<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>7(4)</volume><submitter>Stokes W</submitter><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>Point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests have great potential to help combat the COVID-19 pandemic. In the performance of a rapid, antigen-based SARS-CoV-2 test (RAT), our study had 3 main objectives: to determine the accuracy of nasal swabs, the accuracy of using nasopharyngeal swabs for nasal collection (nasalNP), and the effectiveness of using residual extraction buffer for real-time reverse-transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) confirmation of positive RAT (rPan).&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>Symptomatic adults recently diagnosed with COVID-19 in the community were recruited into the study. Nasal samples were collected using either a nasalNP or nasal swab and tested immediately with the RAT in the individual's home by a health care provider. 500 µL of universal transport media was added to the residual extraction buffer after testing and sent to the laboratory for SARS-CoV-2 testing using RT-PCR. Parallel throat swabs tested with RT-PCR were used as the reference comparators.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>One hundred and fifty-five individuals were included in the study (99 nasal swabs, 56 nasalNP). Sensitivities of nasal samples tested on the RAT using either nasal or nasalNP were 89.0% [95% confidence interval (CI) 80.7%-94.6%] and 90.2% (95% CI 78.6%-96.7%), respectively. rPan positivity agreement compared to throat RT-PCR was 96.2%.&lt;h4>Conclusions&lt;/h4>RAT reliably detect SARS-CoV-2 from symptomatic adults in the community presenting within 7 days of symptom onset using nasal swabs or nasalNP. High agreement with rPan can avoid the need for collecting a second swab for RT-PCR confirmation or testing of variants of concern from positive RAT in this population.</pubmed_abstract><journal>The journal of applied laboratory medicine</journal><pagination>834-841</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC8992337</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><pubmed_title>One Swab Fits All: Performance of a Rapid, Antigen-Based SARS-CoV-2 Test Using a Nasal Swab, Nasopharyngeal Swab for Nasal Collection, and RT-PCR Confirmation from Residual Extraction Buffer.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC8992337</pmcid><pubmed_authors>Shokoples S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Scott B</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Tipples G</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Pabbaraju K</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Wong AA</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Turnbull L</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Gill K</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Stokes W</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Hu J</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Berenger BM</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Portnoy D</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Singh T</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Szelewicki J</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>One Swab Fits All: Performance of a Rapid, Antigen-Based SARS-CoV-2 Test Using a Nasal Swab, Nasopharyngeal Swab for Nasal Collection, and RT-PCR Confirmation from Residual Extraction Buffer.</name><description>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>Point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests have great potential to help combat the COVID-19 pandemic. In the performance of a rapid, antigen-based SARS-CoV-2 test (RAT), our study had 3 main objectives: to determine the accuracy of nasal swabs, the accuracy of using nasopharyngeal swabs for nasal collection (nasalNP), and the effectiveness of using residual extraction buffer for real-time reverse-transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) confirmation of positive RAT (rPan).&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>Symptomatic adults recently diagnosed with COVID-19 in the community were recruited into the study. Nasal samples were collected using either a nasalNP or nasal swab and tested immediately with the RAT in the individual's home by a health care provider. 500 µL of universal transport media was added to the residual extraction buffer after testing and sent to the laboratory for SARS-CoV-2 testing using RT-PCR. Parallel throat swabs tested with RT-PCR were used as the reference comparators.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>One hundred and fifty-five individuals were included in the study (99 nasal swabs, 56 nasalNP). Sensitivities of nasal samples tested on the RAT using either nasal or nasalNP were 89.0% [95% confidence interval (CI) 80.7%-94.6%] and 90.2% (95% CI 78.6%-96.7%), respectively. rPan positivity agreement compared to throat RT-PCR was 96.2%.&lt;h4>Conclusions&lt;/h4>RAT reliably detect SARS-CoV-2 from symptomatic adults in the community presenting within 7 days of symptom onset using nasal swabs or nasalNP. High agreement with rPan can avoid the need for collecting a second swab for RT-PCR confirmation or testing of variants of concern from positive RAT in this population.</description><dates><release>2022-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2022 Jun</publication><modification>2025-04-21T17:29:54.794Z</modification><creation>2025-04-05T16:40:51.286Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC8992337</accession><cross_references><pubmed>35258088</pubmed><doi>10.1093/jalm/jfac004</doi></cross_references></HashMap>