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










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-20205278

ABSTRACT

BackgroundEffective management of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) requires large-scale testing. Collection of nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) by healthcare workers (HCW) is currently used to diagnose SARS-CoV-2, which increases the risk of transmission to HCWs. Self-administered saliva and buccal swabs are convenient, painless and safe alternative sample collection methods. MethodsA cross-sectional single centre study was conducted on 42 participants who were tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 via NPS within the past 7 days. A self-collected saliva and buccal swab and a HCW-collected NPS were obtained. Real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) was performed and cycle threshold (CT) values were obtained. Positive percent agreement (PPA), negative percent agreement (NPA) and overall agreement (OA) were calculated for saliva and buccal swabs, as compared with NPS. ResultsAmong the 42 participants, 73.8% (31/42) tested positive via any one of the 3 tests. With reference to NPS, the saliva test had PPA 66.7%, NPA 91.7% and OA 69.0%. The buccal swab had PPA 56.7%, NPA 100% and OA 73.8%. Presence of symptoms improved diagnostic accuracy. There was no statistically significant association between CT values and duration of symptom onset within the first 12 days of symptoms for all three modalities. ConclusionSelf-collected saliva tests and buccal swabs have only moderate agreement with HCW-collected NPS swabs. Primary screening for SARS-CoV-2 may be performed with a saliva test or buccal swab, with a negative test warranting a confirmatory NPS to avoid false negatives. This combined strategy minimizes discomfort and reduces the risk of spread to the community and HCWs.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...