Oraquick Reliability. Frech Study. Fiasco

Hi all,
After visiting this forum and being informed about a non exposure event , I follow this forum from time to time to keep myself updated on prevention. I´d like to share this link about a research on rapid testing. It seems an oraquick fiasco.  High levels of false negative on several patients, with years of detected infection in a couple of instances.

http://pubmedcentralcanada.ca/articlerender.cgi?artid=1629823#pone.0011581-Eshleman1

My question is if the people who usually answers know this report and which is their take on it.

[spanish_lewis]

Some highlights:

200 consecutive adults with documented HIV infection were recruited and 20 HIV-seronegative volunteers, included to permit blinded test reading.

Sensitivity was 86.5% [81–90.5] with OraQuick Oral Fluid, 94.5% [90.4–96.9] with OraQuick Finger Stick

Overall, 60 tests (5.2%) were falsely negative on samples from 36 patients. Among the six patients with three or more negative tests, olny two had recent HIV infection, and four had undetectable plasma viral load on antiretroviral therapy; one of the latter patients was infected by HIV-1 group O

Among the six patients with HIV-2 infection, two had a false-negative OraQuick test on OF but both were positive on FSB.

OraQuick was negative in a 40-year-old Caucasian man diagnosed with HIV-1 in March 1999. and in a 27-year-old woman of African origin who had been diagnosed with HIV  in September 2004.

[Teak]

Move on, Those studies are outdated. OraQuick are very reliable done at the proper time.

[spanish_lewis]

It was published last year.

[Teak]

I don't care when it was "republished." OraQuick tests done at the proper time are totally reliable.