SafeSwab, a sample collection and dispensing device for near-patient testing
Grys, T. E.; McAulay, K.; Ingram, D.; Duffy, C.; Williams, A.; Arumugam, S.; Ma, J.; Macar, U.; Han, G.; Chang, S.-F.; Sia, S. K.; Mayer, K.
Show abstract
BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the pace of innovation around virtual care visits and testing technology. Here we present the SafeSwab (Safe Health Systems, Los Angeles, CA), an integrated, universal sample collection and dispensing device that is designed to minimize user error and enable rapid testing in a point of care or self-testing format. MethodsThe SafeSwab was used with the Safe Health Systems HealthCheck digital health application to enable self-testing by patients using lateral flow tests for SARS-CoV-2 antigen or for antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. ResultsPatients (n=74) using the SafeSwab produced a valid rapid test result in 96% of attempts, and 96% of patients felt confident that they had collected a good sample. The Safe HealthCheck app has an integrated image analysis algorithm, AutoAdapt LFA, that interprets a picture of a rapid test result, and the algorithm interpreted the result correctly 100% of the time. ConclusionThe SafeSwab was found to be versatile and easy to use for both self-collected nasal sampling as well as fingerstick blood sampling. The use of Safe Health Systems HealthCheck app allows an integrated solution for patient instruction and test interpretation
Matching journals
The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- A multicenter study to assess the performance of the point-of-care RT-PCR Cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Influenza A/B nucleic acid test for use on the Cobas Liat system in comparison with centralized assays across healthcare facilities in the United States 95%
- Evaluation of Serological SARS-CoV-2 Lateral Flow Assays for Rapid Point of Care Testing 94%
- Estimating the false positive rate of highly automated SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification testing 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Clinical evaluation of the Diagnostic Analyzer for Selective Hybridization (DASH): a point-of-care PCR test for rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection 97%
- Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Point of Care Devices in the Laboratory and Clinical Setting 95%
- Evaluation of the accuracy and ease-of-use of Abbott PanBio - A WHO emergency use listed, rapid, antigen-detecting point-of-care diagnostic test for SARS-CoV-2 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Performance of the Cue COVID-19 Molecular Test for Point of Care: Insights from a multi-site clinic service model 96%
- Evaluation of the INDICAID™ COVID-19 Rapid Antigen Test in symptomatic populations and asymptomatic community testing 95%
- Investigating sensitivity of nasal or throat (ISNOT): A combination of both swabs increases sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation of nasopharyngeal swab collection techniques for nucleic acid recovery and participant experience: recommendations for COVID-19 diagnostics 93%
- Acceptability, usability and performance of lateral flow immunoassay tests for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies: REACT-2 study of self-testing in non-healthcare key workers 93%
- Clinical Ordering Practices of the SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Test at a Large Academic Medical Center 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- SARS-CoV-2 patient self-testing with an antigen-detecting rapid test: a head-to-head comparison with professional testing 95%
- Clinical evaluation of a SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR assay on a fully automated system for rapid on-demand testing in the hospital setting 94%
- Clinical evaluation of the molecular-based BD SARS-CoV-2/Flu for the BD MAX™ System 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.