ABSTRACT
Background: Self-collection of nasal swabs for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) would considerably increase the testing capability and decrease the risk of transmission among healthcare workers (HCW) and the use of personal protective equipment (PPE). Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the performance of self-collected nasal swabs compared with professionally collected nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs for detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA by RT-PCR. Materials and methods: We performed a cross-sectional study where the suspected cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were instructed about the self-collection of nasal swabs from their mid-turbinate. The results were compared to a nasopharyngeal swab collected by a trained healthcare worker in the same patient at the same sitting. Results: We enrolled 100 participants, of which, 69 (69%) were male and 31 (31%) were female. The median age of the study participant was 36 years. Of the participants, 58 (58%) were symptomatic, and the commonest clinical presentation was cough, which was present in 42 (42%) participants. Out of 100 samples, 31 (31%) professionally collected nasopharyngeal swabs and 28 (28%) self-collected nasal swabs were positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. Out of 31 professionally collected positive samples, three samples were negative in self-collection. Out of 28 self-collected positive samples, no sample was negative in the professional collection. The sensitivity and specificity of self-collected nasal swabs compared to professionally collected nasopharyngeal swabs were 90.32% and 100.00%, respectively. The sensitivity of self-collected nasal was 100% when the cycle threshold (Ct) value of the professionally collected NP swab was less than 30. Conclusion: Our study showed that self-collected nasal swabs' sensitivities were similar to professionally collected NP swabs with a high viral load (low Ct value). Hence, this method could be used when the patient is symptomatic and come to the health providers in the early stage of COVID-19 illness.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers (HCWs) at the frontline are confronting a substantial risk of infection during the COVID-19 pandemic. This emerging virus created specific hazards to researchers and laboratory staff in a clinical setting, underlined by rapid and extensive worldwide transmission. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among COVID-19 reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) laboratory health workers in Bangladesh. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted between October 2 to December 2, 2020. A total of 508 participants, including doctors, scientific officers, medical technologists, and cleaners working in several COVID-19 RT-PCR laboratories, were included in this study. Data were collected from each participant using a semi-structured questionnaire prepared in the format of an anonymous Google form. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS, version 25.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). RESULTS: Out of the 508 participants, 295 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR. Among the positive cases, 202 were men, and 93 were women, with a median age of 30 years. The most positive cases were medical technologists (53.22%) followed by doctors (28.8%). Out of the 271 symptomatic positive cases, the most typical symptoms were fever (78.5%), fatigue (70%), loss of smell and taste (65%), and cough (64%). Hypertension, obesity, and diabetes were found in 8.8%, 8.8%, and 7.1% positive cases. A + blood group was present in 37% of the positive cases, followed by the B+ blood group (27%) and O+ blood group (25%). Inadequate supply of personal protective equipment (PPE), absence of negative pressure ventilation, laboratory contamination, and no training on molecular test methods were found in 13.8%, 67.8%, 44.7%, and 40.6% of positive cases, respectively. CONCLUSION: Evaluating the infection status of laboratory HCWs is crucial for drawing attention from the public, providing practical suggestions for government agencies, and increasing protective measures for laboratory HCWs.