Your CoVid-19 test queries and observations - the Megathread

PaddyGannon wrote: »

This started as a thread about Waiting for a test but like a lot of threads on boards it has turned into something else. If you want to talk about something else, open a new thread.
Just some of it by what I feel is the first person to go off thread but there are more people.

Pot calling the kettle black.


Yes, exactly, you just read a bit not the whole article or maybe just the bit you wanted to read or report on to prove your non-point. Is it as above you can catch it? Or below

Why didn’t you quote Dr Glockman

And to answer your first question,

Because the WHO recommended it.

Your being very selective, im responding to somebody who thinks hospitalisation reduces immunity and At ever stage I’ve said to err on the side of caution, there are a lot of u knowns in all of this.


And all this talk is about testing, people are not taking into account the limitations of the testing and putting far to much stock in it.



And I could have quoted Gluckman, who said “it seems likely” in relation to immunity, but that only backs up the fact that there are a lot of unknowns in all
Of this.

Contacted the HSE today for an update on how long my own testing might take. They said anyone submitted on March 16th was wiped off the system temporarily last week as system crashed.

Apparently details were uploaded again in the last couple of days so these people are getting priority now. Supposedly.

KGLady wrote: »

If this is true its infuriating. Myself and my 7yr old were referred that morning too and are still waiting. She's great now but I am still quite unwell and GP was very frustrated that we are still untested because she really can't do anything to help me until we know for sure. If I get any worse now its 999 and hospital for me and that in itself is terrifying.

Absolutely. Could not believe it when the operator said it.
Disgraceful people are waiting this long.

Unicorn55 wrote: »

Also waiting since 16th. Got text saying sorry for the wait last night.

I'm pretty much better now, still self isolating

We're the same 3 of us waiting since the 16th too... and nothing other than the same 'sorry for the wait' text received

Partner, who is a surgeon, still waiting having been referred 3 days ago. Symptoms have all but gone but can't return to work until getting the all clear. Would have thought medical workers would be pushed to the top of the queue to get them back to work.

I had symptoms for a good week before I contacted my GP. They were mild, dry cough, increased difficulty breathing. I'm asthmatic and that would usually be with case with a cold or a cough.

I was referred a week ago and since then I just got a text that I was in a queue.

My symptoms are now gone. Cough is gone since yesterday and my breathing is back to normal.

Question now is should I get tested when eventually called. I don't see the point and I think since there is such a backlog it would be better that ppl who don't need to go shouldn't go to free up resources.

CB19Kevo wrote: »

Referred yesterday, Anyone else experiencing wheezing.
I have a cough,slight throat irritation and a substantial wheeze.
No fever or other symptoms.

I've had slight wheezing. I had or still have asthma but haven't had a flare up in a good few years. Not even sure if it's something that stays with you or disappears? Used to be bad when I a kid though.

I find my cough particularly worse in the mornings and evenings and there during the weekend it felt like somebody was standing in my chest when I'd wake up.

This is an absolute sham. By all means tighten the criteria for testing going forward if need be, but to tell people who have self isolated for over a week waiting on a test that they won’t now be tested is ridiculous.

It won’t change what I’m doing, but some people may abandon their self isolation, within the family home at least upon hearing this, which could cause it’s own problems.

Plus, I’m sure I have seen reports of plenty who tested positive without a fever, so why would they make that a necessary symptom for testing? It just doesn’t make sense.

The gp lines are going to be crazy today after this

wat24 wrote: »

The gp lines are going to be crazy today after this

TBH I got the impression from last night that there is more of an issue with how people were being identified from symptoms.

TuringBot47 wrote: »

Anyone know... does the test only test if you have Corona currently?
Or can it detect that you already had it? Eg. if you have anti-bodies against Corona?

I had a bad head cold/cough/sinus infection for last 10 days and on anti-biotics.
Would be good to know whether it was just a sinus infection or mild Corona on top of it.

AFAIK there is no test available yet to tell if you had it, the last thing I read was that somewhere in the US hopes to have one available in time.

Your either positive or negative for currently having it.

What’s unclear about the test is where in the lifecycle of the virus it shows and doesn’t show in the test they are doing. It’s possible you can be infected but not test positive because you are only recently infected or have gone out the far side of the infection.


This might explain it better https://emcrit.org/ibcc/COVID19/


limitations in determining the performance of RT-PCR

There are several major limitations, which make it hard to precisely quantify how RT-PCR performs.
(1) RT-PCR performed on nasal swabs depends on obtaining a sufficiently deep specimen. Poor technique will cause the PCR assay to under-perform.
(2) COVID-19 isn't a binary disease, but rather there is a spectrum of illness. Sicker patients with higher viral burden may be more likely to have a positive assay. Likewise, sampling early in the disease course may reveal a lower sensitivity than sampling later on.
(3) Most current studies lack a “gold standard” for COVID-19 diagnosis. For example, in patients with positive CT scan and negative RT-PCR, it's murky whether these patients truly have COVID-19 (is this a false-positive CT scan, or a false-negative RT-PCR?).
(Convalescent serologies might eventually solve this problem, but this data isn't available currently.)
specificity

Specificity seems to be high (although contamination can cause false-positive results).
sensitivity may not be terrific

Sensitivity compared to CT scans
In a case series diagnosed on the basis of clinical criteria and CT scans, the sensitivity of RT-PCR was only ~70% (Kanne 2/28).
Sensitivity varies depending on assumptions made about patients with conflicting data (e.g. between 66-80%)(Ai et al.).
�� Image of analysis of Ai et al to determine sensitivity & specificity of PCR here.
Among patients with suspected COVID-19 and a negative initial PCR, repeat PCR was positive in 15/64 patients (23%). This suggests a PCR sensitivity of <80%. Conversion from negative to positive PCR seemed to take a period of days, with CT scan often showing evidence of disease well before PCR positivity (Ai et al.).
Bottom line?
PCR seems to have a sensitivity somewhere on the order of ~75%.
A single negative RT-PCR doesn't exclude COVID-19 (especially if obtained from a nasopharyngeal source or if taken relatively early in the disease course).
If the RT-PCR is negative but suspicion for COVID-19 remains, then ongoing isolation and re-sampling several days later should be considered.



All I’m taking from that, and what I’ve been saying all along is that the testing is limited in its nature and at the moment in its numbers. So continue to behave like you have it.

My wife was referred a week ago, symptoms now all but completely gone and all we received was a text from the HsE. We know of someone who was referred Monday this week and received the test Tuesday. At this stage we probably won’t follow it up as there isn’t any health issue currently.