standard swab test which is widely used nowadays but requires laboratory treatment.
Professor Sir John Bell of Oxford University, a government life sciences adviser, said the test could be used to catch infections in people who would otherwise not know they are infected.
“The data in this verification report shows that these inexpensive and easy-to-use tests can play a major role in our battle against Covid-19,” he said. “They identify those who are likely to spread the disease, and when used systematically in mass testing it can reduce transmission by 90%. They will detect disease in large numbers of people who have never even been tested.”
But Professor John Dix, an expert in evaluating Covid-19 tests, disagreed with their assessment of accuracy and said it would be dangerous to use the tests to rule out disease.
One of the tests took place at a community testing center, where 58% of Covid-19 cases were detected. Others included experienced nurses testing people in the hospital, which has picked up 73% of Covid-19 cases. Some were sent to Porton Down, where they earned 79%.
“For the first time we are being allowed to see data on test performance that the government bought for comprehensive examination Moonshot. DHSC data shows that as many as half of Covid cases may miss a test, and may give more false positives than true positives when used in a mass screening.
“I’m really concerned about not giving people information to understand what the results mean. A negative test indicates your risk drops to between a quarter and a half of the average, but it doesn’t rule out Covid. It would be tragic for people to be misled into thinking they are safe to visit their elderly relatives or Take other risks.
“The primary epidemiology is that tests that miss cases like Innova are not appropriate to use to rule out disease – like what is needed to decide whether students are safe to travel home at the end of the year.
It appears that this data has not been released before because it was not ready. The decisions to take group tests do not appear to have been based on any serious scrutiny of the evidence. “
Professor Sebastian Johnston of Imperial College London said the government’s announcement “It gives the impression that all Lateral Flow Antigen tests have high sensitivity after extensive clinical testing by PHE / Oxford. This is very far from the truth. “
Of the 40 tests evaluated, only one – Innova – is evaluated in detail. “Yes, it would be a good idea to run one quick test that could quickly detect people with high virus loads and quickly isolate them,” Johnston said. “This single test will not be good enough to say you are almost negative, because its sensitivity is not good enough, especially in the hands of the general public.”
The ambition is to use tests with saliva samples at home, Peter Santiosagnio, vice president of product management at Innova Medical Group in California, told the Guardian. People use their smartphone camera to read the device and see their results from an app.
“We are, to the best of my knowledge today, the only antigen test that is being used in the UK government to the best of my knowledge that has been fully verified to test for saliva,” he said.
“The saliva test is crucial because the saliva test enables a home test. Ultimately.”
It is believed that lateral flow tests can be used to help people get out of isolation if they are negative. He suggested that, after two days, the two tests would be sufficient to find out if they were infected. “Different people will have different protocols. But, in general, our position on this test is [if] You take the first test and the first test is negative, you wait for two days, and you take the second test. If you’re still negative, then you’re probably fine, but if you want a belt and bras, wait another couple of days. “