BMJ, doi: 10.1136/bmj.39405.472975.80, (Published 6 December 2007)

Research

Population screening for coeliac disease in primary care by district nurses using a rapid antibody test: diagnostic accuracy and feasibility study

¹ Department of Paediatrics, Medical and Health Science Centre, University of Debrecen, 4032 Debrecen, Hungary, ² Coeliac Disease Centre, Heim Pál Children’s Hospital, 1089 Budapest, Hungary, ³ Department of Infectology, Hetényi Géza County Hospital, 5000 Szolnok, Hungary, ⁴ County Institute of Public Health and Health Officer Service, 5000 Szolnok, Hungary, ⁵ Department of Pathology, Hetényi Géza County Hospital, 5000 Szolnok, Hungary, ⁶ Department of Gastroenterology and Alimentary Tract Surgery, Tampere University Hospital and Medical School, 33014 Tampere, Finland, ⁷ Regional Immunology Laboratory, Third Department of Internal Medicine, Medical and Health Science Centre, University of Debrecen, 4032 Debrecen, Hungary, ⁸ Department of Medical Genetics, Biomedicum Helsinki, University of Helsinki, 00014 Helsinki, Finland, ⁹ Paediatric Research Centre, Tampere University Hospital and Medical School, 33014 Tampere, Finland

Objective To evaluate the feasibility and diagnostic accuracy of screening for coeliac disease by rapid detection of IgA antibodies to tissue transglutaminase performed in primary care.

Design District nurses screened 6 year old children using rapid antibody testing of finger prick blood. They also collected capillary blood samples for laboratory determination of IgA and IgG antibodies to endomysium and IgA antibodies to tissue transglutaminase. Children with positive rapid test results were directly sent for biopsy of the small intestine.

Setting Primary care in Jász-Nagykun-Szolnok county, Hungary.

Participants 2690 children (77% of 6 year olds living in the county) and 120 nurses.

Main outcome measures Positivity for antibodies to endomysium or transglutaminase in the laboratory and coeliac disease confirmed at biopsy.

Results 37 children (1.4%, 95% confidence interval 0.9% to 1.8%) had biopsy confirmed coeliac disease. Only five of these children had been diagnosed clinically before screening. Rapid testing had a 78.1% sensitivity (70.0% to 89.3%) and 100% specificity (88.4% to 100%) for a final diagnosis of coeliac disease by biopsy. Sensitivity was 65.1% (50.2% to 77.6%) and specificity was 100% (99.8% to 100%) compared with combined results of IgA and IgG laboratory tests. Trained laboratory workers detected 30 of the 31 newly diagnosed IgA competent patients with the rapid test kit used blindly. Median time to biopsy after a positive rapid test result was significantly shorter (20 days, range 4-148) than after a positive laboratory result (142 days, 70-256; P<0.001). Children with coeliac disease detected at screening were smaller and had worse health status than their peers but they improved on a gluten-free diet.

Conclusions A simple rapid antibody test enabled primary care nurses to detect patients with coeliac disease in the community who were not picked up in clinical care. Extra training is needed to improve sensitivity.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Articles

But where does it take us?

David S Sanders, Andrew D Hopper, John S Leeds, and Marios Hadjivassiliou
BMJ 2008 336: 9. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Reasons for optimism

Rajendra Kale
BMJ 2007 335: 0. [Extract] [Full Text]

Pre-endoscopy serological testing for coeliac disease: evaluation of a clinical decision tool

Andrew D Hopper, Simon S Cross, David P Hurlstone, Mark E McAlindon, Alan J Lobo, Marios Hadjivassiliou, Marion E Sloan, Simon Dixon, and David S Sanders
BMJ 2007 334: 729. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Undiagnosed coeliac disease at age seven: population based prospective birth cohort study

Polly J Bingley, Alistair J K Williams, Alastair J Norcross, D Joe Unsworth, Robert J Lock, Andrew R Ness, and Richard W Jones
BMJ 2004 328: 322-323. [Full Text] [PDF]

Coeliac disease in primary care: case finding study

Harold Hin, Graham Bird, Peter Fisher, Nick Mahy, and Derek Jewell
BMJ 1999 318: 164-167. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Hall, D, Cole, T, Elliman, D, Gibson, P, Logan, S, Wales, J (2008). Growth monitoring. Arch. Dis. Child. 93: 717-718 [Full text]  
• Sanders, D. S, Hopper, A. D, Leeds, J. S, Hadjivassiliou, M. (2008). But where does it take us?. BMJ 336: 9-9 [Full text]  

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Screening for celiac disease: the continuous dilemma

Silvia Salvatore, et al.
bmj.com, 13 Dec 2007 [Full text]

Screening for coeliac disease – feasible and accurate but where does this novel technology take us?

David S Sanders, et al.
bmj.com, 17 Dec 2007 [Full text]

Caution required in promotion of OTC self-testing for Coeliac Disease

PETER M GILLETT
bmj.com, 30 Dec 2007 [Full text]