Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters

Database
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
Paediatr Child Health ; 27(8): 469-475, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2070157

ABSTRACT

Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of intranasal vaporized lidocaine in reducing pain for children undergoing a nasopharyngeal (NP) swab in the Emergency Department (ED). Study Design: A randomized blinded clinical trial was conducted in a paediatric ED. Both participants and the researcher evaluating the primary outcome were blinded. Children aged 6 to 17 years old requiring a NP swab were eligible. Participants were randomly allocated to receive intranasal lidocaine or a sham treatment prior to their NP swab. The primary outcome measure was pain during the swab as assessed by the visual analog scale. Secondary outcome measures were pain using the verbal numeric rating scale, fear using the children fear scale, and adverse effects of the intervention. Results: Eighty-eight participants were enrolled-45 in the lidocaine group and 43 controls. The mean visual analog scale scores for pain were 46 mm in the lidocaine group and 53 mm in the control group (mean difference 7 mm; 95% CI: -5 to 19 mm). No serious adverse events were observed. Conclusions: Intranasal lidocaine administered prior to NP swabs in the ED failed to show an improvement in pain scores for school-aged children and youth.

2.
J Clin Virol ; 144: 104995, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1446825

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Nasopharyngeal swab has long been considered the specimen of choice for the diagnosis of respiratory viral infections, including SARS-CoV-2 infection, but it suffers from several drawbacks: its discomfort limits screening acceptability, and it is vulnerable to shortages in both specialized materials and trained healthcare workers in the context of a pandemic. METHODS: We prospectively compared natural spring water gargle to combined oro-nasopharyngeal swab (ONPS) for the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in paired clinical specimens (1005 ONPS and 1005 gargles) collected from 987 unique early symptomatic as well as asymptomatic individuals from the community. RESULTS: Using a direct RT-PCR method with the Allplex™ 2019-nCoV Assay (Seegene), the clinical sensitivity of the gargle was 95.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 90.2 - 98.3%), similar to the sensitivity of the ONPS (93.8%; 95% CI, 88.2 - 97.3%), despite significantly lower viral RNA concentration in gargles, as reflected by higher cycle threshold values. No single specimen type detected all COVID-19 cases. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was stable in gargles at room temperature for at least 7 days. CONCLUSION: The simplicity of this sampling method coupled with the accessibility of spring water are clear advantages in a pandemic situation where testing frequency, turnaround time and shortage of consumables and trained staff are critical elements.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , RNA, Viral , Humans , Nasopharynx , RNA, Viral/genetics , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , SARS-CoV-2 , Saliva , Specimen Handling , Water
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL