Head-to-head comparison of nasal and nasopharyngeal sampling using SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen testing in Lesotho.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
07
08
2022
accepted:
21
11
2022
entrez:
2
3
2023
pubmed:
3
3
2023
medline:
7
3
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To assess the real-world diagnostic performance of nasal and nasopharyngeal swabs for SD Biosensor STANDARD Q COVID-19 Antigen Rapid Diagnostic Test (Ag-RDT). Individuals ≥5 years with COVID-19 compatible symptoms or history of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 presenting at hospitals in Lesotho received two nasopharyngeal and one nasal swab. Ag-RDT from nasal and nasopharyngeal swabs were performed as point-of-care on site, the second nasopharyngeal swab used for polymerase chain reaction (PCR) as the reference standard. Out of 2198 participants enrolled, 2131 had a valid PCR result (61% female, median age 41 years, 8% children), 84.5% were symptomatic. Overall PCR positivity rate was 5.8%. The sensitivity for nasopharyngeal, nasal, and combined nasal and nasopharyngeal Ag-RDT result was 70.2% (95%CI: 61.3-78.0), 67.3% (57.3-76.3) and 74.4% (65.5-82.0), respectively. The respective specificity was 97.9% (97.1-98.4), 97.9% (97.2-98.5) and 97.5% (96.7-98.2). For both sampling modalities, sensitivity was higher in participants with symptom duration ≤ 3days versus ≤ 7days. Agreement between nasal and nasopharyngeal Ag-RDT was 99.4%. The STANDARD Q Ag-RDT showed high specificity. Sensitivity was, however, below the WHO recommended minimum requirement of ≥ 80%. The high agreement between nasal and nasopharyngeal sampling suggests that for Ag-RDT nasal sampling is a good alternative to nasopharyngeal sampling.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36862684
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0278653
pii: PONE-D-22-22120
pmc: PMC9980827
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0278653Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2023 Labhardt et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Front Med (Lausanne). 2020 Oct 30;7:557797
pubmed: 33195307
Sci Rep. 2021 Jul 21;11(1):14903
pubmed: 34290378
N Engl J Med. 2020 May 28;382(22):e76
pubmed: 32302471
Nat Rev Genet. 2021 Jul;22(7):415-426
pubmed: 33948037
DNA Cell Biol. 2022 Jan;41(1):30-33
pubmed: 34647792
EBioMedicine. 2021 Jul;69:103455
pubmed: 34186490
J Virol Methods. 2020 Oct;284:113925
pubmed: 32659240
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2021 Jul 1;147(7):672-674
pubmed: 33914064
Lancet Infect Dis. 2021 Aug;21(8):1089-1096
pubmed: 33773618
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Jul 22;7:CD013705
pubmed: 35866452
Int J Infect Dis. 2021 Mar;104:282-286
pubmed: 33130198
PLoS Med. 2021 Aug 12;18(8):e1003735
pubmed: 34383750
PLoS Biol. 2021 Jul 12;19(7):e3001333
pubmed: 34252080
PLoS One. 2022 Sep 27;17(9):e0269329
pubmed: 36166414
Lancet Infect Dis. 2021 Sep;21(9):1233-1245
pubmed: 33857405
Eur Respir J. 2021 May 6;57(5):
pubmed: 33574072
Med Microbiol Immunol. 2021 Aug;210(4):181-186
pubmed: 34028625
J Clin Virol Plus. 2021 Jun;1(1):100013
pubmed: 35262001
J Infect Public Health. 2021 Oct;14(10):1446-1453
pubmed: 34175237