Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Stick with the nose…Saliva rapid antigen testing is not a viable method for testing children under 5 years old.
Tosif, Shidan; Lee, Lai-Yang; Nguyen, Jill; McMinn, Alissa; Selman, Chris; Grobler, Anneke C; Daley, Andrew; Crawford, Nigel W.
  • Tosif S; Department of General Medicine & Immunisation Service, Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
  • Lee LY; Infection and Immunity, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
  • Nguyen J; Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
  • McMinn A; Department of Microbiology, The Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
  • Selman C; Infection and Immunity, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
  • Grobler AC; Infection and Immunity, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
  • Daley A; Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics Unit, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
  • Crawford NW; Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
J Paediatr Child Health ; 2022 Nov 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2236359
ABSTRACT

AIM:

Respiratory testing with rapid antigen tests (RATs) in children under 5 years of age may be uncomfortable and presents specific challenges to testing due to compliance and procedural distress. The aim of this study was to investigate sensitivity and feasibility of self-collected nasal and saliva RAT tests compared with a combined nose and throat (CTN) swab PCR in children under 5.

METHODS:

Children aged between 1 month and 5 years, with confirmed COVID-19 or who were a household contact within 7 days were included. A saliva RAT, nasal RAT and CTN swab were collected by the parent. SARS-CoV-2 cycle threshold (Ct) values for CTN tested by PCR were compared with saliva and nasal RAT results. Parent preference for method of sample was recorded.

RESULTS:

Forty-one children were recruited with median age of 1.5 (interquartile range 0.7-4.0) years. Only 22/41 (54%) of parents were able to successfully collect a saliva RAT from their child. Sensitivity of the nasal RAT and saliva RAT was 0.889 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.739-0.969) and 0.158 (95% CI 0.034-0.396), respectively. Upper limit of nasal RAT detection by CTN Ct value was higher than saliva (36.05 vs. 27.29). While saliva RAT was rated most comfortable, nasal RAT was rated the preferred specimen by parents for future testing, due to saliva collection difficulties and time taken.

CONCLUSIONS:

Rapid antigen testing with nasal RAT is a more feasible and sensitive method for SARS-CoV-2 detection in young children compared with saliva RAT.
Keywords

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Type of study: Diagnostic study Language: English Journal subject: Pediatrics Year: 2022 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: Jpc.16277

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Type of study: Diagnostic study Language: English Journal subject: Pediatrics Year: 2022 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: Jpc.16277