Independent Clinical Results
Independent Publications, Posters and Presentations
- Stark D. Dientamoeba Fragilis PCR-Too Good To Be True. Oral Presentation, NRL Workshop on Molecular Diagnostics, Sydney, July 2015.
- Stark D, Roberts T, Marriott D, Harkness J. Evaluation of the EasyScreen™ Enteric Parasite Detection Kit for the detection of Blastocystis spp., Cryptosporidium spp., Dientamoeba fragilis, Entamoeba complex, and Giardia intestinalis from clinical stool samples. Diagnostic Microbiology & Infectious Disease Volume 78, Issue 2 , Pages 149-152, February 2014
- Thomas L, Olma T, Chen S. Centre for Infectious Diseases and Microbiology Laboratory Services, ICPMR, Westmead Hospital, NSW. EasyScreen™ multiplexed real-time PCR assays providing rapid and cost effective routine detection of faecal pathogens in a clinical microbiology laboratory 3rd Molecular Microbiology Meeting, Sydney March 2013
- Thomas L. EasyScreen™ Molecular Diagnostic Assays for Routine Detection of Faecal Pathogens, Oral Presentation, 3rd Molecular Microbiology Meeting, Sydney March 2013
- Thomas L. EasyScreen™ Molecular Diagnostic Assays for Routine Detection of Faecal Pathogens, The Australian Society for Microbiology, Adelaide, Australia July 2013
- Huntington, P., Darber, A., Kotsiou, G., Clostridium difficile PCR ribotype 027 in a northern Sydney hospital: a retrospective investigation. The Australian Society for Microbiology, Annual scientific meeting Hobart, Australia
Results of an Independent Clinical Study
The EasyScreen™ Faecal screening panels were assessed by an independent routine hospital laboratory and the results were compared to conventional diagnostic methods, i.e EIA, culture or microscopy. The results obtained are summarized below:
|Astrovirus||3 (b)||Not tested|
|Salmonella spp.||5||6 (d)
|D. fragilis||5 (e)||-|
|Giardia intestinalis||4 (f)||2|
|B. hominis||3 (g)||2|
|No Pathogen Identified||9||10|
(a) The additional Norovirus sample confirmed positive by an independent RT-PCR assay.
(b) 1/3 Astrovirus confirmed positive by an independent PCR. The other 2 samples were positive at >cycle 35 (borderline positives).
(c) C. difficile sample tested positive in 1 of 2 extracts indicating the presence of a low level infection.
(d) The additional Salmonella sample could not be cultured by an independent lab using conventional and enrichment culture. Furthermore an independent laboratory found this sample to be negative by PCR for Salmonella.
(e) Only 4 of the D. fragilis samples were available for independent testing and all four were positive by PCR.
(f) No independent PCR tests were available for comparison.
(g) The additional B. hominis samples was confirmed by an independent PCR.