Overview of COVID-19 testing and implications for otolaryngologists

Burden of COVID‐19 disease in Kurdistan province in west of Iran using disability‐adjusted life years

Background and Aims

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic, about seven million people were infected with the disease, of which more than 133,000 died. Health policymakers need to know the extent and magnitude of the disease burden to decide on how much to allocate resources for disease control. The results of this investigation could be helpful in this field.

Methods

We used the secondary data released by the Kurdistan University of Medical Sciences between February 2020 to October 2021 to estimate the age‐sex standardized disability‐adjusted life years (DALY) by the sum of the years of life lived with disability (YLD) and the years of life lost (YLL). We also applied the local and specific values of the disease utility in the calculations.

Results

The total DALY was estimated at 23316.5 and 1385.5 per 100,000 populations The YLD and YLL constituted 1% and 99% of the total DALY, respectively. The DALY per 100,000 populations was highest in the men and people aged more than 65 years, but the prevalence was the highest in people under the age of 40.

Conclusions

Compared to the findings of the “burden of disease study 2019,” the burden of COVID‐19 in Iran is ranked first and eighth among communicable and noncommunicable diseases, respectively. Although the disease affects all groups, the elderly suffer the most from it. Given the very high YLL of COVID‐19, the best strategy to reduce the burden of COVID‐19 in subsequent waves should be to focus on preventing infection in the elderly population and reducing mortality.

A review on the recent achievements on coronaviruses recognition using electrochemical detection methods

Various coronaviruses, which cause a wide range of human and animal diseases, have emerged in the past 50 years. This may be due to their abilities to recombine, mutate, and infect multiple species and cell types. A novel coronavirus, which is a family of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), has been termed COVID-19 by the World Health Organization (WHO). COVID-19 is the strain that has not been previously identified in humans. The early identification and diagnosis of the virus is crucial for effective pandemic prevention. In this study, we review shortly various diagnostic methods for virus assay and focus on recent advances in electrochemical biosensors for COVID-19 detection.

Development and Validation of Algorithms to Identify COVID-19 Patients Using a US Electronic Health Records Database: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Introduction

In order to identify and evaluate candidate algorithms to detect COVID-19 cases in an electronic health record (EHR) database, this study examined and compared the utilization of acute respiratory disease codes from February to August 2020 versus the corresponding time period in the 3 years preceding.

Methods

De-identified EHR data were used to identify codes of interest for candidate algorithms to identify COVID-19 patients. The number and proportion of patients who received a SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) within ±10 days of the occurrence of the diagnosis code and patients who tested positive among those with a test result were calculated, resulting in 11 candidate algorithms. Sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios assessed the candidate algorithms by clinical setting and time period. We adjusted for potential verification bias by weighting by the reciprocal of the estimated probability of verification.

Results

From January to March 2020, the most commonly used diagnosis codes related to COVID-19 diagnosis were R06 (dyspnea) and R05 (cough). On or after April 1, 2020, the code with highest sensitivity for COVID-19, U07.1, had near perfect adjusted sensitivity (1.00 [95% CI 1.00, 1.00]) but low adjusted specificity (0.32 [95% CI 0.31, 0.33]) in hospitalized patients.

Discussion

Algorithms based on the U07.1 code had high sensitivity among hospitalized patients, but low specificity, especially after April 2020. None of the combinations of ICD-10-CM codes assessed performed with a satisfactory combination of high sensitivity and high specificity when using the SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR as the reference standard.

Efficient COVID-19 testing via contextual model based compressive sensing

The COVID-19 pandemic is threatening billions of people's life all over the world. As of March 6, 2021, covid-19 has confirmed in 115,653,459 people worldwide. It has also a devastating effect on businesses and social activities. Since there is still no definite cure for this disease, extensive testing is the most critical issue to determine the trend of illness, appropriate medical treatment, and make social distancing policies. Besides, testing more people in a shorter time helps to contain the contagion. The PCR-based methods are the most popular tests which take about an hour to make the output result. Obviously, it makes the number of tests highly limited and consequently, hurts the efficiency of pandemic control. In this paper, we propose a new approach to identify affected individuals with a considerably reduced No. of tests. Intuitively, saving time and resources is the main advantage of our approach. We use contextual information to make a graph-based model to be used in model-based compressive sensing (CS). Our proposed model makes the testing with fewer tests required compared to traditional testing methods and even group testing. We embed contextual information such as age, underlying disease, symptoms (i.e. cough, fever, fatigue, loss of consciousness), and social contacts into a graph-based model. This model is used in model-based CS to minimize the required test. We take advantage of Discrete Graph Signal Processing on Graph (DSP_G) to generate the model. Our contextual model makes CS more efficient in both the number of samples and the recovery quality. Moreover, it can be applied in the case that group testing is not applicable due to its severe dependency on sparsity. Experimental results show that the overall testing speed (individuals per test ratio) increases more than 15 times compared to the individual testing with the error of less than 5% which is dramatically lower than that of traditional compressive sensing.

Practical Recommendations for the Preoperative Screening and Protective Protocols in Cancer Surgeries During COVID-19: A Systematic Review

Introduction: The new coronavirus (COVID-19) has posed many new challenges to the health care and the timing of surgical care. At the beginning of the pandemic many guidelines recommended postponing elective surgical procedures to reallocate resources. As regards, delay in cancer treatment could be effective on cancer progression. The aim of this systematic review was to outline a guideline for preoperative screening before cancer surgeries and protecting health care workers during the pandemic.

Materials and Methods: This study was conducted through a search in electronic databases up to August 2020. PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, Science Direct, and Google Scholar databases were searched without time limitation. The keywords were a combination of preoperative, cancer surgery, COVID-19, and their synonyms.

Results: The most commonly used ways to triage preoperatively were telephone pre-assessment for suspicious symptoms and history of contact or travel, 14-day self-isolation, in- hospital queries at admission, temperature monitoring, and isolation in a single room COVID-free ward or physical distancing. Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test 24–72 h before operation was recommended commonly, except in inaccessible centers, but non-contrast chest-CT scan is not routinely advised for elective surgeries to salvage medical resources. Recommended personal protective equipment (PPE) for staffs were wearing N95 mask in addition to gown, gloves, eye protection in aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs), and wearing gloves, hats, and disposable surgical masks, practice distancing, and hand hygiene for all staffs. Meanwhile team separation of hospital staffs caring for COVID-19 patients, segregated areas for COVID-19 clean and contact, restriction of visitors and family members, and personal distancing are mostly recommended.

Conclusion: We hope this review would be a guidance for triage, preoperative testing, and summarizing safety principles during COVID-19 pandemic alongside with surgical reintegration.

Evaluation of a comprehensive pre-procedural screening protocol for COVID-19 in times of a high SARS CoV-2 prevalence: a prospective cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

To minimise the risk of COVID-19 transmission, an ambulant screening protocol for COVID-19 in patients before admission to the hospital was implemented, combining the SARS CoV-2 reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) on a nasopharyngeal swab, a chest computed tomography (CT) and assessment of clinical symptoms. The aim of this study was to evaluatethe diagnostic yield and the proportionality of this pre-procedural screeningprotocol.

METHODS

In this mono-centre, prospective, cross-sectional study, all patients admitted to the hospital between 22nd April 2020 until 14th May 2020 for semi-urgent surgery, haematological or oncological treatment, or electrophysiological investigationunderwent a COVID-19 screening 2 days before their procedure. At a 2-week follow-up, the presence of clinical symptoms was evaluated by telephone as a post-hoc evaluation of the screening approach.Combined positive RT-PCR assay and/or positive chest CT was used as gold standard. Post-procedural outcomes of all patients diagnosed positive for COVID-19 were assessed.

RESULTS

In total,528 patients were included of which 20 (3.8%) were diagnosed as COVID-19 positive and 508 (96.2%) as COVID-19 negative. 11 (55.0%) of COVID-19 positive patients had only a positive RT-PCR assay, 3 (15.0%) had only a positive chest CT and 6 (30%) had both a positive RT-PCR assay and chest CT. 10 out of 20 (50.0%) COVID-19 positive patients reported no single clinical symptom at the screening. At 2 week follow-up, 50% of these patients were still asymptomatic. 37.5% of all COVID-19 negative patients were symptomatic at screening. In the COVID-19 negative group without symptoms at screening, 78 (29.3%) patients developed clinical symptoms at a 2-week follow-up.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that routine chest CT and assessment of self-reported symptoms have limited value in the preprocedural COVID-19 screening due to low sensitivity and/or specificity.

Microdebrider is less aerosol-generating than CO2 laser and cold instruments in microlaryngoscopy

Objective

COVID-19 spreads through aerosols produced in coughing, talking, exhalation, and also in some surgical procedures. Use of CO₂ laser in laryngeal surgery has been observed to generate aerosols, however, other techniques, such cold dissection and microdebrider, have not been sufficiently investigated. We aimed to assess whether aerosol generation occurs during laryngeal operations and the effect of different instruments on aerosol production.

Methods

We measured particle concentration generated during surgeries with an Optical Particle Sizer. Cough data collected from volunteers and aerosol concentration of an empty operating room served as references. Aerosol concentrations when using different techniques and equipment were compared with references as well as with each other.

Results

Thirteen laryngological surgeries were evaluated. The highest total aerosol concentrations were observed when using CO₂ laser and these were significantly higher than the concentrations when using microdebrider or cold dissection (p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001) or in the background or during coughing (p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001). In contrast, neither microdebrider nor cold dissection produced significant concentrations of aerosol compared with coughing (p = 0.146, p = 0.753). In comparing all three techniques, microdebrider produced the least aerosol particles.

Conclusions

Microdebrider and cold dissection can be regarded as aerosol-generating relative to background reference concentrations, but they should not be considered as high-risk aerosol-generating procedures, as the concentrations are low and do not exceed those of coughing. A step-down algorithm from CO₂ laser to cold instruments and microdebrider is recommended to lower the risk of airborne infections among medical staff.

Screening Tests in the Era of COVID-19: Implications for the Plastic Surgeon

SUMMARY

The novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, responsible for the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, has claimed over 2 million lives to date and brought the global economy to a halt, including elective surgery. As the authors emerge from lockdown, new protocols must be implemented to minimize risk by means of appropriate screening of their patients, surgical adjustments to reduce viral transmission in case of undiagnosed infection, and the development of accurate severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 tests while awaiting the distribution of an effective vaccine. Many serology and molecular tests have received emergency use authorization from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, but they have not yet been independently verified. There are three main types of diagnostic tests available: (1) imaging studies, (2) molecular tests, and (3) serology tests. Imaging studies reveal bilateral lower lobe pneumonia and ground-glass opacities that are suggestive of disease. Quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction identifies specific segments of viral RNA, indicating the active presence of the virus in the test subject, which is most useful for elective surgery screening. Finally, serology studies detect the presence of immunoglobulin M and immunoglobulin G antibodies to the virus, indicating a current or past infection. Each test offers its own benefits and limitations.

Using Machine Learning Algorithms to Develop a Clinical Decision-Making Tool for COVID-19 Inpatients

Background: Within the UK, COVID-19 has contributed towards over 103,000 deaths. Although multiple risk factors for COVID-19 have been identified, using this data to improve clinical care has proven challenging. The main aim of this study is to develop a reliable, multivariable predictive model for COVID-19 in-patient outcomes, thus enabling risk-stratification and earlier clinical decision-making. Methods: Anonymised data consisting of 44 independent predictor variables from 355 adults diagnosed with COVID-19, at a UK hospital, was manually extracted from electronic patient records for retrospective, case–control analysis. Primary outcomes included inpatient mortality, required ventilatory support, and duration of inpatient treatment. Pulmonary embolism sequala was the only secondary outcome. After balancing data, key variables were feature selected for each outcome using random forests. Predictive models were then learned and constructed using Bayesian networks. Results: The proposed probabilistic models were able to predict, using feature selected risk factors, the probability of the mentioned outcomes. Overall, our findings demonstrate reliable, multivariable, quantitative predictive models for four outcomes, which utilise readily available clinical information for COVID-19 adult inpatients. Further research is required to externally validate our models and demonstrate their utility as risk stratification and clinical decision-making tools.

Follow-up of a national web-based survey on the SARS-CoV-2 infectious state of otorhinolaryngologists in Germany

Purpose

The SARS-CoV‑2 pandemic has affected the health and practice of otorhinolaryngologists (ORLs) for over 1 year. Follow-up data of a national survey with German ORLs were evaluated regarding differences between the two waves of the pandemic.

Methods

As in the initial survey, German ORLs were addressed via e‑mail through the German Society of ORL, Head and Neck Surgery and the German ENT Association. All ORLs afflicted with SARS-CoV‑2 were invited to participate in a web-based survey. General data on infections and concomitant parameters were evaluated.

Results

Since the start of the pandemic, 129 ORLs reported testing positive for SARS-CoV‑2 in Germany. The ORLs infected during the first wave had a relative risk (RR) of 4.07 (95% CI: 3.20; 5.19) of contracting SARS-CoV‑2. During the second wave, the RR decreased to 0.35 (95% CI: 0.28; 0.45). The availability of personal protective equipment (PPE) increased from the first to the second wave along with an increased perception of protection in the professional environment. The source of infection shifted from infections via medical staff during the first wave to patients and household exposure during the second wave. Regular medical practice was resumed by clinicians and general practitioners in the second wave. Nevertheless, a proportionally lower infection rate was observed compared with the German population as a whole.

Conclusion

The data reflect a unique long-term survey of ORLs during the pandemic. Differences in the source of infection were seen between the first and second wave, confirming the need for appropriate PPE for medical professionals working in high-risk environments. Further strategies to reduce the risk of infection include consistent testing for SARS-CoV‑2 in healthcare professionals, patients, and the general public as well as vaccination of high-risk medical groups.

Supplementary Information

The online version of this paper (10.1007/s00106-021-01075-4) contains the German version of the COVID-19 questionnaire. The article and supplementary material are available at www.springermedizin.de. Please enter the title of the article in the search field. The additional material can be found at the article under “Ergänzende Inhalte”.

The PanSurg-PREDICT Study: Endocrine Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Background

In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, patients have continued to present with endocrine (surgical) pathology in an environment depleted of resources. This study investigated how the pandemic affected endocrine surgery practice.

Methods

PanSurg-PREDICT is an international, multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study of emergency and elective surgical patients in secondary/tertiary care during the pandemic. PREDICT-Endocrine collected endocrine-specific data alongside demographics, COVID-19 and outcome data from 11–3-2020 to 13–9-2020.

Results

A total of 380 endocrine surgery patients (19 centres, 12 countries) were analysed (224 thyroidectomies, 116 parathyroidectomies, 40 adrenalectomies). Ninety-seven percent were elective, and 63% needed surgery within 4 weeks. Eight percent were initially deferred but had surgery during the pandemic; less than 1% percent was deferred for more than 6 months. Decision-making was affected by capacity, COVID-19 status or the pandemic in 17%, 5% and 7% of cases. Indication was cancer/worrying lesion in 61% of thyroidectomies and 73% of adrenalectomies and calcium 2.80 mmol/l or greater in 50% of parathyroidectomies. COVID-19 status was unknown at presentation in 92% and remained unknown before surgery in 30%. Two-thirds were asked to self-isolate before surgery. There was one COVID-19-related ICU admission and no mortalities. Consultant-delivered care occurred in a majority (anaesthetist 96%, primary surgeon 76%). Post-operative vocal cord check was reported in only 14% of neck endocrine operations. Both of these observations are likely to reflect modification of practice due to the pandemic.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected endocrine surgical decision-making, case mix and personnel delivering care. Significant variation was seen in COVID-19 risk mitigation measures. COVID-19-related complications were uncommon. This analysis demonstrates the safety of endocrine surgery during this pandemic.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00268-021-06099-z.

Quick overview of diagnostic kits and smartphone apps for urologists during the COVID-19 pandemic: a narrative review

The COVID-19 pandemic was an unprecedented event that has caused incredible challenges in all areas of society. However, unlike previous global pandemics, modern advancements in technology and medicine have made it possible to respond much more rapidly. Within months, countries around the world developed diagnostic kits and smartphone applications to tackle the virus. Many of these diagnostic kits vary in what they target and have different uses. Smartphone applications have been developed to provide real-time information to users regarding potential exposure, statistics, updated news, etc. Depending on the country, resources and government policies have created a wide range of products and applications. This narrative review paper focuses on providing a general overview of diagnostic kits and smartphone applications in three major countries, the U.S., South Korea, and China. Smartphone applications were used for tracing person-to-person contact and preventing the spread of COVID-19. These tools allowed public health officials to quickly identify people who may have had exposure to COVID-19 and allows them to act accordingly. In addition to discussing the mechanisms behind diagnostic kits, topics in legislation and policy for contact tracing will also be discussed. As nations enter into the next phase of the pandemic, there are serious considerations to be made about how technology can be integrated into handling future healthcare crises.

Perceived Effectiveness, Safety, and Attitudes Toward the Use of Nucleic Tests of SARS-CoV-2 Among Clinicians and General Public in China

Objective: To assess whether there is a knowledge gap about the use of test kits for residents and to explore the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of using test kits in China during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic. Method: An online-based, nationwide, and cross-sectional study was conducted. A total of 1,167 respondents were recruited from June 19 to July 2, 2020. All participants completed a validated questionnaire written in Chinese. Electronic consent was obtained from all participants upon their agreement to commence the questionnaire. Perceived efficacy, safety, and their attitudes toward the use of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing kits were measured. Result: The majority of the study respondents were female [749 (64.2%)], aged 31-40 years old [372 (31.9%)], and located in mainland China [1,137 (97.4%)]. The majority of the respondents held a positive view toward the introduction of the fast-track approval policy for novel coronavirus testing products (6.16 ± 1.30) as well as toward putting more investment in scientific research and biomedicine to improve the detection accuracy of detection kits (5.94 ± 1.55) in China. The respondents valued the detection accuracy more as opposed to the detection time of the testing kits (4.66 ± 2.00), whereas few participants agreed that in the research and development process, detection accuracy could be sacrificed to speed up production and coverage capacity (3.02 ± 2.04). Conclusion: The majority of the participants have a basic knowledge of the detection methods of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the types of test kits, as well as great confidence in China's domestic production of test kits and decisions. However, how basic knowledge, high compliance, and positive attitudes play a role in easing the tension of the pandemic still remains unknown.

CSO (Canadian Society of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery) position paper on rhinologic and skull base surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic

Healthcare services in many countries have been partially or completely disrupted by the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic since its onset in the end of 2019. Amongst the most impacted are the elective medical and surgical services in order to conserve resources to care for COVID-19 patients. As the number of infected patients decrease across Canada, elective surgeries are being restarted in a staged manner. Since Otolaryngologists - Head & Neck Surgeons manage surgical diseases of the upper aerodigestive tract where the highest viral load reside, it is imperative that these surgeries resume in a safe manner. The aim of this document is to compile the current best evidence available and provide expert consensus on the safe restart of rhinologic and skull base surgeries while discussing the pre-operative, intra-operative, and post-operative care and tips. Risk assessment, patient selection, case triage, and pre-operative COVID-19 testing will be analyzed and discussed. These guidelines will also consider the optimal use of personal protective equipment for specific cases, general and specific operative room precautions, and practical tips of intra-operative maneuvers to optimize patient and provider safety. Given that the literature surrounding COVID-19 is rapidly evolving, these recommendations will serve to start our specialty back into elective rhinologic surgeries over the next months and they may change as we learn more about this disease.

Local spikes in COVID-19 cases: Recommendations for maintaining otolaryngology clinic operations

The Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has created an unprecedented economic and public health crisis in the United States. Following efforts to mitigate disease spread, with a significant decline in some regions, many states began reopening their economies. As social distancing guidelines were relaxed and businesses opened, local outbreaks of COVID-19 continue to place person on healthcare systems. Among medical specialties, otolaryngologists and their staff are among the highest at risk for becoming exposed to COVID-19. As otolaryngologists prepare to weather the storm of impending local surges in COVID-19 infections there are several practical measures that can be taken to mitigate the risk to ourselves and our staff.

COVID-19 screening of asymptomatic patients admitted through emergency departments in Alberta: a prospective quality-improvement study

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among asymptomatic patients admitted to hospital has implications for personal protective equipment use, testing strategy and confidence in the safety of acute care services. Our aim was to estimate the positivity rate of reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing among people admitted to hospital without symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Alberta, Canada.

METHODS

Between Apr. 9 and May 24, 2020, we screened for COVID-19 symptoms and tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection in all consecutive adult patients (≥ 18 yr) admitted via emergency department to 3 Alberta hospitals. We summarized the parameters of the epidemic curve and assessed the performance of symptom screening versus RT-PCR results on nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swab samples.

RESULTS

The study period encompassed Alberta's initial epidemic curve, with peak active cases per 100 000 of 71.4 (0.07%) on Apr. 30, 2020, and 14.7 and 14.6 at the beginning (Apr. 9, 2020) and end (May 24, 2020), respectively. Testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection (64.9% throat and 35.1% nasopharyngeal swabs) was done on 3375 adults (mean age 51, standard deviation 21, yr; 51.5% men). None of the asymptomatic patients (n = 1814) tested positive, and 71 of those with symptoms tested positive (n = 1561; 4.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.6%-5.7%). Sensitivity of symptom screening (v. RT-PCR) was 100% (95% CI 95%-100%), and specificity was 55% (95% CI 53%-57%). Posttest probabilities for prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection ranging from 1.5 to 14 times the peak prevalence of active cases during the study did not change when we assumed lower sensitivity (92%).

INTERPRETATION

In a region with low disease prevalence where protocolized symptom assessment was in place during the admission process, we did not identify people admitted to hospital without COVID-19 symptoms who were RT-PCR positive. There may not be additive benefit to universal testing of asymptomatic patients on hospital admission in a setting of low pretest probability and strong public health containment.

Coronavirus Disease-19: Challenges Associated with the Treatment of Head and Neck Oncology and Laryngology Patients in the Coronavirus Disease-19 Era

This review explores the changes to practice associated with COVID-19 for providers treating patients with head and neck cancer and laryngeal pathology. The aim of the review is to highlight some of the challenges and considerations associated with treating this patient population during the pandemic. Additionally, it seeks to discuss some of the areas of concern related to ramping up clinical volume.

On the True Number of COVID-19 Infections: Effect of Sensitivity, Specificity and Number of Tests on Prevalence Ratio Estimation

In this paper, a formula for estimating the prevalence ratio of a disease in a population that is tested with imperfect tests is given. The formula is in terms of the fraction of positive test results and test parameters, i.e., probability of true positives (sensitivity) and the probability of true negatives (specificity). The motivation of this work arises in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic in which estimating the number of infected individuals depends on the sensitivity and specificity of the tests. In this context, it is shown that approximating the prevalence ratio by the ratio between the number of positive tests and the total number of tested individuals leads to dramatically high estimation errors, and thus, unadapted public health policies. The relevance of estimating the prevalence ratio using the formula presented in this work is that precision increases with the number of tests. Two conclusions are drawn from this work. First, in order to ensure that a reliable estimation is achieved with a finite number of tests, testing campaigns must be implemented with tests for which the sum of the sensitivity and the specificity is sufficiently different than one. Second, the key parameter for reducing the estimation error is the number of tests. For a large number of tests, as long as the sum of the sensitivity and specificity is different than one, the exact values of these parameters have very little impact on the estimation error.

Overview of COVID-19 testing and implications for otolaryngologists

BACKGROUND

Testing for SARS-CoV-2 is important for decision making prior to surgery in otolaryngology. An understanding of current and developing testing methods is important for interpreting test results.

METHODS

We performed a literature review of current evidence surrounding SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic testing highlighting its utility, limitations, and implications for otolaryngologists.

RESULTS

The currently accepted RT-PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 has varying sensitivity according to which subsite of the aerodigestive tract is sampled. Nasal swab sensitivities appear to be about 70%. Chest CT imaging for screening purposes is not currently recommended.

CONCLUSION

Due to the current sensitivity of RT-PCR based testing for SARS-CoV-2, a negative test cannot rule out COVID-19. Full PPE should be worn during high-risk procedures such as aerosol generating procedures even if testing is negative. Patients who test positive during screening should have their surgeries postponed if possible until asymptomatic and have tested negative for SARS-CoV-2.