From: A meta-analysis of the performance of the PimaTM CD4 for point of care testing
Clinical questions | Venous derived specimen testing | Capillary derived specimen testing |
---|---|---|
Is Pima suitable for screening for reflex testing of CryAg testing at the 100 cells/μl threshold? | Suitable: 88 % sensitive, Negative bias of 34 cells/μl, 1.8 % total misclassification, Good specificity >97 % | Not suitable: 79 % sensitivity, Negative bias of 73 cells/μl, 3.5 % total misclassification, Good specificity >97 % |
Is Pima suitable for identifying patients eligible for ART initiation at 350 cell/μl (WHO 2010 guidelines)? |  | |
Suitable: >91 % sensitive, Negative bias 38-51cells/μl. | Suitable: >91 % sensitive, Negative bias 38-51cells/μl. | |
Expect 9.2Â % (6.3Â % false positive) total misclassification with specificity of 89Â % | Expect 13.8Â % (9.3Â % false positive) total misclassification with specificity of 82Â %, Will increase treatment costs significantly more than venous testing. | |
Is Pima suitable for identifying patients eligible for ART initiation at 500 cells/μl (WHO 2013 guidelines)? |  | |
Suitable: >95 % sensitive, Negative bias 53-79 cells/μl | Suitable: >95 % sensitive, Negative bias 53-79 cells/μl | |
Expect 8.3Â % (6.3Â % false positive) total misclassification with 81Â % specificity | Expect 11Â % (7.5Â % false positive)total misclassification with 74Â % specificity Will increase treatment costs significantly more than venous testing. |