Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 7, 2026
11:22
The α-test: Rapid Cell-free CD4 Enumeration Using Whole Saliva
Published on: May 16, 2012
Automatic oral fluid-based HIV testing in HIV screening programmes: automatic for the people
M Rayment1, E Doku, A Thornton
1Directorate of HIV/GU Medicine, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust.
HIV Medicine
|September 17, 2013
Summary
Automating oral fluid HIV testing using the Abbott Architect platform is a viable option for large-scale screening. This method preserves test performance, reduces workload, and speeds up results, making it efficient for public health programs.
Area of Science:
- Clinical Diagnostics
- Public Health Virology
Background:
- UK guidelines advocate routine HIV testing in clinical settings with >0.2% local prevalence.
- Pilot programs utilized manual laboratory-based testing of oral fluid samples.
- Manual testing, while robust, was labor-intensive and demanding on clinical resources.
Purpose of the Study:
- To validate the automation of oral fluid human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing.
- To assess the feasibility of using the fourth-generation HIV test on the Abbott Architect platform for oral fluid samples.
Main Methods:
- Oral fluid samples were collected from 143 patients using the Oracol+ device.
- Samples were tested concurrently using manual (Genscreen Ultra) and automated (Abbott Architect) methods.
- Agreement between platforms and with existing HIV serology was assessed.
Main Results:
- 100% agreement in results between manual and automated oral fluid testing platforms.
- All test results aligned with established HIV serology.
- High-quality samples were obtained using the Oracol+ device, with subsequent field use showing 99.97% specificity.
Conclusions:
- Automated oral fluid HIV testing on the Abbott Architect platform is a viable option for large-scale screening.
- Automation preserves test performance while reducing laboratory workload and accelerating result turnaround.
- This approach is acceptable to patients and requires less training and fewer clinical resources compared to near-patient testing.
