Current status of rubella testing: a report based on data from the College of American Pathologists' surveys, 1978-1980.
Data from national survey programs were used to define selected attributes of popular rubella methods. Of those participating in the College of American Pathologists' survey, 47% used passive hemagglutination (PHA); 45% used hemagglutination-inhibition (HI), 7% used indirect immunofluorescence, and less than 1% used enzyme immunosorbent assays for rubella testing. Enzyme assays were not evaluated. The other methods had sensitivities and specificities exceeding 94% and 88%, respectively. The predictive value of a negative test was used to identify differences among the various methods. The HI tests using human O cells had a 90-95% prediction rate for a true-negative result. Indirect immunofluorescence, PHA, and HI using kaolin had the lowest predictive values (68-72%) values for other methods were intermediate. Levels of reactivity also differed. The HI methods using human O cells yielded higher titers than did the reference method (1- to 3-day-old chick/heparin MnCl2), while the titers for HI methods using kaolin tended to be lower.
D000818:Animals; D000914:Antibodies, Viral / Q000032:analysis; D003625:Data Collection; D004797:Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay; D005455:Fluorescent Antibody Technique; D006385:Hemagglutination Inhibition Tests; D006386:Hemagglutination Tests; D006801:Humans; D007616:Kaolin; D010338:Pathology, Clinical / Q000592:standards; D011336:Probability; D012412:Rubella virus / Q000276:immunology*; D012955:Societies, Medical; D014481:United States
D000914:Antibodies, Viral; D007616:Kaolin