AI Article Synopsis
- The study analyzed the effectiveness of polyester and foam nasal swabs in detecting COVID-19 from convalescent patients using various storage methods: viral transport media (VTM), saline, and dry tubes.
- It found that foam swabs generally had higher sensitivity compared to polyester swabs, with sensitivity rates of 94.5% vs. 87.3% in VTM, 93.8% vs. 87.5% in saline, and 90.6% vs. 75.0% in dry conditions.
- Additionally, while the cycle threshold (Ct) values for both swab types were correlated, polyester swabs performed worse at detecting lower viral loads, highlighting their
Article Abstract
Both polyester and foam nasal swabs were collected from convalescent COVID-19 patients at a single visit and stored in viral transport media (VTM), saline or dry. Sensitivity of each swab material and media combination were estimated, three by three tables were constructed to measure polyester and foam concordance, and cycle threshold (Ct) values were compared. 126 visits had polyester and foam swabs stored in viral transport media (VTM), 51 had swabs stored in saline, and 63 had a foam swab in VTM and a polyester swab stored in a dry tube. Polyester and foam swabs had an estimated sensitivity of 87.3% and 94.5% respectively in VTM, 87.5% and 93.8% respectively in saline, and 75.0% and 90.6% respectively for dry polyester and foam VTM. Polyester and foam Ct values were correlated, but polyester showed decreased performance for cases with a viral load near the detection threshold and higher Ct values on average.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7591034 | PMC |
| http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0241100 | PLOS |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!