ROBERTS: And the second time they took me to the emergency room, they was like - really like, you don't need a ventilator. We told you that you didn't have COVID. And I'm like, well, something is wrong with me; please help me. So they sent me home again, and they told me to get in touch with my primary doctor.
NOWELL: So I reached out to my physician again. I don't know if, because I had a negative test, he didn't believe that I was as sick as I was.
ROBERTS: She didn't help me at all. She was really like, you're not sick. And she told me that I was mimicking what I was seeing on television and that I needed to watch good - Lifetime feel-good movies to get myself out of the funk.
NOWELL: He said, well, maybe you have a UTI, or maybe it's a stomach infection; let's call it a sinus infection. I was like, OK, so you're not going to be the one to help me get well.
ROBERTS: You're stressed. You're stressed. She kept saying I was stressed and it was all in my mind.
Probability of a False-Negative Result Among SARS-CoV-2–Positive Patients, by Day Since Exposure
Over the 4 days of infection before the typical time of symptom onset (day 5), the probability of a false-negative result in an infected person decreases from 100% (95% CI, 100% to 100%) on day 1 to 67% (CI, 27% to 94%) on day 4, although there is considerable uncertainty in these numbers. On the day of symptom onset, the median false-negative rate was 38% (CI, 18% to 65%) (Figure 2, top). This decreased to 20% (CI, 12% to 30%) on day 8 (3 days after symptom onset) then began to increase again, from 21% (CI, 13% to 31%) on day 9 to 66% (CI, 54% to 77%) on day 21.
Predictive factors of COVID-19 in patients with negative RT-qPCRhttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32651152/42% of outpatients with symptoms who were negative on SARS-CoV-2 PCR were then positive on antibody testing.
Objective: To evaluate the factors associated with false negatives in RT-qPCR in patients with mild-moderate symptoms of COVID-19.
Materials and methods: This was a cross-sectional study that used a random sample of nonhospitalized patients from the primary care management division of the Healthcare Area of Leon (58 RT-qPCR-positive cases and 52 RT-qPCR-negative cases). Information regarding symptoms was collected and all patients were simultaneously tested using two rapid diagnostic tests --- RDTs (Combined --- cRDT and Differentiated --- dRDT). The association between symptoms and SARS-CoV-2 infection was evaluated by non-conditional logistic regression, with estimation of Odds Ratio.
Results: A total of 110 subjects were studied, 52% of whom were women (mean age: 48.2 ± 11.0 years). There were 42.3% of negative RT-qPCRs that were positive in some RDTs. Fever over 38 ◦C (present in 35.5% of cases) and anosmia (present in 41.8%) were the symptoms most associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, a relationship that remained statistically significant in patients with negative RT-qPCR and some positive RDT (aOR = 6.64; 95%CI = 1.33---33.13 and aOR = 19.38; 95% CI = 3.69---101.89, respectively).
Conclusions: RT-qPCR is the technique of choice in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, but it is not exempt from false negatives.