Comparison of self-collected mouth gargle with deep-throat saliva samples for the diagnosis of COVID-19: Mouth gargle for diagnosis of COVID-19.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lai CK
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8310573 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:We assessed the performance, stability, and user acceptability of swab-independent self-collected saliva and saline mouth rinse/gargle sample types for the molecular detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in adults and school-aged children. Outpatients who had recently been diagnosed with COVID-19 or were presenting with suspected COVID-19 were asked to have a nasopharyngeal (NP) swab collected and provide at least one self-collected sample type. Participants were also asked about sample acceptability using a five-point Likert scale. For those previously diagnosed with COVID-19, all samples underwent real-time PCR testing using a lab-developed assay, and the majority were also tested using an FDA-authorized assay. For those presenting with suspected COVID-19, only those with a positive nasopharyngeal swab sample went on to have other samples tested. Saline mouth rinse/gargle and saliva samples were tested daily at time zero, day 1, and day 2 to assess nucleic acid stability at room temperature. Fifty participants (aged 4 to 71 years) were included; of these, 40 had at least one positive sample and were included in the primary sample yield analysis. Saline mouth rinse/gargle samples had a sensitivity of 98% (39/40), while saliva samples had a sensitivity of 79% (26/33). Both saline mouth rinse/gargle and saliva samples showed stable viral RNA detection after 2 days of room temperature storage. Mouth rinse/gargle samples had the highest (mean, 4.9) and health care worker (HCW)-collected NP swabs had the lowest acceptability scores (mean, 3.1). In conclusion, saline mouth rinse/gargle samples demonstrated higher combined user acceptability ratings and analytical performance than saliva and HCW-collected NP swabs. This sample type is a promising swab-independent option, particularly for outpatient self-collection in adults and school-aged children.
| S-EPMC8092743 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic nasopharyngeal or nose and/or throat swabs (NTS) have been the primary approach for collecting patient samples for the subsequent detection of viral RNA. However, this procedure, if undertaken correctly, can be unpleasant and therefore deters individuals from providing high quality samples. To overcome these limitations other modes of sample collection have been explored. In a cohort of frontline health care workers we have compared saliva and gargle samples to gold-standard NTS. 93% of individuals preferred providing saliva or gargle samples, with little sex-dependent variation. Viral titers collected in samples were analyzed using standard methods and showed that gargle and saliva were similarly comparable for identifying COVID-19 positive individuals compared to NTS (92% sensitivity; 98% specificity). We suggest that gargle and saliva collection are viable alternatives to NTS swabs and may encourage testing to provide better disease diagnosis and population surveillance.
| S-EPMC9132684 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To investigate the role of gene expression in patients with COVID-19. Full article available at DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044497.
2023-01-30 | GSE217948 | GEO
Project description:Testing for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by RT-PCR is a vital public health tool in the pandemic. Self-collected samples are increasingly used as an alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs. Several studies suggested that they are sufficiently sensitive to be a useful alternative. However, there are limited data directly comparing several different types of self-collected materials to determine which material is preferable. A total of 102 predominantly symptomatic adults with a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection self-collected native saliva, a tongue swab, a mid-turbinate nasal swab, saliva obtained by chewing a cotton pad and gargle lavage, within 48 h of initial diagnosis. Sample collection was unsupervised. Both native saliva and gargling with tap water had high diagnostic sensitivity of 92.8% and 89.1%, respectively. Nasal swabs had a sensitivity of 85.1%, which was not significantly inferior to saliva (p = 0.092), but 16.6% of participants reported they had difficult in self-collection of this sample. A tongue swab and saliva obtained by chewing a cotton pad had a significantly lower sensitivity of 74.2% and 70.2%, respectively. Diagnostic sensitivity was not related to the presence of clinical symptoms or to age. When comparing self-collected specimens from different material, saliva, gargle lavage or mid-turbinate nasal swabs may be considered for most symptomatic patients. However, complementary experiments are required to verify that differences in performance observed among the five sampling modes were not attributed to collection impairment.
| S-EPMC8709431 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNasopharyngeal swab has long been considered the specimen of choice for the diagnosis of respiratory viral infections, including SARS-CoV-2 infection, but it suffers from several drawbacks: its discomfort limits screening acceptability, and it is vulnerable to shortages in both specialized materials and trained healthcare workers in the context of a pandemic.MethodsWe prospectively compared natural spring water gargle to combined oro-nasopharyngeal swab (ONPS) for the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in paired clinical specimens (1005 ONPS and 1005 gargles) collected from 987 unique early symptomatic as well as asymptomatic individuals from the community.ResultsUsing a direct RT-PCR method with the Allplex™ 2019-nCoV Assay (Seegene), the clinical sensitivity of the gargle was 95.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 90.2 - 98.3%), similar to the sensitivity of the ONPS (93.8%; 95% CI, 88.2 - 97.3%), despite significantly lower viral RNA concentration in gargles, as reflected by higher cycle threshold values. No single specimen type detected all COVID-19 cases. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was stable in gargles at room temperature for at least 7 days.ConclusionThe simplicity of this sampling method coupled with the accessibility of spring water are clear advantages in a pandemic situation where testing frequency, turnaround time and shortage of consumables and trained staff are critical elements.
| S-EPMC8487097 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Mass spectrometry (MS) can deliver valuable diagnostic data that complement genomic information and allow us to increase our current knowledge of the COVID-19 disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. We developed a simple, MS-based method to specifically detect SARS-CoV-2 proteins from gargle solution samples of COVID-19 patients. The protocol consists of an acetone precipitation and tryptic digestion of proteins contained within the gargle solution, followed by a targeted MS analysis. Our methodology identifies unique peptides originating from SARS-CoV-2 nucleoprotein. Building on these promising initial results, faster MS protocols can now be developed as routine diagnostic tools for COVID-19 patients. Data are available via ProteomeXchange with identifier PXD019423.
| S-EPMC7315851 | biostudies-literature
Project description:RNA-Seq was used to study changes in gene expression in saliva samples from 266 human subjects after SARS-COV-2 infection, vaccination, or combined infection and vaccination (breakthrough). Approximately equal numbers of males and females, matched for age, were profiled after subjects tested positive for COVID-19 by PCR and sequencing of the variant. In addition to samples from uninfected controls with and without vaccination, samples from infected subjects with and without vaccination that represent eight major SARS-COV-2 lineages are included: epsilon, iota, alpha, delta, omicron BA.1, omicron BA.2, omicron BA.4, and omicron BA.5. Stranded single-end sequencing was performed using standard Illumina protocols. Reads were quantified to hg38 human transcriptome using Salmon after adapter trimming. Quantified reads were filtered to remove features with fewer than one count in 80% of the samples, and normalized using TPM, followed by quantile and log2 transformation.
2023-09-19 | GSE212191 | GEO
Project description:IntroductionContaining COVID-19 requires broad-scale testing. However, sample collection requires qualified personnel and protective equipment and may cause transmission. We assessed the sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2-rtPCR applying three self-sampling techniques as compared to professionally collected oro-nasopharyngeal samples (cOP/NP).MethodsFrom 62 COVID-19 outpatients, we obtained: (i) multi-swab, MS; (ii) saliva sponge combined with nasal vestibula, SN; (iii) gargled water, GW; (iv) professionally collected cOP/NP (standard). We compared ct-values for E-gene and ORF1ab and analysed variables reducing sensitivity of self-collecting procedures.ResultsThe median ct-values for E-gene and ORF1ab obtained in cOP/NP samples were 20.7 and 20.2, in MS samples 22.6 and 21.8, in SN samples 23.3 and 22.3, and in GW samples 30.3 and 29.8, respectively. MS and SN samples showed sensitivities of 95.2% (95%CI, 86.5-99.0) and GW samples of 88.7% (78.1-95.3). Sensitivity was inversely correlated with ct-values, and became <90% for samples obtained more than 8 days after symptom onset. For MS and SN samples, false negativity was associated with language problems, sampling errors, and symptom duration.ConclusionConclusions from this study are limited to the sensitivity of self-sampling in mildly to moderately symptomatic patients. Still, self-collected oral/nasal/saliva samples can facilitate up-scaling of testing in early symptomatic COVID-19 patients if operational errors are minimized.
| S-EPMC8295057 | biostudies-literature
Project description:SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests used at the point-of-care, such as the Abbott Panbio, have great potential to help combat the COVID-19 pandemic. The Panbio is Health Canada approved for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in symptomatic individuals within the first 7 days of COVID-19 symptom onset(s). Symptomatic adults recently diagnosed with COVID-19 in the community were recruited into the study. Paired nasopharyngeal (NP), throat, and saliva swabs were collected, with one paired swab tested immediately with the Panbio, and the other transported in universal transport media and tested using real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). We also prospectively evaluated results from assessment centers within the community. For those individuals, an NP swab was collected for Panbio testing and paired with RT-PCR results from parallel NP or throat swabs. One hundred and forty-five individuals were included in the study. Collection of throat and saliva was stopped early due to poorer performance (throat sensitivity 57.7%, n=61, and saliva sensitivity 2.6%, n=41). NP swab sensitivity was 87.7% [n=145, 95% confidence interval (CI) 81.0-92.7%]. There were 1641 symptomatic individuals tested by Panbio in assessment centers with 268/1641 (16.3%) positive for SARS-CoV-2. There were 37 false negatives and 2 false positives, corresponding to a sensitivity and specificity of 86.1% [95% CI 81.3-90.0%] and 99.9% [95% CI 99.5-100.0%], respectively. The Panbio test reliably detects most cases of SARS-CoV-2 from adults in the community setting presenting within 7 days of symptom onset using nasopharyngeal swabs. Throat and saliva swabs are not reliable specimens for the Panbio.
| S-EPMC7979467 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Longitudinal cohort: 773 host response genes were profiled in previously vaccinated (n=16) and unvaccinated (n=14) COVID-19+ participants along with 5 healthy uninfected controls across a 2-week observational window Single timepoint cohort: 773 host response genes were profiled in 6 healthy uninfected participants
2023-09-30 | GSE243348 | GEO