A comparison of health care worker-collected foam and polyester nasal swabs in convalescent COVID-19 patients.

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 f...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Brian Hart, Yuan-Po Tu, Rachel Jennings, Prateek Verma, Leah R Padgett, Douglas Rains, Deneen Vojta, Ethan M Berke
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2020-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241100
id doaj-8d6054a0c8574a5ab5560f8bf5eff19a
record_format Article
spelling doaj-8d6054a0c8574a5ab5560f8bf5eff19a2021-03-04T11:53:04ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032020-01-011510e024110010.1371/journal.pone.0241100A comparison of health care worker-collected foam and polyester nasal swabs in convalescent COVID-19 patients.Brian HartYuan-Po TuRachel JenningsPrateek VermaLeah R PadgettDouglas RainsDeneen VojtaEthan M BerkeBoth 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.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241100
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Brian Hart
Yuan-Po Tu
Rachel Jennings
Prateek Verma
Leah R Padgett
Douglas Rains
Deneen Vojta
Ethan M Berke
spellingShingle Brian Hart
Yuan-Po Tu
Rachel Jennings
Prateek Verma
Leah R Padgett
Douglas Rains
Deneen Vojta
Ethan M Berke
A comparison of health care worker-collected foam and polyester nasal swabs in convalescent COVID-19 patients.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Brian Hart
Yuan-Po Tu
Rachel Jennings
Prateek Verma
Leah R Padgett
Douglas Rains
Deneen Vojta
Ethan M Berke
author_sort Brian Hart
title A comparison of health care worker-collected foam and polyester nasal swabs in convalescent COVID-19 patients.
title_short A comparison of health care worker-collected foam and polyester nasal swabs in convalescent COVID-19 patients.
title_full A comparison of health care worker-collected foam and polyester nasal swabs in convalescent COVID-19 patients.
title_fullStr A comparison of health care worker-collected foam and polyester nasal swabs in convalescent COVID-19 patients.
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of health care worker-collected foam and polyester nasal swabs in convalescent COVID-19 patients.
title_sort comparison of health care worker-collected foam and polyester nasal swabs in convalescent covid-19 patients.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2020-01-01
description 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.
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241100
work_keys_str_mv AT brianhart acomparisonofhealthcareworkercollectedfoamandpolyesternasalswabsinconvalescentcovid19patients
AT yuanpotu acomparisonofhealthcareworkercollectedfoamandpolyesternasalswabsinconvalescentcovid19patients
AT racheljennings acomparisonofhealthcareworkercollectedfoamandpolyesternasalswabsinconvalescentcovid19patients
AT prateekverma acomparisonofhealthcareworkercollectedfoamandpolyesternasalswabsinconvalescentcovid19patients
AT leahrpadgett acomparisonofhealthcareworkercollectedfoamandpolyesternasalswabsinconvalescentcovid19patients
AT douglasrains acomparisonofhealthcareworkercollectedfoamandpolyesternasalswabsinconvalescentcovid19patients
AT deneenvojta acomparisonofhealthcareworkercollectedfoamandpolyesternasalswabsinconvalescentcovid19patients
AT ethanmberke acomparisonofhealthcareworkercollectedfoamandpolyesternasalswabsinconvalescentcovid19patients
AT brianhart comparisonofhealthcareworkercollectedfoamandpolyesternasalswabsinconvalescentcovid19patients
AT yuanpotu comparisonofhealthcareworkercollectedfoamandpolyesternasalswabsinconvalescentcovid19patients
AT racheljennings comparisonofhealthcareworkercollectedfoamandpolyesternasalswabsinconvalescentcovid19patients
AT prateekverma comparisonofhealthcareworkercollectedfoamandpolyesternasalswabsinconvalescentcovid19patients
AT leahrpadgett comparisonofhealthcareworkercollectedfoamandpolyesternasalswabsinconvalescentcovid19patients
AT douglasrains comparisonofhealthcareworkercollectedfoamandpolyesternasalswabsinconvalescentcovid19patients
AT deneenvojta comparisonofhealthcareworkercollectedfoamandpolyesternasalswabsinconvalescentcovid19patients
AT ethanmberke comparisonofhealthcareworkercollectedfoamandpolyesternasalswabsinconvalescentcovid19patients
_version_ 1714803339929059328