Open AccessResults from the WHO external quality assessment for the respiratory syncytial virus pilot, 2016‐17
Author(s) -
Jackson Sandra,
Peret Teresa C. T.,
Ziegler Thedi T.,
Thornburg Natalie J.,
Besselaar Terry,
Broor Shobha,
Barr Ian,
Baumeister Elsa,
Chadha Mandeep,
Chittaganpitch Malinee,
Darmaa Badarch,
Ellis Joanna,
Fasce Rodrigo,
Herring Belinda,
Herve Kadjo,
Hirve Siddhivinayak,
Li Yan,
Pisareva Maria,
Moen Ann,
Naguib Amel,
Palekar Rakhee,
Potdar Varsha,
Siqueira Marilda,
Treurnicht Florette,
Tivane Almiro,
Venter Marietjie,
Wairagkar Niteen,
Zambon Maria,
Zhang Wenqing
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
influenza and other respiratory viruses
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.743
H-Index - 57
eISSN - 1750-2659
pISSN - 1750-2640
DOI - 10.1111/irv.12771
Subject(s) - external quality assessment , medicine , disease control , covid-19 , virology , standardization , medical physics , computer science , infectious disease (medical specialty) , disease , pathology , operating system
Background External quality assessments (EQAs) for the molecular detection of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) are necessary to ensure the provision of reliable and accurate results. One of the objectives of the pilot of the World Health Organization (WHO) Global RSV Surveillance, 2016‐2017, was to evaluate and standardize RSV molecular tests used by participating countries. This paper describes the first WHO RSV EQA for the molecular detection of RSV. Methods The WHO implemented the pilot of Global RSV Surveillance based on the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System (GISRS) from 2016 to 2018 in 14 countries. To ensure standardization of tests, 13 participating laboratories were required to complete a 12 panel RSV EQA prepared and distributed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), USA. The 14th laboratory joined the pilot late and participated in a separate EQA. Laboratories evaluated a RSV rRT‐PCR assay developed by CDC and compared where applicable, other Laboratory Developed Tests (LDTs) or commercial assays already in use at their laboratories. Results Laboratories performed well using the CDC RSV rRT‐PCR in comparison with LDTs and commercial assays. Using the CDC assay, 11 of 13 laboratories reported correct results. Two laboratories each reported one false‐positive finding. Of the laboratories using LDTs or commercial assays, results as assessed by Ct values were 100% correct for 1/5 (20%). With corrective actions, all laboratories achieved satisfactory outputs. Conclusions These findings indicate that reliable results can be expected from this pilot. Continued participation in EQAs for the molecular detection of RSV is recommended.