Seow Yen Tan1, Hong Liang Tey2, Ernest Tian Hong Lim3, Song Tar Toh4, Yiong Huak Chan5, Pei Ting Tan6, Sing Ai Lee7, Cheryl Xiaotong Tan8, Gerald Choon Huat Koh9, Thean Yen Tan10, Chuin Siau11. 1. Department of Infectious Diseases, Changi General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore. 2. Department of Dermatology, National Skin Centre, Singapore, Singapore. 3. Emergency Department, Woodlands Health Campus, Singapore, Singapore. 4. Department of Otorhinolaryngology- Head and Neck Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore. 5. Biostatistics Unit, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, Singapore, Singapore. 6. Clinical Trials and Research Unit, Changi General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore. 7. Sheares Healthcare Group Pte Ltd, Singapore, Singapore. 8. Temasek International Pte Ltd, Singapore, Singapore. 9. MOH Office for Healthcare Transformation, Singapore, Singapore. 10. Department of Laboratory Medicine, Changi General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore. 11. Department of Respiratory & Critical Care Medicine, Changi General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Self-sampling for SARS-CoV-2 would significantly raise testing capacity and reduce healthcare worker (HCW) exposure to infectious droplets personal, and protective equipment (PPE) use. METHODS: We conducted a diagnostic accuracy study where subjects with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 (n = 401) and healthy volunteers (n = 100) were asked to self-swab from their oropharynx and mid-turbinate (OPMT), and self-collect saliva. The results of these samples were compared to an OPMT performed by a HCW in the same patient at the same session. RESULTS: In subjects confirmed to have COVID-19, the sensitivities of the HCW-swab, self-swab, saliva, and combined self-swab plus saliva samples were 82.8%, 75.1%, 74.3% and 86.5% respectively. All samples obtained from healthy volunteers were tested negative. Compared to HCW-swab, the sensitivities of a self-swab sample and saliva sample were inferior by 8.7% (95%CI: 2.4% to 15.0%, p = 0.006) and 9.5% (95%CI: 3.1% to 15.8%, p = 0.003) respectively. The combined detection rate of self-swab and saliva had a sensitivity of 2.7% (95%CI: -2.6% to 8.0%, p = 0.321). The sensitivity of both the self-collection methods are higher when the Ct value of the HCW swab is less than 30. The specificity of both the self-swab and saliva testing was 100% (95% CI 96.4% to 100%). CONCLUSION: Our study provides evidence that sensitivities of self-collected OPMT swab and saliva samples were inferior to a HCW swab, but they could still be useful testing tools in the appropriate clinical settings.
BACKGROUND: Self-sampling for SARS-CoV-2 would significantly raise testing capacity and reduce healthcare worker (HCW) exposure to infectious droplets personal, and protective equipment (PPE) use. METHODS: We conducted a diagnostic accuracy study where subjects with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 (n = 401) and healthy volunteers (n = 100) were asked to self-swab from their oropharynx and mid-turbinate (OPMT), and self-collect saliva. The results of these samples were compared to an OPMT performed by a HCW in the same patient at the same session. RESULTS: In subjects confirmed to have COVID-19, the sensitivities of the HCW-swab, self-swab, saliva, and combined self-swab plus saliva samples were 82.8%, 75.1%, 74.3% and 86.5% respectively. All samples obtained from healthy volunteers were tested negative. Compared to HCW-swab, the sensitivities of a self-swab sample and saliva sample were inferior by 8.7% (95%CI: 2.4% to 15.0%, p = 0.006) and 9.5% (95%CI: 3.1% to 15.8%, p = 0.003) respectively. The combined detection rate of self-swab and saliva had a sensitivity of 2.7% (95%CI: -2.6% to 8.0%, p = 0.321). The sensitivity of both the self-collection methods are higher when the Ct value of the HCW swab is less than 30. The specificity of both the self-swab and saliva testing was 100% (95% CI 96.4% to 100%). CONCLUSION: Our study provides evidence that sensitivities of self-collected OPMT swab and saliva samples were inferior to a HCW swab, but they could still be useful testing tools in the appropriate clinical settings.
Authors: Gabriella Vavala; Cameron Goldbeck; Claire C Bristow; Chrysovalantis Stafylis; Paul C Adamson; Dianna Polanco; Manuel A Ocasio; Jasmine Fournier; Adriana Romero-Espinoza; Risa Flynn; Robert Bolan; M Isabel Fernandez; Dallas Swendeman; W Scott Comulada; Sung-Jae Lee; Mary Jane Rotheram-Borus; Jeffrey D Klausner Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-09-27 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Silvia Würstle; Christoph D Spinner; Florian Voit; Dieter Hoffmann; Svenja Hering; Simon Weidlich; Jochen Schneider; Alexander Zink; Matthias Treiber; Roman Iakoubov; Roland M Schmid; Ulrike Protzer; Johanna Erber Journal: Infection Date: 2021-05-10 Impact factor: 3.553
Authors: Silvia Würstle; Johanna Erber; Michael Laxy; Christoph D Spinner; Michael Hanselmann; Dieter Hoffmann; Stanislas Werfel; Svenja Hering; Simon Weidlich; Jochen Schneider; Ralf Franke; Michael Maier; Andreas G Henkel; Roland M Schmid; Ulrike Protzer Journal: JMIR Form Res Date: 2022-01-04
Authors: Laura J Edwards; Ashley L Fowlkes; Meredith G Wesley; Jennifer L Kuntz; Marilyn J Odean; Alberto J Caban-Martinez; Kayan Dunnigan; Andrew L Phillips; Lauren Grant; Meghan K Herring; Holly C Groom; Karley Respet; Shawn Beitel; Tnelda Zunie; Kurt T Hegmann; Archana Kumar; Gregory Joseph; Brandon Poe; Paola Louzado-Feliciano; Michael E Smith; Matthew S Thiese; Natasha Schaefer-Solle; Young M Yoo; Carlos A Silvera; Julie Mayo Lamberte; Josephine Mak; L Clifford McDonald; Matthew J Stuckey; Preeta Kutty; Melissa L Arvay; Sarang K Yoon; Harmony L Tyner; Jefferey L Burgess; Danielle Rentz Hunt; Jennifer Meece; Manjusha Gaglani; Allison L Naleway; Mark G Thompson Journal: JMIR Res Protoc Date: 2021-12-03
Authors: Laura E Strong; Irene Middendorf; Michelle Turner; David K Edwards V; Varun Sama; Joshua Mou; K Colleen Adams Journal: JMIR Hum Factors Date: 2021-12-14
Authors: Michael Wölfl-Duchek; Felix Bergmann; Anselm Jorda; Maria Weber; Matthias Müller; Tamara Seitz; Alexander Zoufaly; Robert Strassl; Markus Zeitlinger; Harald Herkner; Harald Schnidar; Karolina Anderle; Ulla Derhaschnig Journal: Microbiol Spectr Date: 2022-02-02