Abstract

Widely available and easily accessible testing for COVID-19 is a cornerstone of pandemic containment strategies. Nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) are the currently accepted standard for sample collection but are limited by their need for collection devices and sampling by trained healthcare professionals. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of saliva to NPS in an outpatient setting. This was a prospective study conducted at three centers, which compared the performance of saliva and NPS samples collected at the time of assessment center visit. Samples were tested by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and sensitivity and overall agreement determined between saliva and NPS. Clinical data was abstracted by chart review for select study participants. Of the 432 paired samples, 46 were positive for SARS-CoV-2, with seven discordant observed between the two sample types (four individuals testing positive only by NPS and three by saliva only). The observed agreement was 98.4% (kappa coefficient 0.91) and a composite reference standard demonstrated sensitivity of 0.91 and 0.93 for saliva and NPS samples, respectively. On average, the Ct values obtained from saliva as compared to NPS were higher by 2.76. This study demonstrates that saliva performs comparably to NPS for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. Saliva was simple to collect, did not require transport media, and could be tested with equipment readily available at most laboratories. The use of saliva as an acceptable alternative to NPS could support the use of widespread surveillance testing for SARS-CoV-2.

Highlights

  • Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has infected over 32 million individuals since December 2019

  • Sciences Centre), Canada, and had an Nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) obtained for SARS-CoV-2 testing from 1 May 2020 until

  • The sensitivity of NPS was 0.93 and that of saliva 0.91

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has infected over 32 million individuals since December 2019. NPS collection is uncomfortable and may result in testing hesitancy [3], specimen retrieval requires a trained healthcare professional wearing personal protective equipment, and the demand for swabs and transport media has led to shortages. Using saliva avoids the need for swabs and transport media and permits self-collection [4]. Most studies are small and are of hospitalized patients only, and some have not investigated the possibility that saliva may identify individuals who falsely test negative by NPS. Patient population, severity of symptoms, testing timing relatively to symptom onset, method of saliva collection and testing platform may all affect test performance characteristics. We assessed the performance characteristics of saliva and NPS for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in three outpatient testing centers

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call