Loading

Journal of Clinical Nephrology and Research

Prospective Study on the Usefulness of SARS Cov-2 Self-Testing Antigen Kits in Nephrology Practice

Research Article | Open Access | Volume 9 | Issue 1

  • 1. Saveetha Medical College, Dept of Nephrology and Transplantation Thandalam, Kancheepuram, India
+ Show More - Show Less
Corresponding Authors
Palani Ravichandran; Dept of Nephrology and Transplantation Thandalam, Saveetha Medical College, Kancheepuram, India
Abstract

SARS CoV-2 virus detection using rapid Antigen diagnostic kit, is now widely used for detection and screening purposes. Self-testing antigen kits are recommended for high-risk individuals. The present study was done to see the utility of self-testing SARS CoV-2 kits as routine screening in hospital frequented by patients in nephrology services. Patients were divided into two groups those who can self-test themselves using self-antigen detection test and another group who were assisted in doing the same test and results compared. Out of 206 individuals who were involved in the study, 43 out of 206 (20.8%) showed positive results. 137 persons who self-tested had a significantly higher rate of failed tests in the first attempt compared to those who were in assisted antigen detection test group (p<0.05). All patients who were found positive underwent mandatory RTPCR test. The detection of viral positive cases was similar in both groups and the sensitivity of the test was above 92% in both groups when compared with RTPCR results.

Conclusion: Self- Antigen detection test as routine screening during pandemic is useful point of care test for early detection and prevention of the spread of COVID-19 infection in hospital frequent visitors. Assisted antigen test must always be encouraged to avoid first time failure.

INTRODUCTION

Early detection, isolation, contact tracing, vaccination, and treatment are the main steps followed for the prevention and spread of Covid-19 disease [7]. sAg-RDT is approved by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) that can be used by individuals as a home screening method [8]

Renal disease patients are frequent hospital visitors for their various treatments and in the case of dialysis patients, they need to visit the dialysis unit weekly twice or thrice. Renal transplant patients and many renal disease patients take immunosuppression for their kidney disease and maintenance of graft function thus they are at high risk of contracting the virus compared to those who are not exposed in the community [9]. Though the reliability of the tests depends largely on the test performance and the respective sampling method sample collection and experience of the trained personnel to do the test, still the sensitivity and specificity of the index tests, i.e., rapid antigen detection tests are cheaper and preferred for rapid screening based on comparison to RT-PCR results acting as the reference standard [10]. The present study was done to see the utility of self-antigen testing as a routine screening method in kidney disease patients, their contacts, and health care workers who frequent the hospital. This prospective study was done during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND

Timely and accurate diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, is an essential part of a comprehensive COVID-19 response strategy. Of the two types of tests currently used for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2, 1) Detection of viral RNA, such as real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR); and 2) Detection of viral antigens through immunodiagnostic techniques such as lateral flow assays, commonly called antigen rapid diagnostic test (Ag-RDT) [1, 2] . Ag-RDTs is a faster and reliable option for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis and is often less expensive. Additionally, Ag-RDTs are effective for identifying most infectious people, whereas a limitation of RT-PCR is that it can lead to persistent positive results well past the period of transmission and recovery [3-5].

COVID-19 self-testing can be considered for diagnostic purposes in settings with ongoing community transmission and when used by symptomatic individuals or those who have been recently exposed to SARS-CoV-2. COVID-19 self-testing can also be considered for screening purposes irrespective of the level of community transmission [6]. Its usefulness in hospital frequent visitors as in nephrology practice in low or middle income countries are not studied well.

This present study aimed to see the usefulness of SARSCOV-2 self-testing antigen rapid diagnostic test (sAg-RDT) in nephrology practice. Compare the results between the test done by individuals themselves and those done under assistance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Individual selection: After obtaining hospital ethical committee approval, all individuals who were frequent hospital visitors needing to visit frequently the hospital for various reasons such as patients, their attenders, hospital workers, doctors, paramedical staff, and students were included in this study. Excluded from the study were individuals, as listed by the manufacturer including those with HIV and Hepatitis B and C positive individuals, those who were not willing to undergo the test, those who did not give consent, and those who were already admitted to hospital, individuals who had already undertaken sAg-RDT test.

Methods

@sight lateral flow immunochromatographic assay kits for the qualitative detection of COVID-19-specific antigens manufactured by Mediclone biotech were used in the present study. The kit had approval from the European Commission device identification no 277 indicated on their web site https://covid19-iagnostics.jrc.ec.europa.eu/devices/detail/277 Selected cases were given information as how the test is to be performed by simple video demonstration and dummy demonstration. Each individual who was willing to undergo the test was given two test kits and asked to follow the instructions shown in the video clip or the diagram given to them by the manufacturer. Patients were divided into two groups, with one group who was agreeable to perform the test by themselves without assistance and Group II those who were assisted by trained personnel in performing the test. The assisted test method used a pharyngeal sample by way of individuals giving a sputum sample from the posterior part of their throat in a predetermined quantity.

Those who were found antigen test positive were automatically asked to do a mandatory RTPCR test and their identity was sent to the local covid intimation helpline for tracking and management. Statistical package for social science (SPSS) Version 25.0 Using this software frequencies and percentages were calculated for qualitative variables. To find association between categorical variables chi-square test were used. p value less than <0.05 considered as significant.

RESULTS

Demographic details of the study subjects are shown in table 1.

Table 1: Shows details of those who have undergone screening test for SARS CoV2 virus.
S No N=206 S Ag-RDT GpI N=137 +ve GpI N=30 Fail GpI N=22 -Ve GpI N=85 A Ag-RDT GpII N= 69 +ve GpII N=13 -Ve GpII N=50 Failed GpII N=6 RTpcr +ve N=40 RTpcr -ve N=3
Male 147 78 20 17 41 59 8 45 6 23 5
 Female 69 59 10 5 44 10 5 5 0 14 1
AGE <50 94
112
64
73
10
20
11
11
36
49
24
44
4
9
35
15
0
6
8
32
2
1
AGE >50
CKD 10 6 2 4 0 4 1 0 3 3 0
HD 89 43 9 6 28 29 4 10 5 13 1
Tx 29 26 4 0 22 3 3 0 0 5 2
Immuno Sup 14 14 9 4 1 0 0 0 0 9 0
Attende-rs 26 12 1 1 10 10 4 5 1 5 0
Donors 8 4 0 4 4 0 4 0 0 0
Drs/HW/SW 19  19 3 2 14 0 0 0 0 3 0
Misc 11  8 2 3 3 0 0 0 0 2 0
Comorbid  
DM 30
118
2
37
19
88
0
30
5
20
0
5
7
10
0
5
10
16
2
30
5
50
2
12
4
5
0
4
11
15
2
2
1
1
0
4
11
22
1
6
1
2
0
0
HBP
CVD
Others
Death 6 4 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 4 0
Admitted 22 12 8 2 2 10 6 4 0 22 4
Quarant-ined  32  21 10 11 0 11 7 3 1 26 2

ABBREVIATIONS: CKD- Chronic Kidney Disease; HD- Hemodialysis; Tx –Transplant; Drs- Doctors; HW- Health Workers; SW- Social Workers; Misc- Miscellaneous; DMDiabetes Mellitus; HBP, High Blood Pressure; CVD- Cardio Vascular Disease.

Out of 206 individuals who formed the total study group, 147 were male and 69 female, sAg-RDT N= 137 formed Group I (Gp I) 78 were Male and 59 Female. In Assisted Ag-RDT group II (Gp II) there were 69 individuals, 59 male, and 10 female.

In GpI total of 85 individuals result was negative of which 41 were male and 44 females. 30 demonstrated positive tests, 20 were male and 10 female. 22/137 (16%) individuals did the test wrong in their first attempt of which 17 were male and 5 Female.

In Gp II out of 69 individuals who underwent assisted AgRDT, 59 were male and 10 female. 50 of 69 tested negative, were male, and 5 were female. The test result was positive in 13 individuals of which 8 were male and 5 female. 6/69 (8.6%) tests were failed tests. The reason for failure in Gp-I was adding too much diluent or dropping the sample all over the well observed in 16 individuals and 4 did not read the result in stipulated time wherein the control was negative and test positive, 2 dropped the kit during the procedure. In Gp II in all six the diluent drops were more than what was prescribed leading to flooding and wastage.

All 43 out of 206 individuals who tested positive had their RTPCT test done in which 40 were positive and 3 results came negative. In study Gp I 64 Individuals was less than 50 Yrs age and 73 were more than 50 yrs. In Gp II 35 were less than 50 yrs and 15 above 50 yrs, In the study group, 142 individuals overall had educational qualifications less than 10th grade and 61 above 10th grade. In Gp I, 43 had less than 10th grade and 26 below 10th grade. Hypertension was seen in 111/206, diabetes in 33/206, renal disease like end-stage kidney disease, chronic kidney disease, immunosuppressed and transplant patients formed 22/33(66.66%) and 11/33 were comorbid individuals with high blood pressure and diabetes. Of 6 Individuals who died 4 were patients were on hemodialysis. In Gp II both cases were post-transplant patients. In this study group of which 10 required hospitalization and Covid -19 specific monoclonal antibody concoction was used in two post-transplant individuals who relapsed after the first infection. In the study group, overall 66 were not vaccinated, 66 had vaccination first dose less than a week before the study, 12 had more than 2 weeks after the first dose and 7 had a second dose.17 individuals who were not vaccinated were Ag-RDT positive, 14 who were positive had been exposed to the vaccine less than a week after the first dose and 4 beyond 2 weeks of first dose vaccination, and 7 had their second dose vaccinated.

In gp1 the Ag-RDT sensitivity was 93% and in Gp II 92.3%. Individuals recovered with various treatments ranging from observation in 6, antibiotics, ivermectin, and steroids in 17, additional IV remdesivir given in four, and three received monoclonal antibody concoction two of whom were posttransplant and one lupus patient on immunosuppression. There was a significant test being failed in the GP I compared to Gp II p<0.05.

There was no significant difference between Gp I and Gp II in the positivity and age or education status or gender difference in the antigen test.

DISCUSSION

Covid-19 Antigen tests are an important tool to detect infection [9]. Rapid antigen test kits are primarily recommended for the early detection of patients suspected of having COVID-19, particularly in countries with limited resources and laboratory equipment [10]. One of the main advantage of an antigen test is the speed of the test, which can provide results in minutes. Early detection of Covid 19 infection is important to treat and prevent the spread of infection. Though sAg- RDT is approved for individual use there are no data on the utility of sAg- RDT when used in diverse populations as in India that includes patients with lower income groups and lower literacy levels to understand how the test needs to be done.

In the present study, we found that the first-time users had a significantly higher failure rate in patients who were male, those with kidney failure and age less than 50 compared to when trained personnel did the test. This significant difference in failure of the self-testing antigen kits in first time users may be due to various reasons like fear and not being able to understand the steps which includes collection of sample, fixing it in diluent and placing the samples into the well in proper measures. This study showed no correlation concerning positive result incidence among gender, age, or educational standard between sAg-RDT Gp I and assisted Ag- RDT group II.

Though WHO initially advised not to rely on Ag-RDT as the point of care testing, subsequently the recommendation changed. Rapid screening was approved to use in crowded places or gatherings for screening [11]. In nephrology practice where patients despite illness or COVID-19 symptoms have to visit the hospital for their life-saving procedures, this test helps in the early detection of covid-19 [12, 13]. In our study, the incidence was around 20% overall which would have been not detected if routine screening was not done.

Regular screening by the RTPCR method is expensive. In the present study, we found that a rapid antigen test was able to detect asymptomatic individuals who would otherwise have been passed off as normal. Only three individuals who were Ag-RDT positive were found negative in RTPCR. The sensitivity and specificity was above 92%. Similar such results obtained prompted to use rapid antigen test as point of care test for detecting COVID -19 infection [14]. Causes of severe disease in the second COVID-19 episode are residual lung function abnormalities due to previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, as well as host susceptibility with recent use of antirejection treatment, Mortality was 6(2%) overall this is lower than the many other studies done in other centers during the covid -19 pandemic [13, 15, 16]. This lower rate is because we had done routine screening and early detection was the reason why we could treat the patients early.

The sensitivity among the first-time users who were found positive was no different from the Gp II. Mortality in covid infected hemodialysis patients is 30% more than the general population and renal transplant patients have 1.28 times more mortality than hemodialysis patients [15, 16]. In the present study, all mortality was in those who were on dialysis and post-transplant patients. Early detection is key to successfully managing patients and making a rapid recovery.

Vaccination is a powerful weapon to protect CKD patients from COVID-19, but it may cause recurrence or deterioration of kidney disease [10, 11]. In the present study, the vaccination was predominantly done for health care workers and only one case of covid that was found positive was asymptomatic all others were vaccinated at the first dose including 10 who received Gp 2.

CONCLUSION

sAg-RDT in routine use is a very useful test for early detection and prevention of the spread of COVID-19 infection hospital frequent visitors and nephrology practice. Assisted Ag-RDT must be always encouraged to reduce first-time failure rate.

REFERENCES

1. Interim guidance: Antigen-detection in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Geneva: WHO. 2021.

2. Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2020.

3. Drain PK. Rapid diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2. N Engl J Med. 2022; 386: 264-72.

4. Downs LO, Eyre DW, O’Donnell D, Jeffery K. Home-based SARS-CoV-2 lateral flow antigen testing in hospital workers. J Infect. 2021; 82: 282- 327.

5. Stohr J, Zwart VF, Goderski G, Meijer A, Nagel-Imming CRS, Kluytmansvan den Bergh MFQ, et al. Self-testing for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection with rapid antigen tests for people with suspected COVID-19 in the community. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2021.

6. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Options for the use of rapid antigen tests for COVID19 in the EU/EEA and the UK. Stockholm: ECDC. 2020.

7. Girum T, Lentiro K, Geremew M. et al. Global strategies and effectiveness for COVID-19 prevention through contact tracing, screening, quarantine, and isolation: a systematic review. Trop Med Health. 2020; 48: 91.

8. Advisory for COVID-19 Home Testing using Rapid Antigen Tests (RATs). JAMA Netw Open. 2022.

9. Raffle A E, Gill M. Self- testing for asymptomatic non-contacts using rapid antigen tests- is this leading to a cost effective reduction in infection transmission? BMJ. 2022; 376: o455.

10.Arshadi M, Fardsanei F, Deihim B, Farshadzadeh Z, Nikkhahi F, Khalili F, et al. Diagnostic Accuracy of Rapid Antigen Tests for COVID-19 Detection: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis. Front Med. 2022; 9: 870738.

11.Use of SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests for COVID-19 self –testing interim guidance. WHO. 2022.

12.Wolfl-Duchek M, Bergmann F, Jorda A, Weber M, Muller M, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Detection Tests using oral, Anterior Nasal and nasopharyengeal Swabs: a diagnostic accuracy study, Microbiol Spectr. 2022: 10: e0202921.

13.Huang W, Li B, Jiang N, Zhang F, Shi W, Zuo L, et al. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients with chronic kidney disease: A narrative review. Medicine. 2022; 101: e29362.

14.LeBlanc JJ, McCracken GR, Goodall B, Hatchette TF, Barrett L, Ross J, et al. Avoiding False-Positive SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test Results with Point-of-Care Molecular Testing on Residual Test Buffer. Microbiol Spectr. 2022; 10: e0063922.

15.Abolghasemi S, Zolfaghari F, Naeimipoor M, Azhdari Tehrani H, Hakamifard A. COVID- 19 reinfection or reactivation in a renal transplant patient. Clin Case Rep. 2021; 9: e04672.

16.Kute VB, Hegde U, Das P, Sharma A, Bahadur MM, Sil K, et al. A Multicenter Cohort Study of Indian Centers on Reoccurring SARSCoV-2 Infections in Kidney Transplant Recipients. Exp Clin Transplant. 2021; 19: 1023-1031.

Ravichandran P, Sambathkumar L, Vijay S, Gokulraj K (2022) Prospective Study on the Usefulness of SARS Cov-2 Self-Testing Antigen Kits in Nephrology Practice. J Clin Nephrol Res 9(1): 1108.

Received : 07 Oct 2022
Accepted : 07 Nov 2022
Published : 08 Nov 2022
Journals
Annals of Otolaryngology and Rhinology
ISSN : 2379-948X
Launched : 2014
JSM Schizophrenia
Launched : 2016
Journal of Nausea
Launched : 2020
JSM Internal Medicine
Launched : 2016
JSM Hepatitis
Launched : 2016
JSM Oro Facial Surgeries
ISSN : 2578-3211
Launched : 2016
Journal of Human Nutrition and Food Science
ISSN : 2333-6706
Launched : 2013
JSM Regenerative Medicine and Bioengineering
ISSN : 2379-0490
Launched : 2013
JSM Spine
ISSN : 2578-3181
Launched : 2016
Archives of Palliative Care
ISSN : 2573-1165
Launched : 2016
JSM Nutritional Disorders
ISSN : 2578-3203
Launched : 2017
Annals of Neurodegenerative Disorders
ISSN : 2476-2032
Launched : 2016
Journal of Fever
ISSN : 2641-7782
Launched : 2017
JSM Bone Marrow Research
ISSN : 2578-3351
Launched : 2016
JSM Mathematics and Statistics
ISSN : 2578-3173
Launched : 2014
Journal of Autoimmunity and Research
ISSN : 2573-1173
Launched : 2014
JSM Arthritis
ISSN : 2475-9155
Launched : 2016
JSM Head and Neck Cancer-Cases and Reviews
ISSN : 2573-1610
Launched : 2016
JSM General Surgery Cases and Images
ISSN : 2573-1564
Launched : 2016
JSM Anatomy and Physiology
ISSN : 2573-1262
Launched : 2016
JSM Dental Surgery
ISSN : 2573-1548
Launched : 2016
Annals of Emergency Surgery
ISSN : 2573-1017
Launched : 2016
Annals of Mens Health and Wellness
ISSN : 2641-7707
Launched : 2017
Journal of Preventive Medicine and Health Care
ISSN : 2576-0084
Launched : 2018
Journal of Chronic Diseases and Management
ISSN : 2573-1300
Launched : 2016
Annals of Vaccines and Immunization
ISSN : 2378-9379
Launched : 2014
JSM Heart Surgery Cases and Images
ISSN : 2578-3157
Launched : 2016
Annals of Reproductive Medicine and Treatment
ISSN : 2573-1092
Launched : 2016
JSM Brain Science
ISSN : 2573-1289
Launched : 2016
JSM Biomarkers
ISSN : 2578-3815
Launched : 2014
JSM Biology
ISSN : 2475-9392
Launched : 2016
Archives of Stem Cell and Research
ISSN : 2578-3580
Launched : 2014
Annals of Clinical and Medical Microbiology
ISSN : 2578-3629
Launched : 2014
JSM Pediatric Surgery
ISSN : 2578-3149
Launched : 2017
Journal of Memory Disorder and Rehabilitation
ISSN : 2578-319X
Launched : 2016
JSM Tropical Medicine and Research
ISSN : 2578-3165
Launched : 2016
JSM Head and Face Medicine
ISSN : 2578-3793
Launched : 2016
JSM Cardiothoracic Surgery
ISSN : 2573-1297
Launched : 2016
JSM Bone and Joint Diseases
ISSN : 2578-3351
Launched : 2017
JSM Bioavailability and Bioequivalence
ISSN : 2641-7812
Launched : 2017
JSM Atherosclerosis
ISSN : 2573-1270
Launched : 2016
Journal of Genitourinary Disorders
ISSN : 2641-7790
Launched : 2017
Journal of Fractures and Sprains
ISSN : 2578-3831
Launched : 2016
Journal of Autism and Epilepsy
ISSN : 2641-7774
Launched : 2016
Annals of Marine Biology and Research
ISSN : 2573-105X
Launched : 2014
JSM Health Education & Primary Health Care
ISSN : 2578-3777
Launched : 2016
JSM Communication Disorders
ISSN : 2578-3807
Launched : 2016
Annals of Musculoskeletal Disorders
ISSN : 2578-3599
Launched : 2016
Annals of Virology and Research
ISSN : 2573-1122
Launched : 2014
JSM Renal Medicine
ISSN : 2573-1637
Launched : 2016
Journal of Muscle Health
ISSN : 2578-3823
Launched : 2016
JSM Genetics and Genomics
ISSN : 2334-1823
Launched : 2013
JSM Anxiety and Depression
ISSN : 2475-9139
Launched : 2016
Clinical Journal of Heart Diseases
ISSN : 2641-7766
Launched : 2016
Annals of Medicinal Chemistry and Research
ISSN : 2378-9336
Launched : 2014
JSM Pain and Management
ISSN : 2578-3378
Launched : 2016
JSM Women's Health
ISSN : 2578-3696
Launched : 2016
Clinical Research in HIV or AIDS
ISSN : 2374-0094
Launched : 2013
Journal of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Obesity
ISSN : 2333-6692
Launched : 2013
Journal of Substance Abuse and Alcoholism
ISSN : 2373-9363
Launched : 2013
JSM Neurosurgery and Spine
ISSN : 2373-9479
Launched : 2013
Journal of Liver and Clinical Research
ISSN : 2379-0830
Launched : 2014
Journal of Drug Design and Research
ISSN : 2379-089X
Launched : 2014
JSM Clinical Oncology and Research
ISSN : 2373-938X
Launched : 2013
JSM Bioinformatics, Genomics and Proteomics
ISSN : 2576-1102
Launched : 2014
JSM Chemistry
ISSN : 2334-1831
Launched : 2013
Journal of Trauma and Care
ISSN : 2573-1246
Launched : 2014
JSM Surgical Oncology and Research
ISSN : 2578-3688
Launched : 2016
Annals of Food Processing and Preservation
ISSN : 2573-1033
Launched : 2016
Journal of Radiology and Radiation Therapy
ISSN : 2333-7095
Launched : 2013
JSM Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
ISSN : 2578-3572
Launched : 2016
Annals of Clinical Pathology
ISSN : 2373-9282
Launched : 2013
Annals of Cardiovascular Diseases
ISSN : 2641-7731
Launched : 2016
Journal of Behavior
ISSN : 2576-0076
Launched : 2016
Annals of Clinical and Experimental Metabolism
ISSN : 2572-2492
Launched : 2016
Clinical Research in Infectious Diseases
ISSN : 2379-0636
Launched : 2013
JSM Microbiology
ISSN : 2333-6455
Launched : 2013
Journal of Urology and Research
ISSN : 2379-951X
Launched : 2014
Journal of Family Medicine and Community Health
ISSN : 2379-0547
Launched : 2013
Annals of Pregnancy and Care
ISSN : 2578-336X
Launched : 2017
JSM Cell and Developmental Biology
ISSN : 2379-061X
Launched : 2013
Annals of Aquaculture and Research
ISSN : 2379-0881
Launched : 2014
Clinical Research in Pulmonology
ISSN : 2333-6625
Launched : 2013
Journal of Immunology and Clinical Research
ISSN : 2333-6714
Launched : 2013
Annals of Forensic Research and Analysis
ISSN : 2378-9476
Launched : 2014
JSM Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
ISSN : 2333-7109
Launched : 2013
Annals of Breast Cancer Research
ISSN : 2641-7685
Launched : 2016
Annals of Gerontology and Geriatric Research
ISSN : 2378-9409
Launched : 2014
Journal of Sleep Medicine and Disorders
ISSN : 2379-0822
Launched : 2014
JSM Burns and Trauma
ISSN : 2475-9406
Launched : 2016
Chemical Engineering and Process Techniques
ISSN : 2333-6633
Launched : 2013
Annals of Clinical Cytology and Pathology
ISSN : 2475-9430
Launched : 2014
JSM Allergy and Asthma
ISSN : 2573-1254
Launched : 2016
Journal of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
ISSN : 2334-2307
Launched : 2013
Annals of Sports Medicine and Research
ISSN : 2379-0571
Launched : 2014
JSM Sexual Medicine
ISSN : 2578-3718
Launched : 2016
Annals of Vascular Medicine and Research
ISSN : 2378-9344
Launched : 2014
JSM Biotechnology and Biomedical Engineering
ISSN : 2333-7117
Launched : 2013
Journal of Hematology and Transfusion
ISSN : 2333-6684
Launched : 2013
JSM Environmental Science and Ecology
ISSN : 2333-7141
Launched : 2013
Journal of Cardiology and Clinical Research
ISSN : 2333-6676
Launched : 2013
JSM Nanotechnology and Nanomedicine
ISSN : 2334-1815
Launched : 2013
Journal of Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders
ISSN : 2475-9473
Launched : 2016
JSM Ophthalmology
ISSN : 2333-6447
Launched : 2013
Journal of Pharmacology and Clinical Toxicology
ISSN : 2333-7079
Launched : 2013
Annals of Psychiatry and Mental Health
ISSN : 2374-0124
Launched : 2013
Medical Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
ISSN : 2333-6439
Launched : 2013
Annals of Pediatrics and Child Health
ISSN : 2373-9312
Launched : 2013
JSM Clinical Pharmaceutics
ISSN : 2379-9498
Launched : 2014
JSM Foot and Ankle
ISSN : 2475-9112
Launched : 2016
JSM Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementia
ISSN : 2378-9565
Launched : 2014
Journal of Addiction Medicine and Therapy
ISSN : 2333-665X
Launched : 2013
Journal of Veterinary Medicine and Research
ISSN : 2378-931X
Launched : 2013
Annals of Public Health and Research
ISSN : 2378-9328
Launched : 2014
Annals of Orthopedics and Rheumatology
ISSN : 2373-9290
Launched : 2013
Annals of Community Medicine and Practice
ISSN : 2475-9465
Launched : 2014
Annals of Biometrics and Biostatistics
ISSN : 2374-0116
Launched : 2013
JSM Clinical Case Reports
ISSN : 2373-9819
Launched : 2013
Journal of Cancer Biology and Research
ISSN : 2373-9436
Launched : 2013
Journal of Surgery and Transplantation Science
ISSN : 2379-0911
Launched : 2013
Journal of Dermatology and Clinical Research
ISSN : 2373-9371
Launched : 2013
JSM Gastroenterology and Hepatology
ISSN : 2373-9487
Launched : 2013
Annals of Nursing and Practice
ISSN : 2379-9501
Launched : 2014
JSM Dentistry
ISSN : 2333-7133
Launched : 2013
Author Information X