Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Rigshospitalet - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

Self-Collected versus Healthcare Worker-Collected Swabs in the Diagnosis of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Harvard

APA

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{b00a9db72d5944068a4311ce152c99cc,
title = "Self-Collected versus Healthcare Worker-Collected Swabs in the Diagnosis of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2",
abstract = "The aim of this study was to compare the sensitivity of self-collected versus healthcare worker (HCW)-collected swabs for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing. Symptomatic individuals referred for SARS-CoV-2 testing were invited to provide mobile-phone video-instructed self-collected oropharyngeal and nasal samples followed by a HCW-collected oropharyngeal sample. All samples were sent for analysis to the same microbiology laboratory, and the number of SARS-CoV-2-positive participants in the two tests was compared. A total of 109 participants were included, and 19 participants had SARS-CoV-2-positive results. The diagnostic sensitivity of the self-collected and HCW-collected swabs was 84.2% and 89.5%, respectively, with an acceptable agreement, Cohens kappa 0.82, p < 0.001. Further, results from a questionnaire answered by the participants found that loss of smell as a self-reported symptom was a strong predictor for a SARS-CoV-2-positive test. In conclusion, we found that self-collected oropharyngeal and nasal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 testing can be reliable compared to HCW-collected oropharyngeal samples.",
author = "Therchilsen, {Johan H} and {von Buchwald}, Christian and Anders Koch and {Dam Nielsen}, Susanne and Rasmussen, {Daniel B} and Thudium, {Rebekka Faber} and Kirkby, {Nikolai S} and Raaschou-Pedersen, {Daniel E T} and Bundgaard, {Johan S} and Kasper Iversen and Henning Bundgaard and Tobias Todsen",
year = "2020",
month = sep,
day = "9",
doi = "10.3390/diagnostics10090678",
language = "English",
volume = "10",
journal = "Diagnostics",
issn = "2075-4418",
publisher = "M D P I AG",
number = "9",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Self-Collected versus Healthcare Worker-Collected Swabs in the Diagnosis of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2

AU - Therchilsen, Johan H

AU - von Buchwald, Christian

AU - Koch, Anders

AU - Dam Nielsen, Susanne

AU - Rasmussen, Daniel B

AU - Thudium, Rebekka Faber

AU - Kirkby, Nikolai S

AU - Raaschou-Pedersen, Daniel E T

AU - Bundgaard, Johan S

AU - Iversen, Kasper

AU - Bundgaard, Henning

AU - Todsen, Tobias

PY - 2020/9/9

Y1 - 2020/9/9

N2 - The aim of this study was to compare the sensitivity of self-collected versus healthcare worker (HCW)-collected swabs for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing. Symptomatic individuals referred for SARS-CoV-2 testing were invited to provide mobile-phone video-instructed self-collected oropharyngeal and nasal samples followed by a HCW-collected oropharyngeal sample. All samples were sent for analysis to the same microbiology laboratory, and the number of SARS-CoV-2-positive participants in the two tests was compared. A total of 109 participants were included, and 19 participants had SARS-CoV-2-positive results. The diagnostic sensitivity of the self-collected and HCW-collected swabs was 84.2% and 89.5%, respectively, with an acceptable agreement, Cohens kappa 0.82, p < 0.001. Further, results from a questionnaire answered by the participants found that loss of smell as a self-reported symptom was a strong predictor for a SARS-CoV-2-positive test. In conclusion, we found that self-collected oropharyngeal and nasal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 testing can be reliable compared to HCW-collected oropharyngeal samples.

AB - The aim of this study was to compare the sensitivity of self-collected versus healthcare worker (HCW)-collected swabs for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing. Symptomatic individuals referred for SARS-CoV-2 testing were invited to provide mobile-phone video-instructed self-collected oropharyngeal and nasal samples followed by a HCW-collected oropharyngeal sample. All samples were sent for analysis to the same microbiology laboratory, and the number of SARS-CoV-2-positive participants in the two tests was compared. A total of 109 participants were included, and 19 participants had SARS-CoV-2-positive results. The diagnostic sensitivity of the self-collected and HCW-collected swabs was 84.2% and 89.5%, respectively, with an acceptable agreement, Cohens kappa 0.82, p < 0.001. Further, results from a questionnaire answered by the participants found that loss of smell as a self-reported symptom was a strong predictor for a SARS-CoV-2-positive test. In conclusion, we found that self-collected oropharyngeal and nasal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 testing can be reliable compared to HCW-collected oropharyngeal samples.

U2 - 10.3390/diagnostics10090678

DO - 10.3390/diagnostics10090678

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 32916801

VL - 10

JO - Diagnostics

JF - Diagnostics

SN - 2075-4418

IS - 9

M1 - 678

ER -

ID: 61231121