Nasopharyngeal swab‐induced pain for SARS‐CoV‐2 screening: A randomised controlled trial of conventional and self‐swabbing

Assessment of the Effective Sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 Sample Pooling Based on a Large-Scale Screening Experience: Retrospective Analysis

BACKGROUND

The development of new large-scale saliva pooling detection strategies can significantly enhance testing capacity and frequency for asymptomatic individuals, which is crucial for containing SARS-CoV-2.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to implement and scale-up a SARS-CoV-2 screening method using pooled saliva samples to control the virus in critical areas and assess its effectiveness in detecting asymptomatic infections.

METHODS

Between August 2020 and February 2022, our laboratory received a total of 928,357 samples. Participants collected at least 1 mL of saliva using a self-sampling kit and registered their samples via a smartphone app. All samples were directly processed using AutoMate 2550 for preanalytical steps and then transferred to Microlab STAR, managed with the HAMILTON Pooling software for pooling. The standard pool preset size was 20 samples but was adjusted to 5 when the prevalence exceeded 2% in any group. Real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) was conducted using the Allplex SARS-CoV-2 Assay until July 2021, followed by the Allplex SARS-CoV-2 FluA/FluB/RSV assay for the remainder of the study period.

RESULTS

Of the 928,357 samples received, 887,926 (95.64%) were fully processed into 56,126 pools. Of these pools, 4863 tested positive, detecting 5720 asymptomatic infections. This allowed for a comprehensive analysis of pooling's impact on RT-PCR sensitivity and false-negative rate (FNR), including data on positive samples per pool (PPP). We defined Ctref as the minimum cycle threshold (Ct) of each data set from a sample or pool and compared these Ctref results from pooled samples with those of the individual tests (ΔCtP). We then examined their deviation from the expected offset due to dilution [ΔΔCtP = ΔCtP - log2]. In this work, the ΔCtP and ΔΔCtP were 2.23 versus 3.33 and -0.89 versus 0.23, respectively, comparing global results with results for pools with 1 positive sample per pool. Therefore, depending on the number of genes used in the test and the size of the pool, we can evaluate the FNR and effective sensitivity (1 - FNR) of the test configuration. In our scenario, with a maximum of 20 samples per pool and 3 target genes, statistical observations indicated an effective sensitivity exceeding 99%. From an economic perspective, the focus is on pooling efficiency, measured by the effective number of persons that can be tested with 1 test, referred to as persons per test (PPT). In this study, the global PPT was 8.66, reflecting savings of over 20 million euros (US $22 million) based on our reagent prices.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate that, as expected, pooling reduces the sensitivity of RT-PCR. However, with the appropriate pool size and the use of multiple target genes, effective sensitivity can remain above 99%. Saliva pooling may be a valuable tool for screening and surveillance in asymptomatic individuals and can aid in controlling SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Further studies are needed to assess the effectiveness of these strategies for SARS-CoV-2 and their application to other microorganisms or biomarkers detected by PCR.

Diagnostic performance, stability, and acceptability of self-collected saliva without additives for SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) caused the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), leading to a global pandemic. The molecular diagnosis of this virus is mostly performed by collecting upper respiratory samples, which has many disadvantages, including patient discomfort and the need for trained healthcare professionals. Although saliva has emerged as a more comfortable sample, the use of additives to preserve viral RNA is expensive and, in some cases, difficult for self-collection.

METHOD

This study evaluated the diagnostic performance by RT-PCR and stability of self-collected saliva using wide-mouth specimen collection cups without stabilization and/or inactivation buffers for SARS-CoV-2 detection, compared to nasopharyngeal samples and saliva collected with additives. Additionally, the study assessed the acceptability of this sample collection method among participants and healthcare personnel.

RESULTS

The study included 1281 volunteers with a 24.6% positive infection rate. Saliva demonstrated comparable diagnostic performance to nasopharyngeal samples, with a sensitivity of 87.6% and specificity of 99.6%, for a total percent agreement of 96.4%. The study also showed that viral RNA in saliva remained stable for at least 72 h at different temperatures. Notably, saliva samples without additives exhibited a lower RdRp Ct compared to samples with additives, suggesting that the absence of stabilization and/or inactivation buffers does not significantly affect its performance. The study highlighted the acceptability of saliva among patients and healthcare personnel due to its noninvasive nature and ease of collection.

CONCLUSIONS

This research supports the implementation of self-collected saliva as a comfortable and user-friendly alternative sample for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis.

Comparative Performance of COVID-19 Test Methods in Healthcare Workers during the Omicron Wave

The COVID-19 pandemic presents unique requirements for accessible, reliable testing, and many testing platforms and sampling techniques have been developed over the course of the pandemic. Not all test methods have been systematically compared to each other or a common gold standard, and the performance of tests developed in the early epidemic have not been consistently re-evaluated in the context of new variants. We conducted a repeated measures study with adult healthcare workers presenting for SARS-CoV-2 testing. Participants were tested using seven testing modalities. Test sensitivity was compared using any positive PCR test as the gold standard. A total of 325 individuals participated in the study. PCR tests were the most sensitive (saliva PCR 0.957 ± 0.048, nasopharyngeal PCR 0.877 ± 0.075, oropharyngeal PCR 0.849 ± 0.082). Standard nasal rapid antigen tests were less sensitive but roughly equivalent (BinaxNOW 0.613 ± 0.110, iHealth 0.627 ± 0.109). Oropharyngeal rapid antigen tests were the least sensitive (BinaxNOW 0.400 ± 0.111, iHealth brands 0.311 ± 0.105). PCR remains the most sensitive testing modality for the diagnosis of COVID-19 and saliva PCR is significantly more sensitive than oropharyngeal PCR and equivalent to nasopharyngeal PCR. Nasal AgRDTs are less sensitive than PCR but have benefits in convenience and accessibility. Saliva-based PCR testing is a viable alternative to traditional swab-based PCR testing for the diagnosis of COVID-19.

Advancements in SARS-CoV-2 Testing: Enhancing Accessibility through Machine Learning-Enhanced Biosensors

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the importance of widespread testing for SARS-CoV-2, leading to the development of various new testing methods. However, traditional invasive sampling methods can be uncomfortable and even painful, creating barriers to testing accessibility. In this article, we explore how machine learning-enhanced biosensors can enable non-invasive sampling for SARS-CoV-2 testing, revolutionizing the way we detect and monitor the virus. By detecting and measuring specific biomarkers in body fluids or other samples, these biosensors can provide accurate and accessible testing options that do not require invasive procedures. We provide examples of how these biosensors can be used for non-invasive SARS-CoV-2 testing, such as saliva-based testing. We also discuss the potential impact of non-invasive testing on accessibility and accuracy of testing. Finally, we discuss potential limitations or biases associated with the machine learning algorithms used to improve the biosensors and explore future directions in the field of machine learning-enhanced biosensors for SARS-CoV-2 testing, considering their potential impact on global healthcare and disease control.

Starting from scratch: Step-by-step development of diagnostic tests for SARS-CoV-2 detection by RT-LAMP

The pandemic caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has affected millions of people worldwide. Public health strategies to reduce viral transmission are based on widespread diagnostic testing to detect and isolate contagious patients. Several reverse transcription (RT)-PCR tests, along with other SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic assays, are available to attempt to cover the global demand. Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) based methods have been established as rapid, accurate, point of care diagnostic tests for viral infections; hence, they represent an excellent alternative for SARS-CoV-2 detection. The aim of this study was to develop and describe molecular detection systems for SARS-CoV-2 based on RT-LAMP. Recombinant DNA polymerase from Bacillus stearothermophilus and thermostable engineered reverse transcriptase from Moloney Murine Leukemia Virus were expressed using a prokaryotic system and purified by fast protein liquid chromatography. These enzymes were used to set up fluorometric real time and colorimetric end-point RT-LAMP assays. Several reaction conditions were optimized such as reaction temperature, Tris-HCl concentration, and pH of the diagnostic tests. The key enzymes for RT-LAMP were purified and their enzymatic activity was determined. Standardized reaction conditions for both RT-LAMP assays were 65°C and a Tris-HCl-free buffer at pH 8.8. Colorimetric end-point RT-LAMP assay was successfully used for viral detection from clinical saliva samples with 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity compared to the results obtained by RT-qPCR based diagnostic protocols with Ct values until 30. The developed RT-LAMP diagnostic tests based on purified recombinant enzymes allowed a sensitive and specific detection of the nucleocapsid gene of SARS-CoV-2.

Performance of saliva compared with nasopharyngeal swab for diagnosis of COVID-19 by NAAT in cross-sectional studies: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) is the preferred method to diagnose coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Saliva has been suggested as an alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS), but previous systematic reviews were limited by the number and types of studies available. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the diagnostic performance of saliva compared with NPS for COVID-19. We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus databases up to 24 April 2021 for studies that directly compared paired NPS and saliva specimens taken at the time of diagnosis. Meta-analysis was performed using an exact binomial rendition of the bivariate mixed-effects regression model. Risk of bias was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Of 2683 records, we included 23 studies with 25 cohorts, comprising 11,582 paired specimens. A wide variety of NAAT assays and collection methods were used. Meta-analysis gave a pooled sensitivity of 87 % (95 % CI = 83-90 %) and specificity of 99 % (95 % CI = 98-99 %). Subgroup analyses showed the highest sensitivity when the suspected individual is tested in an outpatient setting and is symptomatic. Our results support the use of saliva NAAT as an alternative to NPS NAAT for the diagnosis of COVID-19.

Nasopharyngeal swabs vs. saliva sampling for SARS-CoV-2 detection: A cross-sectional survey of acceptability for caregivers and children after experiencing both methods

Background

Saliva sampling is a promising alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 testing, but acceptability data is lacking. We characterize the acceptability of saliva sampling and nasopharyngeal swabs for primary decision makers and their children after experiencing both testing modalities.

Methods

We administered a cross-sectional survey to participants aged 6-to-17 years and their primary decision makers at an Ottawa community COVID-19 testing centre in March 2021. Included were participants meeting local guidelines for testing. Excluded were those identified prior to participation as having inability to complete the consent, sampling, or survey process. Acceptability in multiple hypothetical scenarios was rated using a 5-point Likert scale. Pain was measured using the Faces Pain Scale—Revised (FPS-R). Preference for testing was assessed with direct binary questions.

Results

48 participants and 48 primary decision makers completed the survey. Nasopharyngeal swab acceptability differed between scenarios, ranging 79% [95%CI: 66, 88] to 100% [95%CI: 95, 100]; saliva sampling acceptability was similar across scenarios, ranging 92% [95%CI: 82, 97] to 98% [95%CI: 89, 99]. 58% of youth described significant pain with nasopharyngeal swabbing, versus none with saliva sampling. 90% of children prefer saliva sampling. 66% of primary decision makers would prefer nasopharyngeal swabbing if it were 10% more sensitive.

Conclusion

Though youth prefer saliva sampling over nasopharyngeal swabs, primary decision makers present for testing remain highly accepting of both. Acceptance of nasopharyngeal swabs, however, varies with the testing indication and is influenced by perceived test accuracy. Understanding factors that influence sampling acceptance will inform more successful testing strategies.

Performance evaluation of a non-invasive one-step multiplex RT-qPCR assay for detection of SARS-CoV-2 direct from saliva

Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) has proven to be the gold-standard for SARS-CoV-2 detection in clinical settings. The most common approaches rely on nasopharyngeal specimens obtained from swabs, followed by RNA extraction, reverse transcription and quantitative PCR. Although swab-based PCR is sensitive, swabbing is invasive and unpleasant to administer, reducing patient compliance for regular testing and resulting in an increased risk of improper sampling. To overcome these obstacles, we developed a non-invasive one-step RT-qPCR assay performed directly on saliva specimens. The University of Nottingham Asymptomatic Testing Service protocol simplifies sample collection and bypasses the need for RNA extraction, or additives, thus helping to encourage more regular testing and reducing processing time and costs. We have evaluated the assay against the performance criteria specified by the UK regulatory bodies and attained accreditation (BS EN ISO/IEC 17,025:2017) for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic testing by the United Kingdom Accreditation Service. We observed a sensitivity of 1 viral copy per microlitre of saliva, and demonstrated a concordance of > 99.4% between our results and those of other accredited testing facilities. We concluded that saliva is a stable medium that allows for a highly precise, repeatable, and robust testing method.

Aerosol-jet-printed graphene electrochemical immunosensors for rapid and label-free detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva

Rapid, inexpensive, and easy-to-use coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) home tests are key tools in addition to vaccines in the world-wide fight to eliminate national and local shutdowns. However, currently available tests for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, are too expensive, painful, and irritating, or not sufficiently sensitive for routine, accurate home testing. Herein, we employ custom-formulated graphene inks and aerosol jet printing (AJP) to create a rapid electrochemical immunosensor for direct detection of SARS-CoV-2 Spike Receptor-Binding Domain (RBD) in saliva samples acquired non-invasively. This sensor demonstrated limits of detection that are considerably lower than most commercial SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests (22.91 ± 4.72 pg/mL for Spike RBD and 110.38 ± 9.00 pg/mL for Spike S1) as well as fast response time (~30 mins), which was facilitated by the functionalization of printed graphene electrodes in a single-step with SARS-CoV-2 polyclonal antibody through the carbodiimide reaction without the need for nanoparticle functionalization or secondary antibody or metallic nanoparticle labels. This immunosensor presents a wide linear sensing range from 1 to 1000 ng/mL and does not react with other coexisting influenza viruses such as H1N1 hemagglutinin. By combining high-yield graphene ink synthesis, automated printing, high antigen selectivity, and rapid testing capability, this work offers a promising alternative to current SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests.

Supporting COVID-19 School Safety for Children With Disabilities and Medical Complexity

Children with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDDs) and children with medical complexity (CMC) have been disproportionally impacted by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, including school closures. Children with IDDs and CMC rely on schools for a vast array of educational, therapeutic, medical, and social needs. However, maintaining safe schools for children with IDDs and CMC during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic may be difficult because of the unique challenges of implementing prevention strategies, such as masking, social distancing, and hand hygiene in this high-risk environment. Furthermore, children with IDDs and CMC are at a higher risk of infectious complications and mortality, underscoring the need for effective mitigation strategies. The goal of this report is to describe the implementation of several screening testing models for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in this high-risk population. By describing these models, we hope to identify generalizable and scalable approaches to facilitate safe school operations for children with IDDs and CMC during the current and future pandemics.

Acceptability of OP/Na swabbing for SARS-CoV-2: a prospective observational cohort surveillance study in Western Australian schools

OBJECTIVES

When the COVID-19 pandemic was declared, Governments responded with lockdown and isolation measures to combat viral spread, including the closure of many schools. More than a year later, widespread screening for SARS-CoV-2 is critical to allow schools and other institutions to remain open. Here, we describe the acceptability of a minimally invasive COVID-19 screening protocol trialled by the Western Australian Government to mitigate the risks of and boost public confidence in schools remaining open. To minimise discomfort, and optimise recruitment and tolerability in unaccompanied children, a combined throat and nasal (OP/Na) swab was chosen over the nasopharyngeal swab commonly used, despite slightly reduced test performance.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Trialling of OP/Na swabbing took place as part of a prospective observational cohort surveillance study in 79 schools across Western Australia. Swabs were collected from 5903 asymptomatic students and 1036 asymptomatic staff in 40 schools monthly between June and September 2020.

OUTCOME MEASURES

PCR testing was performed with a two-step diagnostic and independent confirmatory PCR for any diagnostic PCR positives. Concurrent surveys, collected online through the REDCap platform, evaluated participant experiences of in-school swabbing.

RESULTS

13 988 swabs were collected from students and staff. There were zero positive test results for SARS-CoV-2, including no false positives. Participants reported high acceptability: 71% of students reported no or minimal discomfort and most were willing to be reswabbed (4% refusal rate).

CONCLUSIONS

OP/Na swabbing is acceptable and repeatable in schoolchildren as young as 4 years old and may combat noncompliance rates by significantly increasing the acceptability of testing. This kind of minimally-invasive testing will be key to the success of ongoing, voluntary mass screening as society adjusts to a new 'normal' in the face of COVID-19.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry-ACTRN12620000922976.

Preclinical Validation of a Novel Injection-Molded Swab for the Molecular Assay Detection of SARS-CoV-2

During the COVID-19 public health emergency, many actions have been undertaken to help ensure that patients and health care providers have timely and continued access to high-quality medical devices to respond effectively. The development and validation of new testing supplies and equipment, including collection swabs, has helped to expand the availability and capability for various diagnostic, therapeutic, and protective medical devices in high demand during the COVID-19 emergency. Here, we report the initial validation of a new injection-molded anterior nasal swab, ClearTip™, that was experimentally validated in a laboratory setting as well as in independent clinical studies in comparison to gold standard flocked swabs. We have also developed an in vitro anterior nasal tissue model which offers a novel, efficient, and clinically relevant validation tool to replicate the clinical swabbing workflow with high fidelity, while being accessible, safe, reproducible, and time- and cost-effective. ClearTip™ displayed greater inactivated virus release in the benchtop model, confirmed by its greater ability to report positive samples in a small clinical study in comparison to flocked swabs. We also quantified the detection of biological materials, as a proxy for viral material, in multi-center pre-clinical and clinical studies which showed a statistically significant difference in one study and a reduction in performance in comparison to flocked swabs. Taken together, these results emphasize the compelling benefits of non-absorbent injection-molded anterior nasal swabs for COVID-19 detection, comparable to standard flocked swabs. Injection-molded swabs, as ClearTip™, could have the potential to support future swab shortages, due to its manufacturing advantages, while offering benefits in comparison to highly absorbent swabs in terms of comfort, limited volume collection, and potential multiple usage.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 by rapid antigen tests on saliva in hospitalized patients with COVID-19

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic presents great challenges on transmission prevention, and rapid diagnosis is essential to reduce the disease spread. Various diagnostic methods are available to identify an ongoing infection by nasopharyngeal (NPH) swab sampling. However, the procedure requires handling by health care professionals, and therefore limits the application in household and community settings.

Objectives

In this study, we aimed to determine if the detection of SARS-CoV-2 can be performed alternatively on saliva specimens by rapid antigen test.

Study Design

Saliva and NPH specimens were collected from 44 patients with confirmed COVID-19. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test on saliva specimens, we compared the performance of four test products.

Results

RT-qPCR was performed and NPH and saliva sampling had similar Ct values, which associated with disease duration. All four antigen tests showed similar trend in detecting SARS-CoV-2 in saliva, but with variation in the ability to detect positive cases. The rapid antigen test with the best performance could detect up to 67% of the positive cases with Ct values lower than 25, and disease duration shorter than 10 days.

Conclusion

Our study therefore supports saliva testing as an alternative diagnostic procedure to NPH testing, and that rapid antigen test on saliva provides a potential complement to PCR test to meet increasing screening demand.

Insight into pain syndromes in acute phase of mild-to-moderate COVID-19: Frequency, clinical characteristics, and associated factors

Background

Pain has been frequently described as a clinical feature of COVID‐19, and the main pain syndromes that have been associated with the acute phase of this disease so far are headache, myalgia, arthralgia, and neuropathic pain. Understanding the characteristics of pain symptoms is crucial for a better clinical approach.

Methods

Patients who were diagnosed as having COVID‐19 using reverse transcription‐polymerase chain reaction were included in the study. Patients were asked to complete a 51‐item questionnaire via a phone interview, which included questions on demographics, acute COVID‐19 symptoms, the presence of pain symptoms, and their characteristics in the acute phase of COVID‐19.

Results

A total of 222 out of 266 patients with COVID‐19 participated in the study, yielding a response rate of 83.5%. A total of 159 patients reported at least one kind of pain syndrome with a prevalence of 71.6%. Myalgia was reported in 110 (49.6%) patients, headache in 109 (49.1%), neuropathic pain symptoms in 55 (24.8%), and polyarthralgia in 30 (13.5%) patients. A total of 66 patients reported only one type of pain, 46 reported two types, 42 reported three types, and five patients reported all four types of pain. Logistic regression analysis showed that there were significant associations between these pain syndromes and a strong association was found between neuropathic pain and headache.

Conclusion

Pain is a frequently observed symptom of mild‐to‐moderate COVID‐19. There are significant relationships between pain syndromes in COVID‐19, which may be due to a sequence of common etiologic factors.

Significance

This study described the main pain syndromes associated acute phase of mild‐to‐moderate COVID‐19 and its associated features. Headaches and pain of neuropathic characteristics were prevalent in this sample.

Nasopharyngeal versus nasal swabs for detection of SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review

Nasopharyngeal swabbing (NPS) coupled with RT-PCR is the current gold standard for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infections. However, numerous studies have recently demonstrated the advantages of alternative nasal specimen collection approaches over NPS specifically for COVID-19 diagnosis. The present review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines and summarises the current literature to give a clear overview of nasal specimen collection methods for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Publications investigating NPS and at least one other form of nasal specimen collection in combination with RT-PCR for viral detection in the context of COVID-19 were assessed. We identified 425 articles and ultimately included 18 studies in this systematic review. The suitable publications evaluated different forms of nasal specimen collection, with anterior nasal swabbing (ANS) and midturbinate swabbing (MTS) being the most frequently examined techniques. The analysed studies report sensitivity and specificity results (67.5-96.2% and 97.9-100.0%, respectively) similar to those achieved via NPS, especially in the early stages of disease or when paired with an oropharyngeal swab. Results from these studies suggest that ANS and MTS are suitable alternatives to NPS for COVID-19 testing. Due to their ease of collection, ANS and MTS collection techniques may facilitate broader testing strategies and allow for economization of medical staff.

How to make universal, voluntary testing for COVID-19 work? A behavioural economics perspective

Testing is widely seen as one core element of a successful strategy to curtail the COVID-19 pandemic and many countries have increased their efforts to provide testing at large scale. As most democratic governments refrain from enacting mandatory testing, a key emerging challenge is to increase voluntary participation. Using behavioural economics insights complemented with data from a novel survey in the US and a survey experiment in Luxembourg, we examine behavioural factors associated with the individual willingness to get tested (WTT). In our analysis, individual characteristics that correlate positively with WTT include age, altruism, conformism, the tendency to abide by government-imposed rules, concern about contracting COVID-19, and patience. Risk aversion, unemployment, and conservative political orientation correlate negatively with WTT. Building on and expanding these insights may prove fruitful for policy to effectively raise people's propensity to get tested.