Economic comparison of enzyme immunoassay and virus isolation procedures for surveillance of arboviruses in mosquito populations.
AUTOR(ES)
Hildreth, S W
RESUMO
Cost-effectiveness analysis of an enzyme immunoassay (EIA) for the surveillance of arboviruses was conducted. The EIA was compared with conventional virus isolation and serologic identification procedures (virus isolation procedures; VIP). Under most circumstances, EIA was more cost-effective than VIP. Costs for processing mosquito pools by VIP increased with the number of viruses included in the surveillance program and with the prevalence rate of each virus. In contrast to VIP, the prevalence rate did not affect costs for processing pools by EIA. In general, EIA was the most cost-effective procedure, followed by cell culture and mouse bioassays. In a 5-year cost-effectiveness analysis of a model surveillance program in which EIA and cell culture bioassays were used, the EIA again proved to be the most cost-effective assay procedure under most circumstances.
ACESSO AO ARTIGO
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=269119Documentos Relacionados
- Utility of quantitative enzyme immunoassay reactivity for predicting human immunodeficiency virus seropositivity in low- and high-prevalence populations.
- Utility of quantitative enzyme immunoassay reactivity for predicting human immunodeficiency virus seropositivity in low- and high-prevalence populations.
- Comparison of an enzyme immunoassay with electron microscopic procedures for detecting rotavirus.
- Reverse transcription-PCR detection of LaCrosse virus in mosquitoes and comparison with enzyme immunoassay and virus isolation.
- Comparison of Antibody Titers Determined by Hemagglutination Inhibition and Enzyme Immunoassay for JC Virus and BK Virus
