Reliability of induced sputum test is greater than that of throat swab test for detecting SARS-CoV-2 in patients with COVID-19: A multi-center cross-sectional study.
Clicks: 201
ID: 186956
2020
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Improving Quality
0.0
/100
Combines engagement data with AI-assessed academic quality
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
0.3
/100
1 views
1 readers
Trending
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Abstract
We previously reported that sputum induction was more sensitive than throat swabs for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in two convalescent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients; however, the value and safety of induced sputum testing require further study. We conducted a prospective multi-center cross-sectional study to compare induced sputum to throat swabs for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Confirmed COVID-19 patients from six hospitals in six cities across China who received one or more negative RT-PCR result for SARS-CoV-2 were enrolled, and paired specimens (induced sputum and throat swabs; 56 cases) were assayed. In three paired samples, both the induced sputum and throat swabs were positive for SARS-CoV-2. The positive rate for induced sputum was significantly higher than for throat swabs both overall (28.6% vs 5.4%, respectively; p < 0.01). Patients were divided according to time span from onset of illness to sample collection into the more-than-30-day (n = 26) and less-than-30-day (n = 30) groups. The positive rate for induced sputum was also significantly higher than for throat swabs in the less-than-30-day group (53.3% vs 10.0%, respectively; p < 0.001). For the more-than-30-day group, all paired samples were negative for SARS-CoV-2. Blood oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, and heart rate remained stable during sputum induction and no staff were infected. Because induced sputum is more reliable and has a lower false-negative rate than throat swabs, we believe induced sputum is more useful for the confirmation of COVID-19 and is safer as a criterion for release from quarantine.Reference Key |
lai2020reliabilityvirulence
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
---|---|
Authors | Lai, Tianwen;Xiang, Fangfei;Zeng, Jianfeng;Huang, Yingzi;Jia, Liping;Chen, Hui;Wu, Jiayuan;Xie, Jianfeng;Liu, Shuna;Deng, Wei;Zheng, Weiqiang;Huang, Yang;Zhang, Qinfu;Luo, Qingfeng;Mo, Fan;Long, Lieming;Zhang, Wuying;Chen, Wenna;Han, Huanqin; |
Journal | virulence |
Year | 2020 |
DOI | 10.1080/21505594.2020.1831342 |
URL | |
Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.