Many skin testing devices have been commercially available over recent year
s, but use has been limited because of significantly greater costs of such
devices. Therefore, the lancet continues to be the most widely used skin te
sting device in Australia. This study compared performance of another multi
test device, the Sayer Quintest(TM) to the Becton Dickinson Microlance. Nin
eteen atopic volunteers were skin tested using histamine dihydrochloride 10
mg/ml, glycerosaline and eight allergens. In 190 tests, 6 discrepancies bet
ween the Quintest and Microlance occurred. the Microlance produced slightly
larger wheals than the Quintest, reaching statistical significance in 3 al
lergens. We found the Quintest comparable to the Microlance in concordance
of positive and negative allergen responses and in wheal size. The Quintest
had higher acceptability to both participants and staff for comfort, ease
of use and safety. The Quintest's major advantage is the ability to rapidly
screen large numbers of subjects, especially during clinical trials. The m
ajor limitation is it's cost.