AEM
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Coffey, E. M.
Right arrow Articles by Wood, R. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Coffey, E. M.
Right arrow Articles by Wood, R. M.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Coffey, E. M.
Right arrow Articles by Wood, R. M.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Appl Environ Microbiol. 1971 May; 21(5): 820-822
Copyright © 1971 American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Further Evaluation of the Automated Fluorescent Treponemal Antibody Test for Syphilis

E. M. Coffey, L. S. Naritomi, M. V. Ulfeldt, L. L. Bradford and R. M. Wood

Microbial Diseases Laboratory, California State Department of Public Health, Berkeley, California 94704

ABSTRACT

Improvements in the equipment for the automated fluorescent treponemal antibody (AFTA) test for syphilis prompted this comparative study of the AFTA and its manual counterpart, the fluorescent treponemal antibody-absorption (FTA-ABS) test. The AFTA equipment operated satisfactorily, required only minimal monitoring, and afforded a three-to fourfold increase over the number of sera that could be tested manually by one serologist. The AFTA and FTA-ABS tests agreed well with only 2.1% of the sera yielding conflicting results. The AFTA was less precise than the FTA-ABS on sera retested because of original conflicting results and on sera retested within the same run to determine reproducibility. However, these differences were not large, and AFTA test performance was considered to be within the limits acceptable for a diagnostic serological procedure.


Appl Environ Microbiol. 1971 May; 21(5): 820-822
Copyright © 1971 American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.







Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
J. Bacteriol. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. Eukaryot. Cell All ASM Journals

Copyright © 1971 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.