Cargando…

Comparing saliva and nasopharyngeal swab specimens in the detection of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Due to the easy transmission of COVID-19, the virus is a threat to global health. Early diagnosis of suspected patients will play an essential role in preventing further spread of COVID-19. The aim of this review study was to evaluate saliva specimen in comparison to nasopharynge...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nasiri, Kaveh, Dimitrova, Aleksandra
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Association for Dental Sciences of the Republic of China 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7846225/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33558826
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jds.2021.01.010
_version_ 1783644697084821504
author Nasiri, Kaveh
Dimitrova, Aleksandra
author_facet Nasiri, Kaveh
Dimitrova, Aleksandra
author_sort Nasiri, Kaveh
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Due to the easy transmission of COVID-19, the virus is a threat to global health. Early diagnosis of suspected patients will play an essential role in preventing further spread of COVID-19. The aim of this review study was to evaluate saliva specimen in comparison to nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) specimen in studies selected from various databases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To achieve the objective of this study, a systematic literature search was carried out in four databases, namely PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and LILACS. The keywords ″COVID-19″, ″Nasopharyngeal Swab″, and ″Saliva″ were utilized via Boolean operators. RESULTS: 14 articles were included in this review study following the eligibility criteria. Based on data presented in studies used in the meta-analysis, there was no significant difference between both specimen types for detection of COVID-19. Heterogeneity test showed that I(2) value was 5.790% (<20%). The effect size (risk ratio) of the 14 studies was 0.951 (<1). CONCLUSION: With the results revealing no significant difference between the two types of specimen in the diagnosis of COVID-19, the use of saliva specimen is preferable for widespread use because it is easily collected without the need for qualified health workers. However, more in vivo studies are required in order to compare and evaluate saliva and NPS specimens in detecting COVID-19 using various techniques.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7846225
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Association for Dental Sciences of the Republic of China
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78462252021-02-01 Comparing saliva and nasopharyngeal swab specimens in the detection of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis Nasiri, Kaveh Dimitrova, Aleksandra J Dent Sci Review Article BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Due to the easy transmission of COVID-19, the virus is a threat to global health. Early diagnosis of suspected patients will play an essential role in preventing further spread of COVID-19. The aim of this review study was to evaluate saliva specimen in comparison to nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) specimen in studies selected from various databases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To achieve the objective of this study, a systematic literature search was carried out in four databases, namely PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and LILACS. The keywords ″COVID-19″, ″Nasopharyngeal Swab″, and ″Saliva″ were utilized via Boolean operators. RESULTS: 14 articles were included in this review study following the eligibility criteria. Based on data presented in studies used in the meta-analysis, there was no significant difference between both specimen types for detection of COVID-19. Heterogeneity test showed that I(2) value was 5.790% (<20%). The effect size (risk ratio) of the 14 studies was 0.951 (<1). CONCLUSION: With the results revealing no significant difference between the two types of specimen in the diagnosis of COVID-19, the use of saliva specimen is preferable for widespread use because it is easily collected without the need for qualified health workers. However, more in vivo studies are required in order to compare and evaluate saliva and NPS specimens in detecting COVID-19 using various techniques. Association for Dental Sciences of the Republic of China 2021-07 2021-01-29 /pmc/articles/PMC7846225/ /pubmed/33558826 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jds.2021.01.010 Text en © 2021 Association for Dental Sciences of the Republic of China. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review Article
Nasiri, Kaveh
Dimitrova, Aleksandra
Comparing saliva and nasopharyngeal swab specimens in the detection of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title Comparing saliva and nasopharyngeal swab specimens in the detection of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Comparing saliva and nasopharyngeal swab specimens in the detection of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Comparing saliva and nasopharyngeal swab specimens in the detection of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparing saliva and nasopharyngeal swab specimens in the detection of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Comparing saliva and nasopharyngeal swab specimens in the detection of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort comparing saliva and nasopharyngeal swab specimens in the detection of covid-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7846225/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33558826
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jds.2021.01.010
work_keys_str_mv AT nasirikaveh comparingsalivaandnasopharyngealswabspecimensinthedetectionofcovid19asystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT dimitrovaaleksandra comparingsalivaandnasopharyngealswabspecimensinthedetectionofcovid19asystematicreviewandmetaanalysis