4.3 Article

HIV infection: Point-of-care testing

Journal

ANNALS OF PHARMACOTHERAPY
Volume 38, Issue 4, Pages 670-676

Publisher

HARVEY WHITNEY BOOKS CO
DOI: 10.1345/aph.1D314

Keywords

antibody testing; human immunodeficiency virus; OraQuick

Funding

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [K23 AI01781] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIMH NIH HHS [R01 MH068686] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE: To review the data regarding point-of-care testing for the diagnosis of HIV infection in the US. DATA SOURCES: English-language literature was identified via MEDLINE (1980-August 2003) using key words such as rapid HIV tests and HIV antibody testing. Textbooks and other pertinent resources were also reviewed. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: All articles identified through the data sources above were evaluated and reviewed if pertinent to the objective. DATA SYNTHESIS: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has announced an effort to expand currently recommended strategies to prevent new infections with HIV. The cornerstone of this initiative is the availability of the new rapid test for antibodies to HIV (OraCuick Rapid HIV-1 Antibody Test, OraSure Technologies, Bethlehem, PA). The effectiveness, sensitivity, and specificity of this test have been evaluated in a number of cross-sectional studies using previously or simultaneously performed HIV enzyme immunoassays with Western blot confirmation as a reference standard. Although there are several limitations to consider, results of these studies suggest that this test has comparable ability to detect HIV antibodies to other commercially available tests. CONCLUSIONS: The OraQuick test is simple enough to be performed in many settings including those that facilitate achievement of the goals outlined by the CDC. Availability of this test should have a dramatic impact on HIV detection and prevention strategies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available