Evaluation of 3-D printed swabs for respiratory sampling and testing for SARS-CoV-2 during the early pandemic period
Hasan, Z.; Iqbal, A.; Ahmed, I.; Khan, M.; Jabeen, K.; Islam, N.; Khan, E.; Sayani, S.
Show abstract
Appropriate collection of respiratory samples is essential for accurate diagnostic testing of respiratory pathogens such as, SARS-CoV-2. Early in the pandemic, there was a shortage of nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs and difficulty in sampling suspected cases. Therefore, we developed a 3D printed nasal swab for anterior nares, paired with in-house viral transport medium (VTM). The utility of this 3D swab kit was investigated in comparison with the standard NP commercial swab and VTM, in 200 individuals between August and September 2021. Subjects were those presenting for diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 using the RT-PCR (cobas Roche assay) assay. NP samples were taken from each subject using the standard NP and 3D swabs followed by RT-PCR on paired specimens. CT values for amplification of gene targets were evaluated to determine assay parameters based on viral load cut offs of [≤] CT 35 or, [≤] CT 37. For high to medium viral loads, 3D swab based PCR testing had a sensitivity of 93%, specificity of 99%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 98.5% and negative predictive value (NPV) of 96.2% respectively. For low viral loads, 3D swab testing had a sensitivity of 88%, specificity of 99%, with a PPV of 98.5% and NPV of 93.2%.%. 3D swab sampling of anterior nares was comparable with NP sampling using standard swabs for SARS-CoV-2 specimens with a medium to high viral load. Therefore, 3D swab based sampling is a reliable and convenient local solution for collecting respiratory samples for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic testing.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Diagnostic accuracy of two commercial SARS-CoV-2 Antigen-detecting rapid tests at the point of care in community-based testing centers 96%
- Laboratory and field evaluation of the STANDARD Q and Panbio™ SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid test in Namibia using nasopharyngeal samples 95%
- Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Point of Care Devices in the Laboratory and Clinical Setting 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Development of a qualitative real-time RT-PCR assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2: A guide and case study in setting up an emergency-use, laboratory-developed molecular assay 93%
- Clinical and laboratory characteristics in outpatient diagnosis of COVID-19 in healthcare professionals in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 92%
- Increasing both specificity and sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests by using an adaptive orthogonal testing approach 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Preclinical and clinical validation of a novel injected molded swab for molecular assay detection of SARS-CoV-2 virus 97%
- Evaluation and modelling of the performance of an automated SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay according to sample type, target population and epidemic trends 94%
- Evaluation of commercial qPCR kits for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in pooled samples 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection in gargle, spit and sputum specimens 96%
- Investigating sensitivity of nasal or throat (ISNOT): A combination of both swabs increases sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests 96%
- Performance of the Cue COVID-19 Molecular Test for Point of Care: Insights from a multi-site clinic service model 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Performance of Abbott ID NOW COVID-19 rapid nucleic acid amplification test in nasopharyngeal swabs transported in viral media and dry nasal swabs, in a New York City academic institution 96%
- 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%
- Test Agreement Between Roche Cobas 6800 and Cepheid GeneXpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 Assays at High Cycle Threshold Ranges 95%
"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.