ABSTRACT
SARS-CoV-2 quickly spread in the worldwide population by contact with oral and respiratory secretions of infected individuals, imposing social restrictions to control the infection. Massive testing is essential to breaking the chain of COVID-19 transmission. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of at-home self-collected samples - saliva and combined nasal-oropharyngeal swabs (NOP) - for SARS-CoV-2 detection in a telemedicine platform for COVID-19 surveillance. We analyzed 201 patients who met the criteria of suspected COVID-19. NOP sampling were combined (nostrils and oropharynx) and saliva collected using a cotton pad device. Detection of SARS-COV-2 was performed by using the Altona RealStar® SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Kit 1.0. According to our data, there was an overall significant agreement (κ coefficient value of 0.58) between the performances of saliva and NOP. Assuming that positive results in either sample represent true infections, 70 patients positive for SARS-CoV-2 were identified, with 52/70 being positive in NOP and 55/70 in saliva. This corresponds to sensitivities of 74.2% (95% CI; 63.7% to 83.1%) for NOP and 78.6% (95% CI; 67.6% to 86.6%) for saliva. We also found a strong correlation (β-coefficients < 1) between the cycle threshold values in saliva and NOP. Ageusia was the only symptom associated with patients SARS-CoV-2 positive only in NOP (p=0.028). In conclusion, our data show the feasibility of using at-home self-collected samples (especially saliva), as an adequate alternative for SARS-CoV-2 detection. This new approach of testing can be useful to develop strategies for COVID-19 surveillance and for guiding public health decisions.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was supported by the Internal funding from the Hospital das Clinicas of the University of Sao Paulo School of Medicine, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Clinics Hospital Research Ethics Committee of the University of Sao Paulo School of Medicine protocol number 3.979.632.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, Braz-Silva PH, upon reasonable request.
