Diagnostic performance evaluation of Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 assay against RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 detection and surveillance in Ethiopian referral hospitals: cross-sectional study

Accurate diagnosis is vital for controlling viral spread and guiding clinical and public health decisions. This study aimed to determine active (determined by RT-PCR) and past SARS-CoV-2 infection (determined by serology test) and evaluate the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 serological assay performance relative to RT-PCR as a reference for COVID-19 diagnosis and surveillance in Ethiopian hospitals. We conducted a cross-sectional study across five hospitals from August 9-23, 2021, enrolling 1,360 consecutive patients. Paired nasopharyngeal swabs (RT-PCR) and blood samples (Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2) were collected from all participants. Data were analyzed using Stata 14 to evaluate diagnostic performance (sensitivity, specificity), test agreement (Cohen's κ), comparative accuracy (ROC analysis), and predictors of infection using logistic regression (p < 0.05 threshold for significance). The mean age of study participants was 36.2 years (SD ± 17.2); 52% were females, with 418 (29.2%) reporting COVID-like symptoms. Seroprevalence was 53.2%, while 18% had active RT-PCR-confirmed infections. Urban residence (AOR = 8.44, 3.92-18.17), fever (AOR = 1.74, 1.02-2.96), myalgia (AOR = 2.62, 1.48-4.64), and cough (AOR = 1.84, 1.01-3.36) were significantly associated with active infection. The Elecsys test showed poor diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity = 14% [12.1-15.8%]; specificity = 77.9% [75.7-80.1%]; AUC = 0.43; the overall agreement 43.9%, κ = 0.078). These findings highlight a high burden of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a resource-constrained setting. While the Elecsys immunoassay demonstrated low sensitivity and poor agreement with RT-PCR, indicating it is not suitable for diagnosing active infection, its high specificity makes it a valuable tool for sero-surveillance to estimate population exposure and inform public health strategy where RT-PCR capacity is limited.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2026-01-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-36177-y
Primary Topic
SARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Diagnostic performance evaluation of Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 assay against RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 detection and surveillance in Ethiopian referral hospitals: cross-sectional study

Dabesa Gobena, Esayas Kebede Gudina, Zeleke Mekonen Mekonnen, Tizta Tilahun
Scientific Reports
SARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
article

Diagnostic performance evaluation of Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 assay against RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 detection and surveillance in Ethiopian referral hospitals: cross-sectional study

Dabesa Gobena, Esayas Kebede Gudina, Zeleke Mekonen Mekonnen, Tizta Tilahun
article en

Abstract

Accurate diagnosis is vital for controlling viral spread and guiding clinical and public health decisions. This study aimed to determine active (determined by RT-PCR) and past SARS-CoV-2 infection (determined by serology test) and evaluate the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 serological assay performance relative to RT-PCR as a reference for COVID-19 diagnosis and surveillance in Ethiopian hospitals. We conducted a cross-sectional study across five hospitals from August 9-23, 2021, enrolling 1,360 consecutive patients. Paired nasopharyngeal swabs (RT-PCR) and blood samples (Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2) were collected from all participants. Data were analyzed using Stata 14 to evaluate diagnostic performance (sensitivity, specificity), test agreement (Cohen's κ), comparative accuracy (ROC analysis), and predictors of infection using logistic regression (p < 0.05 threshold for significance). The mean age of study participants was 36.2 years (SD ± 17.2); 52% were females, with 418 (29.2%) reporting COVID-like symptoms. Seroprevalence was 53.2%, while 18% had active RT-PCR-confirmed infections. Urban residence (AOR = 8.44, 3.92-18.17), fever (AOR = 1.74, 1.02-2.96), myalgia (AOR = 2.62, 1.48-4.64), and cough (AOR = 1.84, 1.01-3.36) were significantly associated with active infection. The Elecsys test showed poor diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity = 14% [12.1-15.8%]; specificity = 77.9% [75.7-80.1%]; AUC = 0.43; the overall agreement 43.9%, κ = 0.078). These findings highlight a high burden of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a resource-constrained setting. While the Elecsys immunoassay demonstrated low sensitivity and poor agreement with RT-PCR, indicating it is not suitable for diagnosing active infection, its high specificity makes it a valuable tool for sero-surveillance to estimate population exposure and inform public health strategy where RT-PCR capacity is limited.

Scientific ReportsVol. 16(1)
Jimma University (ET), Oromiyaa Regional Health Bureau (ET), Bahir Dar University (ET)
Jimma University
No poverty
Openalex Percentile: Top 85%
SARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.