Introduction: In case of diagnosis of infectious disease, discordant results may have serious consequences among the patients as it causes unnecessary mental stress and tension. For proper diagnosis of infection as well as disease management and prevention, identification of appropriate test kit is necessary. Method: ELISA was used as gold standard for comparative evaluation. 300 samples for HBsAg and 100 samples for Anti HCV were selected and tested on Elisa and ICT kits using separate panel-sera for each. Dual infections with HBV and HCV, co-infection with HIV and repeat samples of same patient were excluded. Results: In our study HBV specificity was 97%, PPV was 81%, the sensitivity was 78% and the NPV was 97%. For HCV specificity was 93%, PPV was 66%, sensitivity was 70% and NPV was 94%. Our results are significant (P value < 0.05). False positive were 2.34%, 6% for HBV and HCV, false negative were 2.67%, 5% for HBV and HCV respectively. Conclusion: Rapid assays must be used with caution and it is also important to validate these rapid assays by testing them in a given population to assess the effectiveness of these assays in detecting the genotypes and subtypes of HBV and HCV circulating in the region before using these tests routinely in diagnostic laboratories. They should be recommended only in poor settings or remote areas.
