Comparison between mid-nasal swabs and buccal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 detection in mild COVID-19 patients

BackgroundThe use of rapid antigen diagnostics tests (Ag-RDT) has gained widespread acceptance as an alternative method for diagnosis of COVID-19 outside of health care settings. Various authors have reported that saliva is a reliable specimen, alternative to nasopharyngeal and mid-nasal swabs, to detect SARS-CoV-2 infections by RT-PCR. We assessed the performance of buccal swabs containing saliva for SARS-CoV-2 detection by Ag-RDT, using mid-nasal specimens as a reference in the northern area of Barcelona (Catalonia, Spain) MethodsIn the context of routine clinical diagnosis of mild COVID-19 patients, we enrolled 300 adults in a study to directly compare mid-nasal swabs and saliva specimens for SARS-CoV-2 detection by Ag-RDT.. When mid-nasal and buccal Ag-RDTs showed discordant results, a third mid-nasal swab was collected and analysed by RT-PCR. ResultsPaired samples were successfully obtained in 300 suspected cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Of the 300 paired samples, Ag-RDT with the mid-nasal swab detected 139 (46.3%) positive COVID-19 cases. In comparison, buccal swabs showed a sensitivity and specificity of 31.7% (44/139) and 98.8% (159/161), respectively. 65 discordant results with positive mid-nasal swabs and negative buccal swabs were tested by RT-qPCR. All samples tested by Rt-PCR resulted positive, with a mean cycle threshold (Ct) of 28.3 (SD 7.3). ConclusionOur findings show that mid-nasal swabs have better performance than buccal swabs for detecting SARS-CoV-2 with Ag-RDT tests. Of note, the sensitivity of buccal samples was affected in samples with high viral loads (Ct<33), suggesting that buccal swabs might not be sensitive enough to detect individuals at risk of transmission. Taken together, the existing literature and the results provided in our analysis we advise against the use of buccal specimens for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics with Ag-RDT.

Risk factors for mortality of residents in nursing homes with Covid-19: a retrospective cohort study

BackgroundNursing homes have shown remarkably high Covid-19 incidence and mortality. We aimed to explore the contribution of structural factors of nursing home facilities and the surrounding district to all-cause and Covid-19-related deaths during a SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. MethodsIn this retrospective cohort study, we investigated the risk factors of Covid-19 mortality at the facility level in nursing homes in Catalonia (North-East Spain). The investigated factors included characteristics of the residents (age, gender, comorbidities, and complexity and/or advanced disease), structural features of the nursing home (total number of residents, residents who return home during the pandemic, and capacity for pandemic response, based on an ad hoc score of availability of twelve essential items for implementing preventive measures), and sociodemographic profile of the catchment district (household income, population density, and population incidence of Covid-19). Study endpoints included all-cause death and Covid-19-related death (either PCR-confirmed or clinical suspicion). FindingsThe analysis included 167 nursing homes that provide long-term care to 8,716 residents. Between March 1 and June 1, 2020, 1,629 deaths were reported in these nursing homes; 1,089 (66{square}9%) of them were Covid-19-confirmed. The multivariable regression showed a higher risk of death associated with a higher percentage of complex patients (HR 1{square}09; 95%CI 1{square}05-1{square}12 per 10% increase) or those with advanced diseases (1{square}13; 1{square}07-1{square}19), lower capacity for implementing preventive measures (1{square}08; 1{square}05-1{square}10 per 1-point increase), and districts with a higher incidence of Covid-19 (2{square}98; 2{square}53-3{square}50 per 1000 cases/100,000 population increase). A higher population density of the catchment area was a protective factor (0{square}60; 0{square}50-0{square}72 per log10 people/Km2 increase). InterpretationPresence of residents with complex/advance disease, low capacity for pandemic response and location in areas with high incidence of Covid-19 are risk factors for Covid-19 mortality in nursing homes and may help policymakers to prioritize preventative interventions for pandemic containment. FundingCrowdfunding campaign YoMeCorono (https://www.yomecorono.com/), and Generalitat de Catalunya. Research in contextO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSWe searched PubMed for studies exploring the management of Covid-19 in long-term care settings. The search was performed on May 1, 2020, and included the keywords "Covid-19", "nursing home", "long term care", and "skilled nursing facility" with no language restriction. In addition to descriptive reports of Covid-19 mortality in the long-term care setting, we found studies providing evidence on the influence of age and comorbidities to mortality at the individual level. Some authors reported comparisons in the incidence and mortality of Covid-19 between facilities and country areas, and suggested the characteristics of each area/facility that may explain differences in mortality. However, we found no published works specifically investigating the contribution of structural features of the facility and sociodemographic characteristics of the area to explaining differences in Covid-19 mortality among long-term care facilities. Added value of this studyThis is the first analysis of risk of mortality at a facility level of residents with Covid-19 in nursing homes. We enrolled up to 167 nursing homes providing long-term care to 8,716 residents and we actively identified risk factors for Covid-19 mortality at the facility level. We found that nursing homes with lower capacity for pandemic response, and located in districts with a higher incidence of Covid-19 had significantly higher risks of Covid-19 mortality. The percentage of complex and/or advanced disease patients was also a risk factor. Implications of all the available evidenceOur findings provide policymakers with critical information to prioritize long-term care facilities at higher risk when deploying preventative interventions to minimize mortality in this setting. The association between mortality within the nursing home and Covid-19 incidence in the catchment area reinforces the importance of preventing the entry of SARS-CoV-2 into facilities. Nursing homes with limited capacity to implement containment measures should be prioritized when deploying preventative interventions for minimizing Covid-19 mortality in long-term care facilities.

A Cluster-Randomized Trial of Hydroxychloroquine as Prevention of Covid-19 Transmission and Disease

BackgroundCurrent strategies for preventing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections are limited to non-pharmacological interventions. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has been proposed as a postexposure therapy to prevent Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) but definitive evidence is lacking. MethodsWe conducted an open-label, cluster-randomized trial including asymptomatic contacts exposed to a PCR-positive Covid-19 case in Catalonia, Spain. Clusters were randomized to receive no specific therapy (control arm) or HCQ 800mg once, followed by 400mg daily for 6 days (intervention arm). The primary outcome was PCR-confirmed symptomatic Covid-19 within 14 days. The secondary outcome was SARS-CoV-2 infection, either symptomatically compatible or a PCR-positive result regardless of symptoms. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed up to 28 days. ResultsThe analysis included 2,314 healthy contacts of 672 Covid-19 index cases identified between Mar 17 and Apr 28, 2020. A total of 1,198 were randomly allocated to usual care and 1,116 to HCQ therapy. There was no significant difference in the primary outcome of PCR-confirmed, symptomatic Covid-19 disease (6.2% usual care vs. 5.7% HCQ; risk ratio 0.89 [95% confidence interval 0.54-1.46]), nor evidence of beneficial effects on prevention of SARS-CoV-2 transmission (17.8% usual care vs. 18.7% HCQ). The incidence of AEs was higher in the intervention arm than in the control arm (5.9% usual care vs 51.6% HCQ), but no treatment-related serious AEs were reported. ConclusionsPostexposure therapy with HCQ did not prevent SARS-CoV-2 disease and infection in healthy individuals exposed to a PCR-positive case. Our findings do not support HCQ as postexposure prophylaxis for Covid-19. ClinicalTrials.gov registration numberNCT04304053