» Articles » PMID: 35784954

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA by Reverse Transcription-Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) on Self-Collected Nasal Swab Compared With Professionally Collected Nasopharyngeal Swab

Abstract

Background: Self-collection of nasal swabs for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) would considerably increase the testing capability and decrease the risk of transmission among healthcare workers (HCW) and the use of personal protective equipment (PPE).

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the performance of self-collected nasal swabs compared with professionally collected nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs for detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA by RT-PCR.

Materials And Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study where the suspected cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were instructed about the self-collection of nasal swabs from their mid-turbinate. The results were compared to a nasopharyngeal swab collected by a trained healthcare worker in the same patient at the same sitting.

Results: We enrolled 100 participants, of which, 69 (69%) were male and 31 (31%) were female. The median age of the study participant was 36 years. Of the participants, 58 (58%) were symptomatic, and the commonest clinical presentation was cough, which was present in 42 (42%) participants. Out of 100 samples, 31 (31%) professionally collected nasopharyngeal swabs and 28 (28%) self-collected nasal swabs were positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. Out of 31 professionally collected positive samples, three samples were negative in self-collection. Out of 28 self-collected positive samples, no sample was negative in the professional collection. The sensitivity and specificity of self-collected nasal swabs compared to professionally collected nasopharyngeal swabs were 90.32% and 100.00%, respectively. The sensitivity of self-collected nasal was 100% when the cycle threshold (Ct) value of the professionally collected NP swab was less than 30.

Conclusion: Our study showed that self-collected nasal swabs' sensitivities were similar to professionally collected NP swabs with a high viral load (low Ct value). Hence, this method could be used when the patient is symptomatic and come to the health providers in the early stage of COVID-19 illness.

Citing Articles

Performance of self-performed SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Cai P, Wang J, Ye P, Zhang Y, Wang M, Guo R Front Public Health. 2024; 12:1402949.

PMID: 39494084 PMC: 11527648. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1402949.


Self-swabbing versus assisted swabbing for viral detection by qRT-PCR: the experience from SARS-CoV-2 based on a meta-analysis of six prospectively designed evaluations conducted in a UK setting.

Fowler T, Chapman D, Futschik M, Tunkel S, Blandford E, Turek E Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2024; 43(8):1621-1630.

PMID: 38856828 PMC: 11271363. DOI: 10.1007/s10096-024-04866-z.


Favorable Antiviral Effect of Metformin on SARS-CoV-2 Viral Load in a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial of COVID-19.

Bramante C, Beckman K, Mehta T, Karger A, Odde D, Tignanelli C Clin Infect Dis. 2024; 79(2):354-363.

PMID: 38690892 PMC: 11327787. DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciae159.


Progress in Biosensors for the Point-of-Care Diagnosis of COVID-19.

Pohanka M Sensors (Basel). 2022; 22(19).

PMID: 36236521 PMC: 9571584. DOI: 10.3390/s22197423.

References
1.
Dhiman N, Miller R, Finley J, Sztajnkrycer M, Nestler D, Boggust A . Effectiveness of patient-collected swabs for influenza testing. Mayo Clin Proc. 2012; 87(6):548-54. PMC: 3538476. DOI: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2012.02.011. View

2.
Khan M, Shumu S, Mim F, Raihan R, Mannan N, Reza M . Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among COVID-19 Reverse Transcription-Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) Laboratory Workers in Bangladesh. Cureus. 2022; 14(4):e24217. PMC: 9113609. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.24217. View

3.
Marx G, Biggerstaff B, Nawrocki C, Totten S, Travanty E, Burakoff A . Detection of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 on Self-Collected Saliva or Anterior Nasal Specimens Compared With Healthcare Personnel-Collected Nasopharyngeal Specimens. Clin Infect Dis. 2021; 73(Suppl 1):S65-S73. PMC: 8135412. DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciab330. View

4.
Bullard J, Dust K, Funk D, Strong J, Alexander D, Garnett L . Predicting Infectious Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 From Diagnostic Samples. Clin Infect Dis. 2020; 71(10):2663-2666. PMC: 7314198. DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciaa638. View

5.
Frazee B, Rodriguez-Hoces de la Guardia A, Alter H, Chen C, Fuentes E, Holzer A . Accuracy and Discomfort of Different Types of Intranasal Specimen Collection Methods for Molecular Influenza Testing in Emergency Department Patients. Ann Emerg Med. 2017; 71(4):509-517.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2017.09.010. View