Evaluation under field conditions of a rapid test for detection of IgM AND IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2

Citations of this article
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.


Objective: To determine the additional diagnostic performance of a rapid serological test for detection of IgM and IgG antibodies compared to the real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test; for detection of SARS-CoV-2. Materials and methods: A cross-sectional study was carried out including patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in 3 hospitals, health workers exposed to the infection and outpatients who met suspicious case criteria, all of which underwent the molecular test (RT-PCR) and the rapid serological test. The additional diagnostic performance of rapid serological test was evaluated in comparison to molecular tests. Likewise, an approximation was made to the sensitivity and specificity of the rapid serological test. Results: 144 people were included. With the rapid test, 19.4% of positive results were obtained compared to 11.1% in the molecular test (p = 0.03). The rapid serological test detected 21 cases that had been negative by the initial (RT-PCR), providing an additional diagnostic performance of 56.8% compared to the RT-PCR. The additional diagnostic performance was 50.0% during the first week, 70.0% during the second week and 50.0% during the third week of symptom onset. The sensitivity of the rapid serological test was 43.8% and the specificity of 98.9%. Conclusions: The rapid serological test was able to detect a greater number of cases than those detected by the molecular test especially after the second week of onset of symptoms. It also showed high specificity. It is therefore useful as a complementary test to RT-PCR, especially during the second and third week of illness.




Vidal-Anzardo, M., Solis, G., Solari, L., Minaya, G., Ayala-Quintanilla, B., Astete-Cornejo, J., … Soto, A. (2020). Evaluation under field conditions of a rapid test for detection of IgM AND IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Publica, 37(2), 203–209. https://doi.org/10.17843/RPMESP.2020.372.5534

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free