Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Evaluation of canine detection of COVID-19 infected individuals under controlled settings.
Chaber, Anne-Lise; Hazel, Susan; Matthews, Brett; Withers, Alexander; Alvergnat, Guillaume; Grandjean, Dominique; Caraguel, Charles.
  • Chaber AL; School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, University of Adelaide, Roseworthy, South Australia, Australia.
  • Hazel S; School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, University of Adelaide, Roseworthy, South Australia, Australia.
  • Matthews B; Detector Dog Program, Operational Strategy and Coordination, Australian Border Force, Bulla, Australia.
  • Withers A; School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, University of Adelaide, Roseworthy, South Australia, Australia.
  • Alvergnat G; Department Special Operations, Metropolitan Fire Service South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.
  • Grandjean D; International Affairs Bureau, Ministry of Interior of the UAE, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
  • Caraguel C; Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire d'Alfort, Université Paris Est, Maisons-Alfort, France.
Transbound Emerg Dis ; 69(5): e1951-e1958, 2022 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1752746
ABSTRACT
Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is currently the standard diagnostic method to detect symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals infected with Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, RT-PCR results are not immediate and may falsely be negative before an infected individual sheds viral particles in the upper airways where swabs are collected. Infected individuals emit volatile organic compounds in their breath and sweat that are detectable by trained dogs. Here, we evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of dog detection against SARS-CoV-2 infection. Fifteen dogs previously trained at two centres in Australia were presented to axillary sweat specimens collected from known SARS-CoV-2 human cases (n = 100) and non-cases (n = 414). The true infection status of the cases and non-cases were confirmed based on RT-PCR results as well as clinical presentation. Across dogs, the overall diagnostic sensitivity (DSe) was 95.3% (95%CI 93.1-97.6%) and diagnostic specificity (DSp) was 97.1% (95%CI 90.7-100.0%). The DSp decreased significantly when non-case specimens were collected over 1 min rather than 20 min (p value = .004). The location of evaluation did not impact the detection performances. The accuracy of detection varied across dogs and experienced dogs revealed a marginally better DSp (p value = .016). The potential and limitations of this alternative detection tool are discussed.
Subject(s)
Keywords

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: COVID-19 Type of study: Diagnostic study / Experimental Studies / Prognostic study Limits: Animals / Humans Language: English Journal: Transbound Emerg Dis Journal subject: Veterinary Medicine Year: 2022 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: Tbed.14529

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: COVID-19 Type of study: Diagnostic study / Experimental Studies / Prognostic study Limits: Animals / Humans Language: English Journal: Transbound Emerg Dis Journal subject: Veterinary Medicine Year: 2022 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: Tbed.14529