Comparison of saliva with oral and nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 detection on various commercial and laboratory-developed assays.

The accurate laboratory detection of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a crucial element in the fight against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction testing on combined oral and nasopharyngeal swab (ONPS) suffers from several limitations, including the need for qualified personnel, the discomfort caused by invasive nasopharyngeal sample collection, and the possibility of swab and transport media shortage. Testing on saliva would represent an advancement. The aim of this study was to compare the concordance between saliva samples and ONPS for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 on various commercial and laboratory-developed tests (LDT). Individuals were recruited from eight institutions in Quebec, Canada, if they had SARS-CoV-2 RNA detected on a recently collected ONPS, and accepted to provide another ONPS, paired with saliva. Assays available in the different laboratories (Abbott RealTime SARS-CoV-2, Cobas® SARS-CoV-2, Simplexa™ COVID-19 Direct, Allplex™ 2019-nCoV, RIDA®GENE SARS-CoV-2, and an LDT preceded by three different extraction methods) were used to determine the concordance between saliva and ONPS results. Overall, 320 tests were run from a total of 125 saliva and ONPS sample pairs. All assays yielded similar sensitivity when saliva was compared to ONPS, with the exception of one LDT (67% vs. 93%). The mean difference in cycle threshold (∆C t ) was generally (but not significantly) in favor of the ONPS for all nucleic acid amplification tests. The maximum mean ∆​​​​​C t was 2.0, while individual ∆C t varied importantly from -17.5 to 12.4. Saliva seems to be associated with sensitivity similar to ONPS for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 by various assays.

Asymptomatic carriers of COVID-19 in a confined adult community population in Quebec: A cross-sectional study.

Several countries have undertaken social distancing measures to stop SARS-CoV-2 spread. Asymptomatic carriers' prevalence is unknown and would provide essential information on hidden viral circulation. In our cross-sectional study, 1.82% of 330 asymptomatic confined individuals living in the community carried SARS-CoV-2 despite no contact with declared cases, raising concerns about unnoticed transmission.

SARS-CoV-2 detection by direct rRT-PCR without RNA extraction.

Rapid and reliable screening of SARS-CoV-2 is fundamental to assess viral spread and limit the pandemic we are facing. In this study, we compared direct rRT-PCR method (without RNA extraction) using SeeGene AllplexTM 2019-nCoV rRT-PCR with the RealStar® SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR kit (Altona Diagnostics). Furthermore, we assessed the impact of swab storage media composition on PCR efficiency. We show that SeeGene and Altona's assays provide similar efficiency. Importantly, we provide evidence that RNA extraction can be successfully bypassed when samples are stored in UTM medium or in molecular water but not when samples are stored in saline solution and in Hanks medium.

Patient Roles in Engagement-Capable Environments: Multiple Perspectives.

Engagement-capable environments have well-defined roles for patients. These roles are often described in terms of their functional aspects. In this paper, we provide a complementary way of thinking about patient roles: an interactionist perspective. For interactionists, roles evolve through social interactions and contextual demands that shape how the work is performed. Drawing from a case example at Health Standards Organization (HSO), we demonstrate the need for engagement leaders to attend to functional descriptions of patient roles and their interactive possibilities. Finally, we argue for the connection between multiple patient roles and engagement-capable environments.