Journal
INFECTION
Volume 50, Issue 1, Pages 251-256Publisher
SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s15010-021-01653-2
Keywords
SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; Serology; Antibody; Comparison; Immunity
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
The study evaluated the SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence in healthcare workers of a pediatric hospital and found inconsistent results among different commercially available antibody detection assays, highlighting the importance of accurately assessing the number of past infections and the duration of antibodies.
The aim of the study was to access the SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence in healthcare workers (HCWs) of a tertiary pediatric hospital after the first wave of the pandemic and to compare the results among seven commercially available antibody detection assays, including chemiluminescence (CMIA), electroluminescence (ECLIA), Epsilon nzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA), and rapid immunochromatography (RIC). SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection was performed in serum samples of 1216 HCWs, using a reference CMIA assay and 8/1216 (0.66%) were detected positive. Positive serum samples were further tested with other assays; however, only one sample was positive by all tests. The rest 7 cases were negative with ECLIA and ELISA and gave discordant results with RIC test. Six months later, new serum samples of seropositive HCWs were analyzed with the same 7 tests, with inconsistent results again. Identification of reliable SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests is important to determine the actual number of past infections, the duration of antibodies, and guide public health decisions.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available