» Articles » PMID: 36018570

Concordance of SARS-CoV-2 Results in Self-collected Nasal Swabs Vs Swabs Collected by Health Care Workers in Children and Adolescents

Abstract

Importance: Despite the expansion of SARS-CoV-2 testing, available tests have not received Emergency Use Authorization for performance with self-collected anterior nares (nasal) swabs from children younger than 14 years because the effect of pediatric self-swabbing on SARS-CoV-2 test sensitivity is unknown.

Objective: To characterize the ability of school-aged children to self-collect nasal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 testing compared with collection by health care workers.

Design, Setting, And Participants: Cross-sectional study of 197 symptomatic children and adolescents aged 4 to 14 years old. Individuals were recruited based on results of testing in the Children's Healthcare of Atlanta system from July to August 2021.

Exposures: Children and adolescents were given instructional material consisting of a short instructional video and a handout with written and visual steps for self-swab collection. Participants first provided a self-collected nasal swab. Health care workers then collected a second specimen.

Main Outcomes And Measures: The primary outcome was SARS-CoV-2 detection and relative quantitation by cycle threshold (Ct) in self- vs health care worker-collected nasal swabs when tested with a real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction test with Emergency Use Authorization.

Results: Among the study participants, 108 of 194 (55.7%) were male and the median age was 9 years (IQR, 6-11). Of the 196 participants, 87 (44.4%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and 105 (53.6%) tested negative by both self- and health care worker-collected swabs. Two children tested positive by self- or health care worker-collected swab alone; 1 child had an invalid health care worker swab. Compared with health care worker-collected swabs, self-collected swabs had 97.8% (95% CI, 94.7%-100.0%) and 98.1% (95% CI, 95.6%-100.0%) positive and negative percent agreement, respectively, and SARS-CoV-2 Ct values did not differ significantly between groups (mean [SD] Ct, self-swab: 26.7 [5.4] vs health care worker swab: 26.3 [6.0]; P = .65).

Conclusions And Relevance: After hearing and seeing simple instructional materials, children and adolescents aged 4 to 14 years self-collected nasal swabs that closely agreed on SARS-CoV-2 detection with swabs collected by health care workers.

Citing Articles

SARS-CoV-2 Infection in School Settings, Okinawa Prefecture, Japan, 2021-2022.

Takayama Y, Shimakawa Y, Matsuyama R, Chowell G, Omori R, Nagamoto T Emerg Infect Dis. 2024; 30(11):2343-2351.

PMID: 39447162 PMC: 11521161. DOI: 10.3201/eid3011.240638.


How much samples do you misdiagnosis with nasal swab?.

Faico-Filho K, Perosa A, Bellei N Braz J Infect Dis. 2024; 28(4):103854.

PMID: 39038600 PMC: 11321276. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjid.2024.103854.


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.


Comparison of RT-PCR and antigen test sensitivity across nasopharyngeal, nares, and oropharyngeal swab, and saliva sample types during the SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant.

Damhorst G, Lin J, Frediani J, Sullivan J, Westbrook A, McLendon K Heliyon. 2024; 10(6):e27188.

PMID: 38500996 PMC: 10945130. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e27188.


Testing for SARS-CoV-2: lessons learned and current use cases.

Theel E, Kirby J, Pollock N Clin Microbiol Rev. 2024; 37(2):e0007223.

PMID: 38488364 PMC: 11237512. DOI: 10.1128/cmr.00072-23.