Comparison of Saliva Sample and Nasopharyngeal Swab Sampling Methods for Non-Extraction PCR-Based  SARS-CoV-2 Testing

Burcu Gürer Giray; Gökçe Güven Açık; Efdal Oktay Gultekin

Makale detayları

Comparison of Saliva Sample and Nasopharyngeal Swab Sampling Methods for Non-Extraction PCR-Based SARS-CoV-2 Testing

Yazarlar:

Burcu Gürer Giray | Gökçe Güven Açık | Efdal Oktay Gultekin

Yayıncı:

Karyay Karadeniz Yayımcılık

Ana Başlıklar:

Klinik Tıp Bilimleri (Diğer)

Dergi:

Black Sea Journal of Health Science Vol.6 Issue 4, pp.726-729

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

10/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001290985

pISSN:

2619-9041

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 Currently, the most important method for the definitive diagnosis of COVID-19 is the identification of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 SARS-CoV-2 RNA in nasopharyngeal swab NS samples by RT-PCR. Taking a nasopharyngeal swab sample is an uncomfortable procedure that sometimes has adverse effects, and poses a risk of infection for the health personnel performing the sampling. Using a saliva sample in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 is a less invasive alternative method compared to NS. Studies evaluating the compatibility of the gold standard NS and salivary protocols are limited in literature. The aim of this study is to compare the NS sample taken by the healthcare worker with the saliva sample and the method of self NS taking in the PCR-based diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. NS and Saliva variant samples of 2178 patients were tested against SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. 684 SARS-CoV-2 patients were identified in at least one of their samples,606 88.59 of the NS sample taken by the healthcare worker, 402 58.77 of the NS sample taken by the individual and 456 of the saliva sample 66.66 were found to be positive. It was found statistically significant that the NS sample and saliva samples taken from the person could be used. Being able to collect NS samples with different procedures those substitute one another will extricate patients from adisturbing and hurting methods and leşsen infection risk for healthcare personnel collecting samples. Using self-acquired NS samples or saliva samples to test SARS-CoV- presence 2 will dial down the hospital burden, decrease time for test results, accommodate more capacity to diagnose asymptomatic populations, and enable swift isolation of infected patients.

 Currently, the most important method for the definitive diagnosis of COVID-19 is the identification of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 SARS-CoV-2 RNA in nasopharyngeal swab NS samples by RT-PCR. Taking a nasopharyngeal swab sample is an uncomfortable procedure that sometimes has adverse effects, and poses a risk of infection for the health personnel performing the sampling. Using a saliva sample in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 is a less invasive alternative method compared to NS. Studies evaluating the compatibility of the gold standard NS and salivary protocols are limited in literature. The aim of this study is to compare the NS sample taken by the healthcare worker with the saliva sample and the method of self NS taking in the PCR-based diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. NS and Saliva variant samples of 2178 patients were tested against SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. 684 SARS-CoV-2 patients were identified in at least one of their samples,606 88.59 of the NS sample taken by the healthcare worker, 402 58.77 of the NS sample taken by the individual and 456 of the saliva sample 66.66 were found to be positive. It was found statistically significant that the NS sample and saliva samples taken from the person could be used. Being able to collect NS samples with different procedures those substitute one another will extricate patients from adisturbing and hurting methods and leşsen infection risk for healthcare personnel collecting samples. Using self-acquired NS samples or saliva samples to test SARS-CoV- presence 2 will dial down the hospital burden, decrease time for test results, accommodate more capacity to diagnose asymptomatic populations, and enable swift isolation of infected patients.

 Currently, the most important method for the definitive diagnosis of COVID-19 is the identification of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 SARS-CoV-2 RNA in nasopharyngeal swab NS samples by RT-PCR. Taking a nasopharyngeal swab sample is an uncomfortable procedure that sometimes has adverse effects, and poses a risk of infection for the health personnel performing the sampling. Using a saliva sample in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 is a less invasive alternative method compared to NS. Studies evaluating the compatibility of the gold standard NS and salivary protocols are limited in literature. The aim of this study is to compare the NS sample taken by the healthcare worker with the saliva sample and the method of self NS taking in the PCR-based diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. NS and Saliva variant samples of 2178 patients were tested against SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. 684 SARS-CoV-2 patients were identified in at least one of their samples,606 88.59 of the NS sample taken by the healthcare worker, 402 58.77 of the NS sample taken by the individual and 456 of the saliva sample 66.66 were found to be positive. It was found statistically significant that the NS sample and saliva samples taken from the person could be used. Being able to collect NS samples with different procedures those substitute one another will extricate patients from adisturbing and hurting methods and leşsen infection risk for healthcare personnel collecting samples. Using self-acquired NS samples or saliva samples to test SARS-CoV- presence 2 will dial down the hospital burden, decrease time for test results, accommodate more capacity to diagnose asymptomatic populations, and enable swift isolation of infected patients.

 Günümüzde COVID-19un kesin tanısı için en önemli yöntem, nazofaringeal sürüntü NS örneklerinde şiddetli akut solunum sendromu koronavirüs 2 SARS-CoV-2 RNAsının RT-PCR ile tanımlanmasıdır. Nazofaringeal sürüntü örneğinin alınması bazen olumsuz etkileri olan rahatsız edici bir işlem olup, örneklemeyi yapan sağlık personeli için de enfeksiyon riski oluşturmaktadır. SARS-CoV-2 tanısında tükürük örneğini kullanmak NSye göre daha az invaziv alternatif bir yöntemdir. Altın standart NS ile tükürük protokollerinin uyumunu değerlendiren çalışmalar sınırlıdır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, PCR bazlı SARS-CoV-2 tanısında, sağlık çalışanı tarafından alınan NS örneği ile tükürük örneği ve kişinin kendinden NS alma yöntemini karşılaştırmaktır. 2178 hastadan alınan tükürük ve NS örnekleme çeşitleri SARS-CoV-2 varlığı açısından RT-PCR ile analiz edilmiştir. Örneklerinden en az birinde SARS-CoV-2 tespit edilen 684 hastanın, sağlık çalışanı tarafından alınan NS örneğinin 606sı 88,59, kişinin kendinden aldığı NS örneğinin 402si 58,77 ve tükürük örneğinin 456sı 66,66 pozitif bulunmuştur. Kişinin kendinden aldığı NS örneği ve tükürük örneklerinin kullanılabilmesi istatistik olarak anlamlı bulunmuştur. NS örneklerine alternatif yöntemin olması hastaları invaziv ve ağrılı bir işlemden kurtaracak ve örnek alan sağlık personelinin enfeksiyon riskini azaltacaktır. SARS-CoV-2 tanısında tükürük örneklerinin ya da kişinin kendinden aldığı NS örneğinin test için kullanımı, hastanelerin iş yükünü azaltabilir, test sonuçlarının süresini kısaltabilir, asemptomatik popülasyonları test etmek için daha fazla kapasite sağlayarak enfekte hastaların hızlı bir şekilde izolasyonunu sağlayabilecektir.

Makale detayları

Comparison of Saliva Sample and Nasopharyngeal Swab Sampling Methods for Non-Extraction PCR-Based SARS-CoV-2 Testing

Yazarlar:

Burcu Gürer Giray | Gökçe Güven Açık | Efdal Oktay Gultekin

Yayıncı:

Karyay Karadeniz Yayımcılık

Ana Başlıklar:

Klinik Tıp Bilimleri (Diğer)

Dergi:

Black Sea Journal of Health Science Vol.6 Issue 4, pp.726-729

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

10/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001290985

pISSN:

2619-9041

SARS-CoV-2

Saliva

Nasopharyngeal Swabs

RT-PCSARS-CoV-2

Tükürük

Nazofaringeal Sürüntü

RT-PC

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Burcu Gürer Giray | Gökçe Güven Açık | Efdal Oktay Gultekin

Yayıncı: Karyay Karadeniz Yayımcılık

Ana Başlıklar: Klinik Tıp Bilimleri (Diğer)

Dergi: Black Sea Journal of Health Science Vol.6 Issue 4, pp.726-729

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 10/2023

Belge Dili: Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.): 2001290985

pISSN: 2619-9041

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Burcu Gürer Giray | Gökçe Güven Açık | Efdal Oktay Gultekin

Yayıncı:

Karyay Karadeniz Yayımcılık

Ana Başlıklar:

Klinik Tıp Bilimleri (Diğer)

Dergi:

Black Sea Journal of Health Science Vol.6 Issue 4, pp.726-729

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

10/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001290985

pISSN:

2619-9041