Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Acad Radiol ; 30(4): 631-639, 2023 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2164930

ABSTRACT

Understanding imaging research experiences, challenges, and strategies for academic radiology departments during and after COVID-19 is critical to prepare for future disruptive events. We summarize key insights and programmatic initiatives at major academic hospitals across the world, based on literature review and meetings of the Radiological Society of North America Vice Chairs of Research (RSNA VCR) group. Through expert discussion and case studies, we provide suggested guidelines to maintain and grow radiology research in the postpandemic era.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Radiology , Humans , Pandemics , Diagnostic Imaging , North America/epidemiology
2.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(9): e3027-e3032, 2021 11 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1500994

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), can be detected in respiratory samples by real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) or other molecular methods. Accessibility of diagnostic testing for COVID-19 has been limited by intermittent shortages of supplies required for testing, including flocked nasopharyngeal (FLNP) swabs. METHODS: We developed a 3-dimensional printed nasopharyngeal (3DP) swab as a replacement of the FLNP swab. The performance of 3DP and FLNP swabs were compared in a clinical trial of symptomatic patients at 3 clinical sites (n = 291) using 3 SARS-CoV-2 emergency use authorization tests: a modified version of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel and 2 commercial automated formats, Roche Cobas and NeuMoDx. RESULTS: The cycle threshold-C(t)-values from the gene targets and the RNase P gene control in the CDC assay showed no significant differences between swabs for both gene targets (P = .152 and P = .092), with the RNase P target performing significantly better in the 3DP swabs (P < .001). The C(t) values showed no significant differences between swabs for both viral gene targets in the Roche cobas assay (P = .05 and P = .05) as well as the NeuMoDx assay (P = .401 and P = .484). The overall clinical correlation of COVID-19 diagnosis between all methods was 95.88% (Kappa 0.901). CONCLUSIONS: The 3DP swabs were equivalent to standard FLNP in 3 testing platforms for SARS-CoV-2. Given the need for widespread testing, 3DP swabs printed onsite are an alternate to FLNP that can rapidly scale in response to acute needs when supply chain disruptions affect availability of collection kits.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing , COVID-19 , Humans , Nasopharynx , Printing, Three-Dimensional , SARS-CoV-2 , Specimen Handling
3.
3D Print Med ; 6(1): 21, 2020 Aug 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-713340

ABSTRACT

The nasopharyngeal swab is a critical component of the COVID-19 testing kit. Supply chain remains greatly impacted by the pandemic. Teams from USF Health Radiology and Northwell Health System developed a 3D-printed stopgap alternative. This descriptive study details the workflow and provides guidance for hospital-based 3D printing labs to leverage the design to make a positive impact on the pandemic. Swab use is also outlined, and the early information regarding clinical use is described, including an ongoing multicenter trial methodology.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL