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: 232
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
7.8
/100
26 views
26 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.