Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Anterior nasal versus nasal mid-turbinate sampling for a SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detecting rapid test: does localisation or professional collection matter?
Olga Nikolai; Chiara Rohardt; Frank Tobian; Andrea Junge; Victor M. Corman; Terry C. Jones; Marry Gaeddert; Federica Lainati; Jilian Sacks; Joachim Seybold; Frank P. Mockenhaupt; Claudia M. Denkinger; Andreas K. Lindner.
Affiliation
  • Olga Nikolai; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health; Institute of
  • Chiara Rohardt; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health; Institute of
  • Frank Tobian; Division of Clinical Tropical Medicine, Center of Infectious Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany
  • Andrea Junge; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health; Institute of
  • Victor M. Corman; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health; Institute of
  • Terry C. Jones; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health; Institute of
  • Marry Gaeddert; Division of Clinical Tropical Medicine, Center of Infectious Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany
  • Federica Lainati; Division of Clinical Tropical Medicine, Center of Infectious Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany
  • Jilian Sacks; Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics, Geneva, Switzerland
  • Joachim Seybold; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health; Medical Dire
  • Frank P. Mockenhaupt; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health; Institute of
  • Claudia M. Denkinger; Division of Clinical Tropical Medicine, Center of Infectious Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany
  • Andreas K. Lindner; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health; Institute of
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-21251274
Journal article
A scientific journal published article is available and is probably based on this preprint. It has been identified through a machine matching algorithm, human confirmation is still pending.
See journal article
ABSTRACT
ObjectivesThe aim of this diagnostic accuracy study was direct comparison of two different nasal sampling methods for an antigen-based rapid diagnostic test (Ag-RDT) that detects severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Furthermore, the accuracy and feasibility of self-sampling was evaluated. MethodsThis manufacturer-independent, prospective diagnostic accuracy study, compared professional anterior nasal (AN) and nasal mid-turbinate (NMT) sampling for a WHO-listed SARS-CoV-2 Ag-RDT. A second group of participants collected a NMT sample themselves and underwent a professional nasopharyngeal swab for comparison. The reference standard was real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) using combined oro-/nasopharyngeal sampling. Individuals with high suspicion of SARS-CoV-2 infection were tested. Sensitivity, specificity, and percent agreement were calculated. Self-sampling was observed without intervention. Feasibility was evaluated by observer and participant questionnaires. ResultsAmong 132 symptomatic adults, both professional AN- and NMT-sampling yielded a sensitivity of 86.1% (31/36 RT-PCR positives detected; 95%CI 71.3-93.9) and a specificity of 100.0% (95%CI 95.7-100). The positive percent agreement (PPA) was 100% (95%CI 89.0-100). Among 96 additional adults, self NMT- and professional NP-sampling yielded an identical sensitivity of 91.2% (31/34; 95%CI 77.0-97.0). Specificity was 98.4% (95%CI 91.4-99.9) with NMT- and 100.0% (95%CI 94.2-100) with NP-sampling. The PPA was 96.8% (95%CI 83.8-99.8). Most participants (85.3%) considered self-sampling as easy to perform. ConclusionProfessional AN- and NMT-sampling are of equivalent accuracy for an Ag-RDT in ambulatory symptomatic adults. Participants were able to reliably perform the NMT-sampling themselves, following written and illustrated instructions. Nasal self-sampling will likely facilitate scaling of SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing.
License
cc_by_nc_nd
Full text: Available Collection: Preprints Database: medRxiv Type of study: Diagnostic study / Experimental_studies / Observational study / Prognostic study Language: English Year: 2021 Document type: Preprint
Full text: Available Collection: Preprints Database: medRxiv Type of study: Diagnostic study / Experimental_studies / Observational study / Prognostic study Language: English Year: 2021 Document type: Preprint
...