Comparison of saliva and oro-nasopharyngeal swab sample in the molecular diagnosis of COVID-19

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Güçlü,Ertuğrul
Data de Publicação: 2020
Outros Autores: Koroglu,Mehmet, Yürümez,Yusuf, Toptan,Hande, Kose,Elif, Güneysu,Fatih, Karabay,Oğuz
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-42302020000801116
Resumo: SUMMARY BACKGROUND Healthcare personnel are at risk of becoming infected while taking upper and/or lower respiratory tract specimens. Therefore, there is a need for sampling methods that do not risk infecting them. In this study, we aimed to compare the saliva and Oro-Nasopharyngeal Swab (ONS) sampling methods. METHODS Patients were divided into three groups. Group 1 included patients whose diagnosis of COVID-19 was confirmed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Group 2 included patients with COVID-19 compatible findings in lung computed tomography (CT), but with a negative PCR. Group 3 included patients who presented to the emergency department with COVID-19 compatible complaints but had normal CT. Saliva and ONS samples were taken on the third day of hospitalization in groups 1 and 2, whereas in group 3, they were taken at the time of admission to the hospital. RESULTS A total of 64 patients were included in the study. The average age was 51.04 ± 17.9 years, and 37 (57.8%) were male. SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 27 (42.2%) patients’ saliva samples. While the sensitivity and positive predictive value of saliva samples were 85.2%, specificity and negative predictive value were 89.2%. The value of kappa was in substantial agreement (0.744), and it was found statistically significant (<0.001). CONCLUSIONS Saliva samples can be used instead of ONS samples in detecting SARS-CoV-2. Investigating SARS-CoV-2 with saliva is cheaper, easier for the patient and overall, and, most importantly, it poses much less risk of SARS-CoV-2 contamination to healthcare personnel.
id AMB-1_41054c5f51b08fa5f87dcfe73e08b32a
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0104-42302020000801116
network_acronym_str AMB-1
network_name_str Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Comparison of saliva and oro-nasopharyngeal swab sample in the molecular diagnosis of COVID-19Coronavirus Infections/diagnosisSalivaHealth PersonnelBetacoronavirusSUMMARY BACKGROUND Healthcare personnel are at risk of becoming infected while taking upper and/or lower respiratory tract specimens. Therefore, there is a need for sampling methods that do not risk infecting them. In this study, we aimed to compare the saliva and Oro-Nasopharyngeal Swab (ONS) sampling methods. METHODS Patients were divided into three groups. Group 1 included patients whose diagnosis of COVID-19 was confirmed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Group 2 included patients with COVID-19 compatible findings in lung computed tomography (CT), but with a negative PCR. Group 3 included patients who presented to the emergency department with COVID-19 compatible complaints but had normal CT. Saliva and ONS samples were taken on the third day of hospitalization in groups 1 and 2, whereas in group 3, they were taken at the time of admission to the hospital. RESULTS A total of 64 patients were included in the study. The average age was 51.04 ± 17.9 years, and 37 (57.8%) were male. SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 27 (42.2%) patients’ saliva samples. While the sensitivity and positive predictive value of saliva samples were 85.2%, specificity and negative predictive value were 89.2%. The value of kappa was in substantial agreement (0.744), and it was found statistically significant (<0.001). CONCLUSIONS Saliva samples can be used instead of ONS samples in detecting SARS-CoV-2. Investigating SARS-CoV-2 with saliva is cheaper, easier for the patient and overall, and, most importantly, it poses much less risk of SARS-CoV-2 contamination to healthcare personnel.Associação Médica Brasileira2020-08-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-42302020000801116Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira v.66 n.8 2020reponame:Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online)instname:Associação Médica Brasileira (AMB)instacron:AMB10.1590/1806-9282.66.8.1116info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessGüçlü,ErtuğrulKoroglu,MehmetYürümez,YusufToptan,HandeKose,ElifGüneysu,FatihKarabay,Oğuzeng2020-09-09T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0104-42302020000801116Revistahttps://ramb.amb.org.br/ultimas-edicoes/#https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||ramb@amb.org.br1806-92820104-4230opendoar:2020-09-09T00:00Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online) - Associação Médica Brasileira (AMB)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparison of saliva and oro-nasopharyngeal swab sample in the molecular diagnosis of COVID-19
title Comparison of saliva and oro-nasopharyngeal swab sample in the molecular diagnosis of COVID-19
spellingShingle Comparison of saliva and oro-nasopharyngeal swab sample in the molecular diagnosis of COVID-19
Güçlü,Ertuğrul
Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis
Saliva
Health Personnel
Betacoronavirus
title_short Comparison of saliva and oro-nasopharyngeal swab sample in the molecular diagnosis of COVID-19
title_full Comparison of saliva and oro-nasopharyngeal swab sample in the molecular diagnosis of COVID-19
title_fullStr Comparison of saliva and oro-nasopharyngeal swab sample in the molecular diagnosis of COVID-19
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of saliva and oro-nasopharyngeal swab sample in the molecular diagnosis of COVID-19
title_sort Comparison of saliva and oro-nasopharyngeal swab sample in the molecular diagnosis of COVID-19
author Güçlü,Ertuğrul
author_facet Güçlü,Ertuğrul
Koroglu,Mehmet
Yürümez,Yusuf
Toptan,Hande
Kose,Elif
Güneysu,Fatih
Karabay,Oğuz
author_role author
author2 Koroglu,Mehmet
Yürümez,Yusuf
Toptan,Hande
Kose,Elif
Güneysu,Fatih
Karabay,Oğuz
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Güçlü,Ertuğrul
Koroglu,Mehmet
Yürümez,Yusuf
Toptan,Hande
Kose,Elif
Güneysu,Fatih
Karabay,Oğuz
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis
Saliva
Health Personnel
Betacoronavirus
topic Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis
Saliva
Health Personnel
Betacoronavirus
description SUMMARY BACKGROUND Healthcare personnel are at risk of becoming infected while taking upper and/or lower respiratory tract specimens. Therefore, there is a need for sampling methods that do not risk infecting them. In this study, we aimed to compare the saliva and Oro-Nasopharyngeal Swab (ONS) sampling methods. METHODS Patients were divided into three groups. Group 1 included patients whose diagnosis of COVID-19 was confirmed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Group 2 included patients with COVID-19 compatible findings in lung computed tomography (CT), but with a negative PCR. Group 3 included patients who presented to the emergency department with COVID-19 compatible complaints but had normal CT. Saliva and ONS samples were taken on the third day of hospitalization in groups 1 and 2, whereas in group 3, they were taken at the time of admission to the hospital. RESULTS A total of 64 patients were included in the study. The average age was 51.04 ± 17.9 years, and 37 (57.8%) were male. SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 27 (42.2%) patients’ saliva samples. While the sensitivity and positive predictive value of saliva samples were 85.2%, specificity and negative predictive value were 89.2%. The value of kappa was in substantial agreement (0.744), and it was found statistically significant (<0.001). CONCLUSIONS Saliva samples can be used instead of ONS samples in detecting SARS-CoV-2. Investigating SARS-CoV-2 with saliva is cheaper, easier for the patient and overall, and, most importantly, it poses much less risk of SARS-CoV-2 contamination to healthcare personnel.
publishDate 2020
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2020-08-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-42302020000801116
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-42302020000801116
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/1806-9282.66.8.1116
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Médica Brasileira
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Médica Brasileira
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira v.66 n.8 2020
reponame:Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online)
instname:Associação Médica Brasileira (AMB)
instacron:AMB
instname_str Associação Médica Brasileira (AMB)
instacron_str AMB
institution AMB
reponame_str Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online)
collection Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online) - Associação Médica Brasileira (AMB)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||ramb@amb.org.br
_version_ 1754212835215278080