tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
Sci Rep
. 2022 May 5;12(1):7355.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-11284-8.
Diagnostic performance of oral swab specimen for SARS-CoV-2 detection with rapid point-of-care lateral flow antigen test
Arati Mane[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Shilpa Jain[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Ankita Jain[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Michael Pereira[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Atul Sirsat[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Gaurav Pathak[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Vikalp Bhoi[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Shailaja Bhavsar[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Samiran Panda[SUP] 3 4 [/SUP]
Affiliations
Abstract
We evaluated the performance of oral swab specimen both health-care worker (HCW) collected and self-collected for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection with rapid antigen test (RAT) as compared to reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Of the 529 participants enrolled, 121 (22.8%) were RT-PCR positive. Among the RT-PCR positives, 62 (51.2%) were RAT positive using oral swab. When compared with RT-PCR, RAT with oral swab had sensitivity and specificity of 63.3 and 96.8% respectively among symptomatic individuals. No statistically significant difference was observed in RAT positivity with HCW collection and self-collection, p = 0.606. Ct values were significantly lower in RT-PCR and RAT positive samples (ORF gene: 18.85 ± 4.36; E gene: 18.72 ± 4.84) as compared to RT-PCR positive and RAT negative samples (ORF gene: 26.98 ± 7.09; E gene: 26.97 ± 7.07), p < 0.0001. Our study demonstrated moderate sensitivity of RAT with oral swab in symptomatic individuals. Oral swab was the preferred sampling by almost all participants in terms of convenience and comfort as compared to nasopharyngeal swab. Oral swabs have utility for SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection among symptomatic individuals residing in remote rural areas and can serve as an initial screening tool during COVID-19 spikes when cases rise exponentially and laboratory capacities for RT-PCR testing become overwhelmed.
. 2022 May 5;12(1):7355.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-11284-8.
Diagnostic performance of oral swab specimen for SARS-CoV-2 detection with rapid point-of-care lateral flow antigen test
Arati Mane[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Shilpa Jain[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Ankita Jain[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Michael Pereira[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Atul Sirsat[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Gaurav Pathak[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Vikalp Bhoi[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Shailaja Bhavsar[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Samiran Panda[SUP] 3 4 [/SUP]
Affiliations
- PMID: 35513547
- DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-11284-8
Abstract
We evaluated the performance of oral swab specimen both health-care worker (HCW) collected and self-collected for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection with rapid antigen test (RAT) as compared to reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Of the 529 participants enrolled, 121 (22.8%) were RT-PCR positive. Among the RT-PCR positives, 62 (51.2%) were RAT positive using oral swab. When compared with RT-PCR, RAT with oral swab had sensitivity and specificity of 63.3 and 96.8% respectively among symptomatic individuals. No statistically significant difference was observed in RAT positivity with HCW collection and self-collection, p = 0.606. Ct values were significantly lower in RT-PCR and RAT positive samples (ORF gene: 18.85 ± 4.36; E gene: 18.72 ± 4.84) as compared to RT-PCR positive and RAT negative samples (ORF gene: 26.98 ± 7.09; E gene: 26.97 ± 7.07), p < 0.0001. Our study demonstrated moderate sensitivity of RAT with oral swab in symptomatic individuals. Oral swab was the preferred sampling by almost all participants in terms of convenience and comfort as compared to nasopharyngeal swab. Oral swabs have utility for SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection among symptomatic individuals residing in remote rural areas and can serve as an initial screening tool during COVID-19 spikes when cases rise exponentially and laboratory capacities for RT-PCR testing become overwhelmed.