Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Roum Arch Microbiol Immunol. 2004 Jul-Dec;63(3-4):235-43.

Comparison of the quick view influenza test (Quidel) to an immunofluorescence assay for the detection of influenza virus infections.

Author information

  • 1Laboratory of Human and Molecular Virology, University Hospital, Caen, France.


The performancs of a membrane-based EIA, the Quick Vue Influenza test, (Quidel,USA) were compared to those of an immunofluorescence assay (IFA) for the detection of influenza virus A antigens in respiratory samples from children hospitalized during the 2002-2003 winter season. A prospective study was carried out on 2 nasal swabs drawn in parallel from 33 children: 13 samples were positive and 18 negative on both the Quick Vue test and IFA. Using an in-house reverse transcription (RT)- PCR assay as a gold standard, the two discordant results were identified as a false-positive reaction of the IFA and a false-negative one of the Quick Vue test . The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of the Quick Vue test were 87.5%, 100%, 100% and 89.5%, respectively. In the retrospective study of frozen samples, 57 of the 70 positive samples were detected by the Quick Vue test and 5 of 50 negative samples. Using the RT-PCR as a gold standard, there were 4 false-negative and 3 false-positive results on IFA and 10 false-negative results on the Quick Vue test. Our study suggests that performances of the Quick Vue are good if the test is carried out directly on nasal secretions, but that they can be decreased when nasal aspirates are collected in transport medium and frozen.

[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk