English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The mainstay of laboratory diagnosis for Lyme disease is two-tiered serological testing, in which a reactive first-tier enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) or an immunofluorescence assay is supplemented by separate IgM and IgG immunoblots. Recent data suggest that the C6 ELISA can be substituted for immunoblots without a reduction in either sensitivity or specificity. In this study, the costs of 4 different two-tiered testing strategies for Lyme disease were compared using the median charges for these tests at 6 commercial diagnostic laboratories in 2012. The study found that a whole-cell sonicate ELISA followed by the C6 ELISA was the most cost-effective two-tiered testing strategy for Lyme disease with acute-phase serum samples. We conclude that the C6 ELISA can substitute for immunoblots in the two-tiered testing protocol for Lyme disease without a loss of sensitivity or specificity and is less expensive.

Comparative Cost-Effectiveness of Two-Tiered Testing Strategies for Serodiagnosis of Lyme Disease with Noncutaneous Manifestations