This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Alberto Odio, MD
University of California, Los Angeles Northridge Hospital Family Practice Residency Program Northridge, Calif

JAMA. 1986;256(18):2516.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

Drs Kellogg and Manzella¹ are to be congratulated for their review of the complicated subject of testing for streptococcal pharyngitis. However, I feel some important aspects of such testing may warrant further clarification. The primary reason for testing is to find patients with active infection. The best way to determine this, as the authors allude to early in their article, is to demonstrate a significant antibody titer rise between the acute and the convalescent serum samples of patients. Titers are not clinically helpful for an individual patient but serve as our "gold standard" against which other tests should be compared. Instead, as the authors document, most recent studies on throat cultures use other throat cultures as the standard comparison.²

Now, the new "rapid strep tests" are being evaluated with throat culture results, not by comparing them with the gold standard of antibody titer rise.^1,3 . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?