Back to Search Start Over

SARS-CoV-2 detection by rRT-PCR on self-collected anterior nares swabs or saliva compared with clinician-collected nasopharyngeal swabs — Denver and Atlanta, August – November, 2020

Authors :
Sarah E Rowan
Marcos C. Schechter
Jennifer Dolan Thomas
Kevin O'Laughlin
Tracy Scott
Halie K. Miller
Juliana Almeida da Silva
Ashley Paulick
Talya Shragai
Jesse J Carlson
Cdc Covid Response Lab Task Force
D. Joseph Sexton
Hannah L Kirking
Courtney C. Nawrocki
Grace E Marx
Mitsuki Koh
Jacqueline E. Tate
Hany Atallah
Yun F. Wang
Brad J. Biggerstaff
Emily A. Travanty
Karen A. Wendel
Sarah E. Smith-Jeffcoat
Rebekah J Stewart
Claire Hartloge
Brooks Moore
Alexis Burakoff
Rebecca Rosetti
Sarah E. Totten
Jesse Chavez-Van De Hey
Cdc Covid Emergency Response Ga Field Team
Paulina A. Rebolledo
Adam Hoffman
Caitlin Biedron
Sadia Sleweon
Publication Year :
2021
Publisher :
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, 2021.

Abstract

Nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) collected by trained healthcare professionals are the preferred specimen for SARS-CoV-2 testing. Self-collected specimens might decrease patient discomfort, conserve healthcare resources, and be preferred by patients. During August – November 2020, 1,806 adults undergoing SARS-CoV-2 testing in Denver, Colorado and Atlanta, Georgia, provided self-collected anterior nares swabs (ANS) and saliva specimens before NPS collection. Compared to NPS, sensitivity for SARS-CoV-2 detection by rRT-PCR appeared higher for saliva than for ANS (85% versus 80% in Denver; 67% versus 58% in Atlanta) and higher among participants reporting current symptoms (94% and 87% in Denver; 72% and 62% in Atlanta, for saliva and ANS, respectively) than among those reporting no symptoms (29% and 50% in Denver; 50% and 44% in Atlanta, for saliva and ANS, respectively). Compared to ANS, saliva was more challenging to collect and process. Self-collected saliva and ANS are less sensitive than NPS for SARS-CoV-2 detection; however, they offer practical advantages and might be most useful for currently symptomatic patients.

Details

Database :
OpenAIRE
Accession number :
edsair.doi...........619b94677e32aa0ed7d087983ae3223c
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.02.16.21251521