Table 1.
Compilation of results of lateral flow device (LFD) (penside) PPRV test compared with laboratory test results. For each test used, we tabulated the type of sample and the result (+/−) of the LFD test and the corresponding PCR test for PPRV. Assuming that the PCR test is a definitive test for infection with PPRV, the sensitivity of the test for ocular/nasal swabs was 83.54% (95% CI: 73.5–90.9%) while the specificity was 94.59% (95% CI: 86.7–98.5%)
| Sample type | Sample origin | Number of samples | PCR neg; LFD neg | PCR neg; LFD pos | PCR pos; LFD neg | PCR pos; LFD pos |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nasal swabs | UK (known clean)a | 12 | 12 | 0 | – | – |
| UK (known −ve)a | 10 | 10 | 0 | – | – | |
| UK (known +ve)a | 27 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 22 | |
| Ivory Coastb | 18 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 9 | |
| Ugandab | 8 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 5 | |
| Pakistanc | 21 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 13 | |
| Eye swabs | UK(known clean)a | 8 | 8 | 0 | – | – |
| UK (known −ve)a | 5 | 5 | 0 | – | – | |
| Ivory Coastb | 16 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 8 | |
| Ethiopiab | 10 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Pakistanc | 18 | 4 | 0 | 5 | 9 | |
| Oral swabs | Ivory Coastb | 10 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| Faecal swabs | Pakistanc | 10 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 2 |
| Tissue homogenate | Ethiopiab | 9 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 7 |
PCR tests for PPRV were carried out in the UK using real-time PCR as described in Batten et al. (2011). Note that, for UK animals that were known to be free of PPRV, the PCR test was not carried out but can be assumed to be negative.
PCR tests for PPRV were carried out in Ivory Coast, Ethiopia and Uganda using conventional (gel-based) PCR as described in Couacy-Hymann et al. (2002).
PCR tests for PPRV were carried out in Pakistan using real-time PCR as described in Kwiatek et al. (2010).