Search Results

'RapidTec'-5 A-Multiple Dip Test is a one-step lateral flow immunoassay for the simultaneous qualitative detection of amphetamines, benzovl ecgonine, cannabinoids, phencyclidine, and opiates in urine.

'RapidTec' - 5 A-Multiple Dip Test is intended for professional use. It is not intended for over-the-counter sales to nonprofessionals. The assay is easy to perform, but should not be used without proper supervision. This immunoassay is a simplified, qualitative screening method that provides only a preliminary result for use in determining the need for additional or confirmatory testing, i.e. gas chromatorgraphy/mass spectrometry (GC/MS.)

'Rapid Tec'-5A-Multiple Dip Test provides only a preliminary analytical result. A more specific alternate chemical method must be used in order to obtain a more confirmed result. GC/MS is the preferred confirmatory method. Clinical and professional judgment should be applied to any drug of abuse test result. Particularly when preliminary results are used.

The assays employed in the 'RapidTec'-5A-Multiple Dip Test is based on the same principle of highly specific reactions between antigens and antibodies.

This assay is a one-step. competitive, immunoassay for the detection of marijuana. opiates, phencyclidine, cocaine and amphetamine in human urine. The test device consists of a membrane strip onto which drug conjugates have been immobilized and a colloidal gold-multi-antibody complex dried at one end of the membrane. In the absence of any drug in the urine sample, the colloidal gold-antibody complex moves with the urine by capillary action to contact the immobilized drug conjugates. Antibody-antigen reactions occur forming visible lines in the 'test' area.

When drug is present in the urine sample, the drug or metabolite will compete with its corresponding drug conjugate in the test area for the limited antibody sites on the colloidal gold-labeled antibody complex. If sufficient amount of drug is present, it will fill all of the available antibody binding sites, thus preventing attachment of the labeled antibody to the drug conjugate. An absence of a color band (line) in the 'test' area is indicative of a positive result.

A control band (line), comprised of a different antibody/antigen reaction, is present on the membrane strip. The control line is not influenced by the presence or absence of drug in the urine, and therefore, should be present on all reactions.

A negative urine will produce two colored bands, and a positive sample will produce only one band.

Here's an analysis of the provided text to extract the acceptance criteria and study details:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance

The device's acceptance criteria are defined by its ability to accurately detect specific drugs in human urine at or above set cut-off concentrations. The study described confirms that the device meets these criteria through reproducibility testing.

Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

Note: The table in the original document lists "Opiates" twice with different concentrations (2000 ng/ml and 300 ng/ml). Assuming the 2000 ng/ml is the primary cut-off for "Opiates" and the 300 ng/ml might be for a specific opiate metabolite not explicitly named, or there's a typo. For this summary, I'll list the two distinct values as they appear.

Study Details:

1. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance:

   • Sample Size: The document states that "control urines" were used, including concentrations above and below the stated cut-off, as well as negative controls. Each sample was tested four times, twice daily, for five days. The exact number of distinct "control urines" or individual patients is not specified.
   • Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated. The study seems to be a lab-based reproducibility study. There is no mention of country of origin or if it's retrospective or prospective patient data. It appears to be an experimental setup using controlled urine samples.

2. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts:

   • Number of Experts: Not applicable. The ground truth was established through instrumental analysis.
   • Qualifications of Experts: Not applicable.

3. Adjudication method for the test set:

   • Adjudication Method: Not applicable. Ground truth was established by GC/MS, an objective chemical method, not human interpretation requiring adjudication.

4. If a multi reader multi case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done, If so, what was the effect size of how much human readers improve with AI vs without AI assistance:

   • MRMC Study: No. This is a standalone diagnostic test, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool.

5. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done:

   • Standalone Performance: Yes, the device's performance (its ability to detect drugs at given cut-offs) was evaluated in a standalone manner. The "RapidTec'-5A-Multiple Dip Test" is a device that produces a visual result (lines) based on its internal chemical reactions, and its accuracy was verified against GC/MS. The document implies a human reads the results (presence or absence of lines), but the performance itself is of the device's chemical assay, verified against an independent chemical method.

6. The type of ground truth used:

   • Ground Truth: Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS). The document explicitly states: "All concentrations were verified by GC/MS."

7. The sample size for the training set:

   • Training Set Sample Size: Not applicable. This device is a lateral flow immunoassay, not a machine learning or AI-based algorithm that requires a "training set" in the conventional sense. Its performance is based on its chemical design and manufacturing consistency.

8. How the ground truth for the training set was established:

   • Ground Truth for Training Set: Not applicable, as there is no training set for this type of device.

Ask a specific question about this device