Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Accuracy of COVID-19 self-tests with unsupervised nasal or nasal plus oropharyngeal self-sampling in symptomatic individuals in the Omicron period

View ORCID ProfileEwoud Schuit, View ORCID ProfileRoderick P Venekamp, View ORCID ProfileLotty Hooft, View ORCID ProfileIrene K Veldhuijzen, View ORCID ProfileWouter van den Bijllaardt, View ORCID ProfileSuzan D Pas, View ORCID ProfileVivian F Zwart, Esther B Lodder, View ORCID ProfileMarloes Hellwich, Marco Koppelman, View ORCID ProfileRichard Molenkamp, Constantijn Wijers, Irene H Vroom, Leonard C Smeets, Carla R S Nagel-Imming, View ORCID ProfileWanda G H Han, View ORCID ProfileSusan van den Hof, View ORCID ProfileJan AJW Kluytmans, View ORCID ProfileJanneke H M van de Wijgert, View ORCID ProfileKarel G M Moons
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.03.24.22272891
Ewoud Schuit
1Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 100, 3584 CG Utrecht, The Netherlands
2Cochrane Netherlands, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 100, 3584 CG Utrecht, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Ewoud Schuit
Roderick P Venekamp
1Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 100, 3584 CG Utrecht, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Roderick P Venekamp
Lotty Hooft
1Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 100, 3584 CG Utrecht, The Netherlands
2Cochrane Netherlands, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 100, 3584 CG Utrecht, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Lotty Hooft
Irene K Veldhuijzen
3Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Antonie van Leeuwenhoeklaan 9, 3721 MA Bilthoven, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Irene K Veldhuijzen
Wouter van den Bijllaardt
4Microvida Laboratory for Medical Microbiology, Amphia Hospital, Molengracht 21, 4818 CK Breda, The Netherlands
10Department of Infection Control, Amphia Hospital, Molengracht 21, 4818 CK Breda, the Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Wouter van den Bijllaardt
Suzan D Pas
4Microvida Laboratory for Medical Microbiology, Amphia Hospital, Molengracht 21, 4818 CK Breda, The Netherlands
5Microvida Laboratory for Medical Microbiology, Bravis Hospital, Boerhaavelaan 25 4708 AE Roosendaal, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Suzan D Pas
Vivian F Zwart
4Microvida Laboratory for Medical Microbiology, Amphia Hospital, Molengracht 21, 4818 CK Breda, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Vivian F Zwart
Esther B Lodder
6Public Health Service West-Brabant, Doornboslaan 225-227, 4816 CZ Breda, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Marloes Hellwich
7Public Health Service Hart voor Brabant, Reitseplein 3, 5037 AA Tilburg, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Marloes Hellwich
Marco Koppelman
12National Screening laboratory of Sanquin, Sanquin Blood Supply foundation, Plesmanlaan 125 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Richard Molenkamp
8Department of Viroscience, Erasmus MC, Doctor Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Richard Molenkamp
Constantijn Wijers
9Public Health Service Rotterdam-Rijnmond, Schiedamsedijk 95, 3011 EN Rotterdam, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Irene H Vroom
9Public Health Service Rotterdam-Rijnmond, Schiedamsedijk 95, 3011 EN Rotterdam, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Leonard C Smeets
11Reinier Haga Medical Diagnostic Center, Reinier de Graafweg 7, 2625 AD Delft, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Carla R S Nagel-Imming
1Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 100, 3584 CG Utrecht, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Wanda G H Han
3Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Antonie van Leeuwenhoeklaan 9, 3721 MA Bilthoven, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Wanda G H Han
Susan van den Hof
3Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Antonie van Leeuwenhoeklaan 9, 3721 MA Bilthoven, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Susan van den Hof
Jan AJW Kluytmans
1Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 100, 3584 CG Utrecht, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Jan AJW Kluytmans
Janneke H M van de Wijgert
1Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 100, 3584 CG Utrecht, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Janneke H M van de Wijgert
Karel G M Moons
1Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 100, 3584 CG Utrecht, The Netherlands
2Cochrane Netherlands, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 100, 3584 CG Utrecht, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Karel G M Moons
  • For correspondence: k.g.m.moons@umcutrecht.nl
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background Performances of rapid antigen diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) with nasal self-sampling, and oropharyngeal plus nasal (OP-N) self-sampling, in the Omicron period are unknown.

Methods Prospective diagnostic accuracy study among 6,497 symptomatic individuals aged >16 years presenting for SARS-CoV-2 testing at three test-sites. Participants were sampled for RT-PCR (reference test) and received one Ag-RDT to perform unsupervised with either nasal self-sampling (during the emergence of Omicron, and after Omicron share was >90%, phase-1) or with OP-N self-sampling (in a subsequent phase-2; Omicron share >99%). The evaluated tests were Acon Flowflex (Flowflex; phase-1 only), MP Biomedicals (MPBio), and Siemens-Healthineers Clinitest (Clinitest).

Findings During phase-1, 45% of Flowflex, 29% of MPBio, and 35% of Clinitest participants were confirmatory testers (previously tested positive by a self-test at own initiative). Overall sensitivities with nasal self-sampling were 79.0% (95% CI: 74.7-82.8%) for Flowflex, 69.9% (65.1-74.4%) for MPBio, and 70.2% (65.6-74.5%) for Clinitest. Sensitivities were substantially higher in confirmatory testers (93.6%, 83.6%, and 85.7%, respectively) than in those who tested for other reasons (52.4%, 51.5%, and 49.5%, respectively). Sensitivities decreased by 6.1 (p=0.16 by Chi-square test), 7.0 (p=0.60), and 12.8 (p=0.025) percentage points, respectively, when transitioning from 29% to >95% Omicron. During phase-2, 53% of MPBio, and 44% of Clinitest participants were confirmatory testers. Overall sensitivities with OP-N self-sampling were 83.0% (78.8%-86.7%) for MPBio and 77.3% (72.9%-81.2%) for Clinitest. Comparing OP-N to nasal sampling, sensitivities were slightly higher in confirmatory testers (87.4% and 86.1%, respectively), and substantially higher in those testing for other reasons (69.3% and 59.9%, respectively).

Interpretatio Sensitivities of three Ag-RDTs with nasal self-sampling decreased during Omicron emergence but was only statistically significant for Clinitest. Sensitivities were substantially influenced by the proportion of confirmatory testers. Addition of oropharyngeal to nasal self-sampling improved sensitivities of MPBio and Clinitest.

Funding Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare, and Sport.

Evidence before this study SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) require no or minimal equipment, provide a result within 15-30 minutes, and can be used in a range of settings including for self-testing at home. Self-testing may potentially lower the threshold to testing and allows individuals to obtain a test result quickly and at their own convenience, which could support the early detection of infectious cases and reduce community transmission. Real world evidence on the performance of unsupervised nasal and oropharyngeal plus nasal (OP-N) self-sampling in the Omicron variant period is needed to accurately inform end-users and policymakers. Therefore, we conducted a large prospective diagnostic accuracy study of three commercially available Ag-RDTs with self-sampling (the Acon Flowflex test, the MP Biomedicals test, and the Siemens-Healthineers Clinitest) during and after the emergence of Omicron using RT-PCR as the reference standard. Our aims were to evaluate whether the accuracies of Ag-RDTs with nasal self-sampling changed over time with the emergence of Omicron; and to determine whether addition of oropharyngeal to nasal self-sampling with the same swab yielded higher diagnostic accuracies.

What this study adds The large comprehensive study was conducted in almost 6,500 participants with symptoms when presenting for routine SARS-CoV-2 testing at three public health service COVID-19 test-sites in the Netherlands. During the study, conducted between 21 December 2021 and 10 February 2022, the percentage of the Omicron variant in samples from the national SARS-CoV-2 pathogen surveillance increased from 29% in the first week to 99% in the last week of the study. The period during which the Omicron variant was dominant was divided into a nasal sampling phase (phase-1; Omicron present in >90% of surveillance samples) and an OP-N sampling phase (phase-2; Omicron share was >99%). In phase-1, 45% of Flowflex, 29% of MPBio, and 35% of Clinitest participants visited the test-site because of a positive self-test (confirmatory testers). Overall sensitivities with nasal self-sampling were 79.0% (95% CI: 74.7-82.8%) for the Flowflex, 69.9% (65.1-74.4%) for the MPBio, and 70.2% (65.6-74.5%) for the Clinitest Ag-RDT. Sensitivities were 94%, 84%, and 86%, respectively, for confirmatory testers, and 52%, 52%, and 50%, respectively, for those who had other reasons for getting tested. Sensitivities were 87.0% (79.7-92.4%), 83.1% (72.9-90.7%), and 80.0% (51.9-95.7%), respectively, in the first week, and decreased by 6.1 (p=0.16 by Chi-square test), 7.0 (p=0.60), and 12.8 (p=0.025) percentage points in the final week of the study. In Phase-2, 53% of MPBio and 44% of Clinitest participants were confirmatory testers. Overall sensitivities with OP-N self-sampling were 83.0% (78.8%-86.7%) for MPBio and 77.3% (72.9%-81.2%) for Clinitest. When comparing OP-N to nasal sampling, sensitivities were slightly higher in confirmatory testers (87.4% and 86.1%, respectively), and substantially higher in those testing for other reasons (69.3% and 59.9%).

Implications of all the available evidence The sensitivities of three commercially available Ag-RDTs performed with nasal self-sampling decreased during the emergence of Omicron, but this trend was only statistically significant for Clinitest. Addition of oropharyngeal to nasal self-sampling improved the sensitivity of the MPBio and Clinitest, most notably in individuals who visited the test-site for other reasons than to confirm a positive self-test. Based on these findings, the manufacturers of MPBio and Clinitest may consider extending their instructions for use to include combined oropharyngeal and nasal sampling, and other manufacturers may consider evaluating this as well.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

This study was funded by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare, and Sport. The funder had no role in design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; writing and decision to submit the paper for publication.

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:

Ethical approval Not required because the study was judged by the METC Utrecht to be outside the scope of the Dutch Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (protocol No 21-818 /C). All participants signed an informed consent form before any study procedure.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

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

Footnotes

  • ↵* Dual first authorship

  • ↵# Dual last authorship

Data Availability

Individual participant data collected during the study will be available, after deidentification of all participants. Data will be available to researchers who provide a methodologically sound proposal to achieve the aims in the approved proposal. Proposals should be directed to the corresponding author to gain access to the data. Data requestors will need to sign a data sharing agreement.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted March 24, 2022.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Accuracy of COVID-19 self-tests with unsupervised nasal or nasal plus oropharyngeal self-sampling in symptomatic individuals in the Omicron period
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Accuracy of COVID-19 self-tests with unsupervised nasal or nasal plus oropharyngeal self-sampling in symptomatic individuals in the Omicron period
Ewoud Schuit, Roderick P Venekamp, Lotty Hooft, Irene K Veldhuijzen, Wouter van den Bijllaardt, Suzan D Pas, Vivian F Zwart, Esther B Lodder, Marloes Hellwich, Marco Koppelman, Richard Molenkamp, Constantijn Wijers, Irene H Vroom, Leonard C Smeets, Carla R S Nagel-Imming, Wanda G H Han, Susan van den Hof, Jan AJW Kluytmans, Janneke H M van de Wijgert, Karel G M Moons
medRxiv 2022.03.24.22272891; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.03.24.22272891
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Accuracy of COVID-19 self-tests with unsupervised nasal or nasal plus oropharyngeal self-sampling in symptomatic individuals in the Omicron period
Ewoud Schuit, Roderick P Venekamp, Lotty Hooft, Irene K Veldhuijzen, Wouter van den Bijllaardt, Suzan D Pas, Vivian F Zwart, Esther B Lodder, Marloes Hellwich, Marco Koppelman, Richard Molenkamp, Constantijn Wijers, Irene H Vroom, Leonard C Smeets, Carla R S Nagel-Imming, Wanda G H Han, Susan van den Hof, Jan AJW Kluytmans, Janneke H M van de Wijgert, Karel G M Moons
medRxiv 2022.03.24.22272891; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.03.24.22272891

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS)
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (174)
  • Allergy and Immunology (421)
  • Anesthesia (97)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (901)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (170)
  • Dermatology (102)
  • Emergency Medicine (257)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (407)
  • Epidemiology (8789)
  • Forensic Medicine (4)
  • Gastroenterology (405)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (1863)
  • Geriatric Medicine (179)
  • Health Economics (388)
  • Health Informatics (1292)
  • Health Policy (644)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (492)
  • Hematology (207)
  • HIV/AIDS (394)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (10565)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (564)
  • Medical Education (193)
  • Medical Ethics (52)
  • Nephrology (218)
  • Neurology (1756)
  • Nursing (103)
  • Nutrition (266)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (343)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (461)
  • Oncology (965)
  • Ophthalmology (283)
  • Orthopedics (107)
  • Otolaryngology (177)
  • Pain Medicine (118)
  • Palliative Medicine (43)
  • Pathology (264)
  • Pediatrics (557)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (265)
  • Primary Care Research (219)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (1845)
  • Public and Global Health (3986)
  • Radiology and Imaging (655)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (344)
  • Respiratory Medicine (535)
  • Rheumatology (215)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (178)
  • Sports Medicine (166)
  • Surgery (197)
  • Toxicology (37)
  • Transplantation (106)
  • Urology (80)