Dataset Information

Stick with the nose…Saliva rapid antigen testing is not a viable method for testing children under 5 years old.

ABSTRACT:

Aim

Respiratory testing with rapid antigen tests (RATs) in children under 5 years of age may be uncomfortable and presents specific challenges to testing due to compliance and procedural distress. The aim of this study was to investigate sensitivity and feasibility of self-collected nasal and saliva RAT tests compared with a combined nose and throat (CTN) swab PCR in children under 5.

Methods

Children aged between 1 month and 5 years, with confirmed COVID-19 or who were a household contact within 7 days were included. A saliva RAT, nasal RAT and CTN swab were collected by the parent. SARS-CoV-2 cycle threshold (Ct) values for CTN tested by PCR were compared with saliva and nasal RAT results. Parent preference for method of sample was recorded.

Results

Forty-one children were recruited with median age of 1.5 (interquartile range 0.7-4.0) years. Only 22/41 (54%) of parents were able to successfully collect a saliva RAT from their child. Sensitivity of the nasal RAT and saliva RAT was 0.889 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.739-0.969) and 0.158 (95% CI 0.034-0.396), respectively. Upper limit of nasal RAT detection by CTN Ct value was higher than saliva (36.05 vs. 27.29). While saliva RAT was rated most comfortable, nasal RAT was rated the preferred specimen by parents for future testing, due to saliva collection difficulties and time taken.

Conclusions

Rapid antigen testing with nasal RAT is a more feasible and sensitive method for SARS-CoV-2 detection in young children compared with saliva RAT.

SUBMITTER: Tosif S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10100334 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Stick with the nose…Saliva rapid antigen testing is not a viable method for testing children under 5 years old.

Tosif Shidan S Lee Lai-Yang LY Nguyen Jill J McMinn Alissa A Selman Chris C Grobler Anneke C AC Daley Andrew A Crawford Nigel W NW

Journal of paediatrics and child health 20221118 2

<h4>Aim</h4>Respiratory testing with rapid antigen tests (RATs) in children under 5 years of age may be uncomfortable and presents specific challenges to testing due to compliance and procedural distress. The aim of this study was to investigate sensitivity and feasibility of self-collected nasal and saliva RAT tests compared with a combined nose and throat (CTN) swab PCR in children under 5.<h4>Methods</h4>Children aged between 1 month and 5 years, with confirmed COVID-19 or who were a househol ...[more]

PMID: 36401338

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe diagnostic accuracy of unsupervised self-testing with rapid antigen diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) is mostly unknown. We studied the diagnostic accuracy of a self-performed SARS-CoV-2 saliva and nasal Ag-RDT in the general population.MethodsThis large cross-sectional study consecutively included unselected individuals aged ≥ 16 years presenting for SARS-CoV-2 testing at three public health service test sites. Participants underwent molecular test sampling and received two self-tests (the Hangzhou AllTest Biotech saliva self-test and the SD Biosensor nasal self-test by Roche Diagnostics) to perform themselves at home. Diagnostic accuracy of both self-tests was assessed with molecular testing as reference.ResultsOut of 2819 participants, 6.5% had a positive molecular test. Overall sensitivities were 46.7% (39.3-54.2%) for the saliva Ag-RDT and 68.9% (61.6-75.6%) for the nasal Ag-RDT. With a viral load cut-off (≥ 5.2 log10 SARS-CoV-2 E-gene copies/mL) as a proxy of infectiousness, these sensitivities increased to 54.9% (46.4-63.3%) and 83.9% (76.9-89.5%), respectively. For the nasal Ag-RDT, sensitivities were 78.5% (71.1-84.8%) and 22.6% (9.6-41.1%) in those symptomatic and asymptomatic at the time of sampling, which increased to 90.4% (83.8-94.9%) and 38.9% (17.3-64.3%) after applying the viral load cut-off. In those with and without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, sensitivities were 36.8% (16.3-61.6%) and 72.7% (65.1-79.4%). Specificities were > 99% and > 99%, positive predictive values > 70% and > 90%, and negative predictive values > 95% and > 95%, for the saliva and nasal Ag-RDT, respectively, in most analyses. Most participants considered the self-performing and result interpretation (very) easy for both self-tests.ConclusionsThe Hangzhou AllTest Biotech saliva self Ag-RDT is not reliable for SARS-CoV-2 detection, overall, and in all studied subgroups. The SD Biosensor nasal self Ag-RDT had high sensitivity in individuals with symptoms and in those without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection but low sensitivity in asymptomatic individuals and those with a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection which warrants further investigation.

Project description:Evaluating SARS-CoV-2 viral loads in nasopharyngeal (NP) and saliva samples, factors affecting viral loads, and the performance of rapid antigen testing (RAT) have not been comprehensively conducted during SARS-CoV-2 Omicron epidemic. This prospective study included outpatients enrolled during Omicron variant period in Japan. Paired NP swab and saliva samples were collected to measure viral loads by reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR). The correlation between viral loads and clinical symptoms was examined. The performance of an immunochromatography-based RAT kit was also assessed. A total of 153 patients tested within 3 days of symptom onset were included. The mean viral load was 5.60 log10 copies/test and 3.65 log10 copies/test in NP and saliva samples, respectively, resulting in a significant difference (P < 0.0001). Fever over 37°C (axillary temperature) and total number of symptoms other than fever were identified as independent factors positively correlated with the viral loads in both NP and saliva samples. RAT sensitivity using NP and saliva samples was 92% and 68%, respectively, using positive RT-qPCR results as the reference. The sensitivity of RAT using NP and saliva samples was significantly higher in patients with fever ≥37°C and/or at least one symptom than in those with fever <37°C and/or no symptoms (97% vs 83% in NP swabs; 80% vs 50% in saliva). Distinct symptoms, including fever ≥37°C, may reflect high Omicron variant viral loads. Rapid antigen testing, not only using nasopharyngeal swabs but also using saliva, would be useful for COVID-19 diagnosis as point-of-care testing, particularly for symptomatic patients.ImportanceWe examined nasopharyngeal and salivary viral loads using samples collected from outpatients with SARS-CoV-2 infection during the Omicron epidemic in Japan and explored the outpatient factors correlated with viral loads. In addition, we evaluated the performance of an authorized rapid antigen testing (RAT) kit using nasopharyngeal and saliva samples with RT-PCR testing as the reference. Intriguingly, a correlation between fever and other symptoms and SARS-CoV-2 viral loads in nasopharyngeal and saliva samples was observed based on one COVID-19 outpatient visit. RAT sensitivity was influenced by viral loads. Nevertheless, nasopharyngeal RAT is considered useful for SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care diagnosis. In patients with distinct symptoms, including high-grade fever, salivary RAT could be a practical diagnostic tool because of the higher estimated viral loads. After the Omicron epidemic, outpatients with mild COVID-19 have become the main focus of diagnosis and treatment. Our study provides valuable information regarding the point-of-care diagnosis of these patients.

Dataset Information

Stick with the nose…Saliva rapid antigen testing is not a viable method for testing children under 5 years old.

Aim

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Stick with the nose…Saliva rapid antigen testing is not a viable method for testing children under 5 years old.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets