Cargando…
Diagnostic performance of patient self‐collected oral swab (tongue and cheek) in comparison with healthcare worker‐collected nasopharyngeal swab for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2 detection
The present study was conducted to compare the performance of patient self‐collected oral swab (OS) with healthcare worker (HCW)‐collected nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) for SARS‐CoV‐2 detection by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) in real‐world setting. Paired OS and NPS were coll...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9912197/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35927785 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/apm.13266 |
_version_ | 1784885152494649344 |
---|---|
author | Mane, Arati Jain, Shilpa Jain, Ankita Nema, Vijay Kurle, Swarali Saxena, Vandana Pereira, Michael Sirsat, Atul Pathak, Gaurav Bhoi, Vikalp Bhavsar, Shailaja Panda, Samiran |
author_facet | Mane, Arati Jain, Shilpa Jain, Ankita Nema, Vijay Kurle, Swarali Saxena, Vandana Pereira, Michael Sirsat, Atul Pathak, Gaurav Bhoi, Vikalp Bhavsar, Shailaja Panda, Samiran |
author_sort | Mane, Arati |
collection | PubMed |
description | The present study was conducted to compare the performance of patient self‐collected oral swab (OS) with healthcare worker (HCW)‐collected nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) for SARS‐CoV‐2 detection by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) in real‐world setting. Paired OS and NPS were collected from 485 consecutive individuals presenting with symptoms of coronavirus disease‐19 (COVID‐19) or asymptomatic contacts of COVID‐19 cases. Both specimens were processed for RT‐PCR and cycle threshold (Ct) value for each test was obtained. Positive percent agreement (PPA), negative percent agreement (NPA), overall percent agreement (OPA) and kappa were calculated for OS RT‐PCR compared with NPS RT‐PCR as reference. A total of 116/485 (23.9%) participants were positive by NPS RT‐PCR. OS had PPA of 71.6%, NPA of 98.8%, OPA of 92.4% and kappa of 0.771. Almost all participants (483/485, 99.6%) reported OS as a convenient and comfortable sample for SARS‐CoV‐2 testing over NPS. All participants with Ct values <25 and majority (90.8%) with Ct values <30 were detected by OS. To conclude, OS self‐sampling was preferred in comparison with NPS due the ease and comfort during collection. The performance of OS RT‐PCR for SARS‐CoV‐2 detection, however, was sub‐optimal in comparison with NPS RT‐PCR. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9912197 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-99121972023-02-11 Diagnostic performance of patient self‐collected oral swab (tongue and cheek) in comparison with healthcare worker‐collected nasopharyngeal swab for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2 detection Mane, Arati Jain, Shilpa Jain, Ankita Nema, Vijay Kurle, Swarali Saxena, Vandana Pereira, Michael Sirsat, Atul Pathak, Gaurav Bhoi, Vikalp Bhavsar, Shailaja Panda, Samiran APMIS Original Articles The present study was conducted to compare the performance of patient self‐collected oral swab (OS) with healthcare worker (HCW)‐collected nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) for SARS‐CoV‐2 detection by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) in real‐world setting. Paired OS and NPS were collected from 485 consecutive individuals presenting with symptoms of coronavirus disease‐19 (COVID‐19) or asymptomatic contacts of COVID‐19 cases. Both specimens were processed for RT‐PCR and cycle threshold (Ct) value for each test was obtained. Positive percent agreement (PPA), negative percent agreement (NPA), overall percent agreement (OPA) and kappa were calculated for OS RT‐PCR compared with NPS RT‐PCR as reference. A total of 116/485 (23.9%) participants were positive by NPS RT‐PCR. OS had PPA of 71.6%, NPA of 98.8%, OPA of 92.4% and kappa of 0.771. Almost all participants (483/485, 99.6%) reported OS as a convenient and comfortable sample for SARS‐CoV‐2 testing over NPS. All participants with Ct values <25 and majority (90.8%) with Ct values <30 were detected by OS. To conclude, OS self‐sampling was preferred in comparison with NPS due the ease and comfort during collection. The performance of OS RT‐PCR for SARS‐CoV‐2 detection, however, was sub‐optimal in comparison with NPS RT‐PCR. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-09-08 2022-11 /pmc/articles/PMC9912197/ /pubmed/35927785 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/apm.13266 Text en © 2022 The Authors. APMIS published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Scandinavian Societies for Pathology, Medical Microbiology and Immunology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Mane, Arati Jain, Shilpa Jain, Ankita Nema, Vijay Kurle, Swarali Saxena, Vandana Pereira, Michael Sirsat, Atul Pathak, Gaurav Bhoi, Vikalp Bhavsar, Shailaja Panda, Samiran Diagnostic performance of patient self‐collected oral swab (tongue and cheek) in comparison with healthcare worker‐collected nasopharyngeal swab for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2 detection |
title | Diagnostic performance of patient self‐collected oral swab (tongue and cheek) in comparison with healthcare worker‐collected nasopharyngeal swab for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2 detection |
title_full | Diagnostic performance of patient self‐collected oral swab (tongue and cheek) in comparison with healthcare worker‐collected nasopharyngeal swab for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2 detection |
title_fullStr | Diagnostic performance of patient self‐collected oral swab (tongue and cheek) in comparison with healthcare worker‐collected nasopharyngeal swab for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2 detection |
title_full_unstemmed | Diagnostic performance of patient self‐collected oral swab (tongue and cheek) in comparison with healthcare worker‐collected nasopharyngeal swab for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2 detection |
title_short | Diagnostic performance of patient self‐collected oral swab (tongue and cheek) in comparison with healthcare worker‐collected nasopharyngeal swab for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2 detection |
title_sort | diagnostic performance of patient self‐collected oral swab (tongue and cheek) in comparison with healthcare worker‐collected nasopharyngeal swab for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2 detection |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9912197/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35927785 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/apm.13266 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT manearati diagnosticperformanceofpatientselfcollectedoralswabtongueandcheekincomparisonwithhealthcareworkercollectednasopharyngealswabforsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2detection AT jainshilpa diagnosticperformanceofpatientselfcollectedoralswabtongueandcheekincomparisonwithhealthcareworkercollectednasopharyngealswabforsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2detection AT jainankita diagnosticperformanceofpatientselfcollectedoralswabtongueandcheekincomparisonwithhealthcareworkercollectednasopharyngealswabforsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2detection AT nemavijay diagnosticperformanceofpatientselfcollectedoralswabtongueandcheekincomparisonwithhealthcareworkercollectednasopharyngealswabforsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2detection AT kurleswarali diagnosticperformanceofpatientselfcollectedoralswabtongueandcheekincomparisonwithhealthcareworkercollectednasopharyngealswabforsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2detection AT saxenavandana diagnosticperformanceofpatientselfcollectedoralswabtongueandcheekincomparisonwithhealthcareworkercollectednasopharyngealswabforsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2detection AT pereiramichael diagnosticperformanceofpatientselfcollectedoralswabtongueandcheekincomparisonwithhealthcareworkercollectednasopharyngealswabforsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2detection AT sirsatatul diagnosticperformanceofpatientselfcollectedoralswabtongueandcheekincomparisonwithhealthcareworkercollectednasopharyngealswabforsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2detection AT pathakgaurav diagnosticperformanceofpatientselfcollectedoralswabtongueandcheekincomparisonwithhealthcareworkercollectednasopharyngealswabforsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2detection AT bhoivikalp diagnosticperformanceofpatientselfcollectedoralswabtongueandcheekincomparisonwithhealthcareworkercollectednasopharyngealswabforsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2detection AT bhavsarshailaja diagnosticperformanceofpatientselfcollectedoralswabtongueandcheekincomparisonwithhealthcareworkercollectednasopharyngealswabforsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2detection AT pandasamiran diagnosticperformanceofpatientselfcollectedoralswabtongueandcheekincomparisonwithhealthcareworkercollectednasopharyngealswabforsevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2detection |