Background

Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) have transformed infectious disease detection by providing timely and accessible diagnostic information. These tests play a crucial role in disease surveillance, outbreak control, patient management, and antimicrobial stewardship. However, variations in diagnostic accuracy may affect clinical decision-making and public health outcomes.

Objective

To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of rapid infectious disease tests compared with standard laboratory reference methods and assess their clinical and public health utility.

Methods

A prospective diagnostic accuracy study was conducted involving 1,200 patients suspected of infectious diseases. Rapid diagnostic tests for influenza, COVID-19, dengue fever, malaria, and streptococcal pharyngitis were compared with gold-standard laboratory methods including polymerase chain reaction (PCR), culture, and microscopy. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and overall accuracy were calculated.

Results

Rapid diagnostic tests demonstrated overall sensitivity ranging from 82.4% to 96.7% and specificity ranging from 88.6% to 98.9%. Malaria and COVID-19 rapid tests exhibited the highest overall diagnostic performance. Diagnostic accuracy was influenced by disease prevalence, specimen quality, and timing of testing.

Conclusion

Rapid infectious disease tests provide valuable diagnostic information and support timely clinical decision-making. While they cannot fully replace confirmatory laboratory testing in all situations, their high diagnostic performance makes them essential tools in modern healthcare and public health practice.