This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Other Versions of this Article: JCM.01761-07v1 46/5/1692    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Reprints and Permissions Copyright Information Books from ASM Press MicrobeWorld Google Scholar Articles by Learmonth, K. M. Articles by Dax, E. M. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Learmonth, K. M. Articles by Dax, E. M.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, May 2008, p. 1692-1697, Vol. 46, No. 5
0095-1137/08/$08.00+0     doi:10.1128/JCM.01761-07
Copyright © 2008, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Assessing Proficiency of Interpretation of Rapid Human Immunodeficiency Virus Assays in Nonlaboratory Settings: Ensuring Quality of Testing

National Serology Reference Laboratory, Australia, St. Vincent's Institute, Fitzroy, Victoria, Australia,¹ Department of Medicine at St. Vincent's Health, University of Melbourne, Fitzroy, Victoria, Australia,² Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia³

Received 4 September 2007/ Returned for modification 4 January 2008/ Accepted 6 March 2008

Rapid antibody tests for the detection of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) offer an effective means of providing a timely result of HIV serostatus to individuals. The increased use of rapid HIV antibody tests outside the laboratory has highlighted the need for new, cost-effective quality assurance methods to be developed for use in nonlaboratory-based and resource-limited settings. Photographed rapid HIV test results were used in a modified external quality assessment scheme to assess the interpretation proficiency and, therefore, to assess the feasibility of using this method as a basis for a quality assessment program for nonlaboratory-based testing. Participants (n = 148), both experienced and inexperienced in the performance and interpretation of rapid HIV testing, interpreted the photographed results of five rapid HIV assays. These were scored according to the degree of technical discordance. Error scores were grouped according to each participant's technical experience. The accuracy of interpretation for four of the five assays was between 80 and 97%, indicating that the photographed results of samples, including those difficult to read or borderline difficult to read, can be used to assess the proficiency of test operators in interpreting results. Participants had greater difficulty in interpreting samples of weak reactivity; this was consistent across the five assays. Experience played an important role in accurate interpretation, with experienced laboratory participants exhibiting greater proficiency (P < 0.05) in interpreting the results of three of the five rapid HIV assays. It was established that photographed results of rapid HIV assays could be interpreted with accuracy and demonstrated that prior experience resulted in a more accurate interpretation performance.

Published ahead of print on 19 March 2008.