AUTHOR=Cai Peiling , Wang Junren , Ye Peng , Zhang Yarong , Wang Mengping , Guo Ronglian , Zhao Hongying 

TITLE=Performance of self-performed SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test: a systematic review and meta-analysis

JOURNAL=Frontiers in Public Health

VOLUME=12

YEAR=2024

URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/public-health/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1402949

DOI=10.3389/fpubh.2024.1402949

ISSN=2296-2565

ABSTRACT=<sec id="sec1"><title>Background</title><p>The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of self-tested SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests.</p></sec><sec id="sec2"><title>Methods</title><p>Databases of Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for original studies investigating accuracy of self-tested SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests, with RT-PCR as “gold standard.”</p></sec><sec id="sec3"><title>Results</title><p>Forty-five eligible studies were found after database searching and screening using pre-defined criteria. The accuracy results from 50,897 suspected COVID-19 patients were pooled, and the overall sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio were 0.77, 1.00, and 625.95, respectively. Subgroup analysis showed higher sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in subgroups of Abbott Panbio, self-collected nasal swab samples, and use of nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swab and lower Ct cutoff value in RT-PCR.</p></sec><sec id="sec4"><title>Conclusion</title><p>Fully self-performed SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests showed overall high accuracy compared to “gold standard,” and are reliable surrogates for the standard test of COVID-19 using nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal samples and RT-PCR.</p></sec>