Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Oct;83(4):452-457.
doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2021.07.038. Epub 2021 Aug 5.

Real-world evaluation of COVID-19 lateral flow device (LFD) mass-testing in healthcare workers at a London hospital; a prospective cohort analysis

Georgia Lamb  1 , Joseph Heskin  2 , Paul Randell  3 , Nabeela Mughal  2 , Luke Sp Moore  4 , Rachael Jones  2 , Gary W Davies  2 , Michael Rayment  2
Affiliations

Real-world evaluation of COVID-19 lateral flow device (LFD) mass-testing in healthcare workers at a London hospital; a prospective cohort analysis

Georgia Lamb et al. J Infect. 2021 Oct.

Abstract

Objectives: Real-world evaluation of the performance of the Innova lateral flow immunoassay antigen device (LFD) for regular COVID-19 testing of hospital workers.

Methods: This prospective cohort analysis took place at a London NHS Trust. 5076 secondary care healthcare staff participated in LFD testing from 18 November 2020 to21 January 2021. Staff members submitted results and symptoms via an online portal twice weekly. Individuals with positive LFD results were invited for confirmatory SARS CoV-2 PCR testing. The positive predictive value (PPV) of the LFD was measured. Secondary outcome measures included time from LFD result to PCR test and staff symptom profiles.

Results: 284/5076 individuals reported a valid positive LFD result, and a paired PCR result was obtained in 259/284 (91.2%). 244 were PCR positive yielding a PPV of 94.21% (244/259, 95% CI 90.73% to 96.43%). 204/259 (78.8%) staff members had the PCR within 36 hours of the LFD test. Symptom profiles were confirmed for 132/244 staff members (54.1%) with positive PCR results (true positives) and 13/15 (86.6%) with negative PCR results (false positives). 91/132 true positives (68.9%) were symptomatic at the time of LFD testing: 65/91 (71.4%) had symptoms meeting the PHE case definition of COVID-19, whilst 26/91 (28.6%) had atypical symptoms. 18/41 (43.9%) staff members who were asymptomatic at the time of positive LFD developed symptoms in the subsequent four days. 9/13 (76.9%) false positives were asymptomatic, 1/13 (7.7%) had atypical symptoms and 3/13 (23.1%) had symptoms matching the PHE case definition.

Conclusions: The PPV of the Innova LFD is high when used amongst hospital staff during periods of high prevalence of COVID-19, yet we find frequent use by symptomatic staff rather than as a purely asymptomatic screening tool. LFD testing does allow earlier isolation of infected workers and facilitates detection of individuals whose symptoms do not qualify for PCR testing.

Keywords: Diagnostics; Lateral flow tests; Point-of-care; SARS-CoV-2.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Competing Interests JH received research funding from CW+ Charity and the Westminster Medical School Research Trust, and received honoraria from Gilead. NM has received speaker fees from Beyer (2016) and Pfizer (2019) and received educational support from Eumedica (2016) and Baxter (2017). LSPM has consulted for or received speaker fees from bioMerieux (2013–2021), Pfizer (2018–2021), Eumedica (2016–2021), DNAelectronics (2015–18), Dairy Crest (2017–2018), Umovis Lab (2020–2021), Shionogi (2021), Pulmocide (2021), and received research grants from the National Institute for Health Research (2013–2021), CW+ Charity (2018–2021) and LifeArc (2020–2021). RJ has received honoraria, speaker fees, travel support and/or research grant funding from Gilead, ViiV Healthcare, BMS, Abbvie, Janssen and Merck. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig. 1
CONSORT diagram summarizing healthcare worker cohort participation and SARS-CoV-2 lateral flow antigen test analysis.
Fig 2
Fig. 2
Summary of paired SARS-CoV-2 lateral flow device (LFD) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) results of healthcare workers during the study period.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. WHO . WHO; 2020. Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2.https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/diagnostic-testing-for-sars-cov-2 Available at. (accessed February 22, 2021)
    1. NHS England and NHS Improvement . NHS England; 2020. Rollout of lateral flow devices for asymptomatic staff testing for SARS CoV-2 (phase 2: trusts)https://www.england.nhs.uk/coronavirus/wp-content/uploads/sites/52/2020/... (accessed January 22)
    1. Guglielmi G. Fast coronavirus tests: what they can and can’t do. Nature. 2020;585:496–498. doi: 10.1038/d41586-020-02661-2. - DOI - PubMed
    1. O'Farrell B. In: Lateral flow immunoassay. Wong R., Tse H., editors. Humana Press; 2009. Evolution in lateral flow–based immunoassay systems. (eds) - DOI
    1. Cevik M., Kuppalli K., Kindrachuk J., Peiris M. Virology, transmission, and pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2. BMJ. 2020;371 doi: 10.1136/bmj.m3862. m3862. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types