Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection in gargle, spit and sputum specimens
Henna Mäkelä; Eero Poukka; Lotta Hagberg; Thuan Vo; Hanna Nohynek; Niina Ikonen; Kirsi Liitsola; Otto Helve; Carita Savolainen-Kopra; Timothée Dub.
Affiliation
  • Henna Mäkelä; Finnish institute for Health and Welfare
  • Eero Poukka; Finnish institute for Health and Welfare
  • Lotta Hagberg; Finnish institute for Health and Welfare
  • Thuan Vo; University of Tampere
  • Hanna Nohynek; National Institute for Health and Welfare
  • Niina Ikonen; The National Institute for Health and Welfare
  • Kirsi Liitsola; National Institute of health and welfare
  • Otto Helve; Finnish institute for Health and Welfare
  • Carita Savolainen-Kopra; National Institute for Health and Welfare (THL)
  • Timothée Dub; Finnish institute for Health and Welfare
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-21255857
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
The gold standard for SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnosis is RT-PCR from nasopharyngeal specimen (NPS). Its collection involves a close contact between patients and healthcare workers requiring a significant amount of workforce and putting them at risk of infection. We evaluated self-collection of alternative specimens and compared their sensitivity and Ct values to NPS. We visited acute COVID-19 outpatients to collect concomitant nasopharyngeal and gargle specimens and had patients self-collect a gargle and either sputum or spit specimens on the next morning. We included 40 patients and collected 40 concomitant nasopharyngeal and gargle specimens, as well as 40 gargle, 22 spit and 16 sputum specimens on the next day, as 2 patients could not produce sputum. All specimens were as sensitive as NPS. Gargle specimens had a sensitivity of 0.97 (CI 95% 0.92-1,00), whether collected concomitantly to NPS or on the next morning. Next morning spit and sputum specimens showed a sensitivity of 1.00 CI (95% 1.00-1.00) and 0.94 (CI 95% 0.87-1.00), respectively. The gargle specimens had a significantly higher mean cycle threshold (Ct) values, 29.89 (SD 4.63) (p-value <0.001) and 29.25 (SD 3.99) (p-value <0.001) when collected concomitantly and on the next morning compared to NPS (22.07, SD 4.63). Ct value obtained with spit (23.51, SD 4.57, p-value 0.11) and sputum (25.82, SD 9.21, p-value 0.28) specimens were close to NPS. All alternative specimen collection methods were as sensitive as NPS, but spit collection appeared more promising, with a low Ct value and ease of collection. Our findings warrant further investigation.
License
cc_by_nc_nd
Full text: Available Collection: Preprints Database: medRxiv Type of study: Diagnostic study / Experimental_studies / Prognostic study Language: English Year: 2021 Document type: Preprint
Full text: Available Collection: Preprints Database: medRxiv Type of study: Diagnostic study / Experimental_studies / Prognostic study Language: English Year: 2021 Document type: Preprint
...