Cureus . Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA by Reverse Transcription-Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) on Self-Collected Nasal Swab Compared With Profess

[tetano]

Cureus


. 2022 Jun 3;14(6):e25618.
doi: 10.7759/cureus.25618. eCollection 2022 Jun.
Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA by Reverse Transcription-Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) on Self-Collected Nasal Swab Compared With Professionally Collected Nasopharyngeal Swab​

Nusrat Mannan[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Ruksana Raihan[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Ummey Shahnaz Parvin[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Sheikh Mohammad Fazle Akbar[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Md Selim Reza[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Shafiqul Islam[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Joy Kundu[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Abdullah Al Noman[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Md Fakhruddin[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Muttasim Billaha[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Moniruzzaman Anik[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Tanzil Hasan[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Nikhil Tudu[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Abdur Rahim[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Farzana Mim[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Mohammad Jahidur Rahman Khan[SUP] 5 [/SUP]



Affiliations

• PMID: 35784954
• PMCID: PMC9249011
• DOI: 10.7759/cureus.25618

Abstract

Background: Self-collection of nasal swabs for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) would considerably increase the testing capability and decrease the risk of transmission among healthcare workers (HCW) and the use of personal protective equipment (PPE).
Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the performance of self-collected nasal swabs compared with professionally collected nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs for detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA by RT-PCR.
Materials and methods: We performed a cross-sectional study where the suspected cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were instructed about the self-collection of nasal swabs from their mid-turbinate. The results were compared to a nasopharyngeal swab collected by a trained healthcare worker in the same patient at the same sitting.
Results: We enrolled 100 participants, of which, 69 (69%) were male and 31 (31%) were female. The median age of the study participant was 36 years. Of the participants, 58 (58%) were symptomatic, and the commonest clinical presentation was cough, which was present in 42 (42%) participants. Out of 100 samples, 31 (31%) professionally collected nasopharyngeal swabs and 28 (28%) self-collected nasal swabs were positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. Out of 31 professionally collected positive samples, three samples were negative in self-collection. Out of 28 self-collected positive samples, no sample was negative in the professional collection. The sensitivity and specificity of self-collected nasal swabs compared to professionally collected nasopharyngeal swabs were 90.32% and 100.00%, respectively. The sensitivity of self-collected nasal was 100% when the cycle threshold (Ct) value of the professionally collected NP swab was less than 30.
Conclusion: Our study showed that self-collected nasal swabs' sensitivities were similar to professionally collected NP swabs with a high viral load (low Ct value). Hence, this method could be used when the patient is symptomatic and come to the health providers in the early stage of COVID-19 illness.

Keywords: covid-19; nasal swab; nasopharyngeal swab; rt-pcr; sars-cov-2; self-collection.