Conventional Naso-Oropharyngeal Sampling Versus Self-Collected Saliva Samples in COVID-19 Testing.

Abstract

Comparing the diagnostic utility of salivary specimen samples with conventional nasopharynx-oropharynx (NP-OP) specimen samples to identify COVID-19 cases by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Eighty COVID-19 suspects enrolled for the paired sampling. In addition to conventional sampling, suspects were asked to follow stepwise pictorial instructions for self salivary sampling. Separate nylon swab stick was used for taking the samples from NP-OP and the floor of the oral cavity. The data were analyzed for sensitivity, specificity, concordance of COVID-19 status, and limits of agreement for cycle threshold (ct) values by either method. Forty-nine suspects (61.3%) were males, the mean age was 36.4 years. To determine the diagnostic test performance of the saliva, RT-PCR results of the NP-OP samples were used as the reference standard. Out of 80 suspects, 41 showed positivity by NP-OP swabs and 12 by salivary samples. The salivary samples showed significantly lesser positivity rate. The sensitivity and specificity of salivary samples against conventional reference standards are 24.4%, 94.9% respectively. Concordance of these two types of samples in terms of agreement kappa statistics is estimated as K = 0.252 (0.09–0.42). Median ct values of both the E and ORF1ab gene for the salivary samples were higher compared to the corresponding NP-OP sample. This study showed lesser sensitivity with salivary swab samples as compared to conventional NP-OP sampling for RT-PCR, COVID-19 detection. Hence, we are of opinion that more studies are required to establish the utility of salivary sampling in COVID-19 diagnostics.