Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 7(9): ofaa382, 2020 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32964067

RESUMO

We compared oropharyngeal swab test performance with nasopharyngeal testing for discontinuation of transmission-based COVID-19 precautions. We performed a retrospective review of confirmed COVID-19-positive patients who received paired nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 tests for clearance from isolation from May 4, 2020, to May 26, 2020. Using nasopharyngeal swabs as the reference standard, we calculated the sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value of oropharyngeal swabs. We also calculated the kappa between the 2 tests. A total of 189 paired samples were collected from 74 patients. Oropharyngeal swab sensitivity was 38%, specificity was 87%, and negative predictive value was 70%. The kappa was 0.25. Our study suggests that oropharyngeal swabs are inferior to nasopharyngeal swabs for test-based clearance from COVID-19 isolation.

2.
J Clin Microbiol ; 49(4): 1624-7, 2011 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21307220

RESUMO

Antibiotic neutralization in blood culture media from two automated systems was evaluated by measuring the recovery of organisms and times to detection in simulated cultures. Overall, BD Bactec Plus media (Bactec FX system) outperformed TREK 80 ml Redox media (VersaTREK system), although results suggest a relative rather than an absolute increased rate of recovery for the Bactec media.


Assuntos
Antibacterianos/antagonistas & inibidores , Antibacterianos/sangue , Bacteriemia/diagnóstico , Técnicas Bacteriológicas/métodos , Sangue/microbiologia , Meios de Cultura/química , Adulto , Humanos , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Fatores de Tempo
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...