Use of trained scent dogs for detection of COVID-19 and evidence of cost-saving.

Background: One of the lessons learned from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is the importance of early, flexible, and rapidly deployable disease detection methods. Currently, diagnosis of COVID-19 requires the collection of oro/nasopharyngal swabs, nasal turbinate, anterior nares and saliva but as the pandemic continues, disease detection methods that can identify infected individuals earlier and more quickly will be crucial for slowing the spread of the virus. Previous studies have indicated that dogs can be trained to identify volatile organic compounds (VOCs) produced during respiratory infections. We sought to determine whether this approach could be applied for detection of COVID-19 in Rwanda and measured its cost-saving. Methods: Over a period of 5 months, four dogs were trained to detect VOCs in sweat samples collected from human subjects confirmed positive or negative for COVID-19 by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing. Dogs were trained using a detection dog training system (DDTS) and in vivo diagnosis. Samples were collected from 5,253 participants using a cotton pad swiped in the underarm to collect sweat samples. Statistical analysis was conducted using R statistical software. Findings: From August to September 2021 during the Delta wave, the sensitivity of the dogs' COVID-19 detection ranged from 75.0 to 89.9% for the lowest- and highest-performing dogs, respectively. Specificity ranged from 96.1 to 98.4%, respectively. In the second phase coinciding with the Omicron wave (January-March 2022), the sensitivity decreased substantially from 36.6 to 41.5%, while specificity remained above 95% for all four dogs. The sensitivity and specificity by any positive sample detected by at least one dog was 83.9, 95% CI: 75.8-90.2 and 94.9%; 95% CI: 93.9-95.8, respectively. The use of scent detection dogs was also found to be cost-saving compared to antigen rapid diagnostic tests, based on a marginal cost of approximately $14,000 USD for testing of the 5,253 samples which makes 2.67 USD per sample. Testing turnaround time was also faster with the scent detection dogs, at 3 h compared to 11 h with routine diagnostic testing. Conclusion: The findings from this study indicate that trained dogs can accurately identify respiratory secretion samples from asymptomatic and symptomatic COVID-19 patients timely and cost-effectively. Our findings recommend further uptake of this approach for COVID-19 detection.

Canine real-time detection of SARS-CoV-2 infections in the context of a mass screening event.

INTRODUCTION: Previous research demonstrated that medical scent detection dogs have the ability to distinguish SARS-CoV-2 positive from negative samples with high diagnostic accuracy. To deploy these dogs as a reliable screening method, it is mandatory to examine if canines maintain their high diagnostic accuracy in real-life screening settings. We conducted a study to evaluate the performance of medical scent detection dogs under real-life circumstances. METHODS: Eight dogs were trained to detect SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR-positive samples. Four concerts with a total of 2802 participants were held to evaluate canines' performance in screening individuals for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Sweat samples were taken from all participants and presented in a line-up setting. In addition, every participant had been tested with a SARS-CoV-2 specific rapid antigen test and a RT-qPCR and they provided information regarding age, sex, vaccination status and medical disease history. The participants' infection status was unknown at the time of canine testing. Safety measures such as mask wearing and distance keeping were ensured. RESULTS: The SARS-CoV-2 detection dogs achieved a diagnostic specificity of 99.93% (95% CI 99.74% to 99.99%) and a sensitivity of 81.58% (95% CI 66.58% to 90.78%), respectively. The overall rate of concordant results was 99.68%. The majority of the study population was vaccinated with varying vaccines and vaccination schemes, while several participants had chronic diseases and were under chronic medication. This did not influence dogs' decisions. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 scent detection dogs achieved high diagnostic accuracy in a real-life scenario. The vaccination status, previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, chronic disease and medication of the participants did not influence the performance of the dogs in detecting the acute infection. This indicates that dogs provide a fast and reliable screening option for public events in which high-throughput screening is required.

Detection of Post-COVID-19 Patients Using Medical Scent Detection Dogs-A Pilot Study.

There is a growing number of COVID-19 patients experiencing long-term symptoms months after their acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. Previous research proved dogs' ability to detect acute SARS-CoV-2 infections, but has not yet shown if dogs also indicate samples of patients with post-COVID-19 condition (Long COVID). Nine dogs, previously trained to detect samples of acute COVID-19 patients, were confronted with samples of Long COVID patients in two testing scenarios. In test scenario I (samples of acute COVID-19 vs. Long COVID) dogs achieved a mean sensitivity (for acute COVID-19) of 86.7% (95%CI: 75.4-98.0%) and a specificity of 95.8% (95%CI: 92.5-99.0%). When dogs were confronted with Long COVID and negative control samples in scenario IIa, dogs achieved a mean sensitivity (for Long COVID) of 94.4 (95%CI: 70.5-100.0%) and a specificity of 96.1% (95%CI: 87.6-100.0%). In comparison, when acute SARS-CoV-2 positive samples and negative control samples were comparatively presented (scenario IIb), a mean sensitivity of 86.9 (95%CI: 55.7-100.0%) and a specificity of 88.1% (95%CI: 82.7-93.6%) was attained. This pilot study supports the hypothesis of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) being long-term present after the initial infection in post-COVID-19 patients. Detection dogs, trained with samples of acute COVID-19 patients, also identified samples of Long COVID patients with a high sensitivity when presented next to samples of healthy individuals. This data may be used for further studies evaluating the pathophysiology underlying Long COVID and the composition of specific VOC-patterns released by SARS-CoV-2 infected patients throughout the course of this complex disease.

Discrimination of SARS-CoV-2 Infections From Other Viral Respiratory Infections by Scent Detection Dogs.

Background: Testing of possibly infected individuals remains cornerstone of containing the spread of SARS-CoV-2. Detection dogs could contribute to mass screening. Previous research demonstrated canines' ability to detect SARS-CoV-2-infections but has not investigated if dogs can differentiate between COVID-19 and other virus infections. Methods: Twelve dogs were trained to detect SARS-CoV-2 positive samples. Three test scenarios were performed to evaluate their ability to discriminate SARS-CoV-2-infections from viral infections of a different aetiology. Naso- and oropharyngeal swab samples from individuals and samples from cell culture both infected with one of 15 viruses that may cause COVID-19-like symptoms were presented as distractors in a randomised, double-blind study. Dogs were either trained with SARS-CoV-2 positive saliva samples (test scenario I and II) or with supernatant from cell cultures (test scenario III). Results: When using swab samples from individuals infected with viruses other than SARS-CoV-2 as distractors (test scenario I), dogs detected swab samples from SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals with a mean diagnostic sensitivity of 73.8% (95% CI: 66.0-81.7%) and a specificity of 95.1% (95% CI: 92.6-97.7%). In test scenario II and III cell culture supernatant from cells infected with SARS-CoV-2, cells infected with other coronaviruses and non-infected cells were presented. Dogs achieved mean diagnostic sensitivities of 61.2% (95% CI: 50.7-71.6%, test scenario II) and 75.8% (95% CI: 53.0-98.5%, test scenario III), respectively. The diagnostic specificities were 90.9% (95% CI: 87.3-94.6%, test scenario II) and 90.2% (95% CI: 81.1-99.4%, test scenario III), respectively. Conclusion: In all three test scenarios the mean specificities were above 90% which indicates that dogs can distinguish SARS-CoV-2-infections from other viral infections. However, compared to earlier studies our scent dogs achieved lower diagnostic sensitivities. To deploy COVID-19 detection dogs as a reliable screening method it is therefore mandatory to include a variety of samples from different viral respiratory tract infections in dog training to ensure a successful discrimination process.

Canine olfactory detection and its relevance to medical detection.

The extraordinary olfactory sense of canines combined with the possibility to learn by operant conditioning enables dogs for their use in medical detection in a wide range of applications. Research on the ability of medical detection dogs for the identification of individuals with infectious or non-infectious diseases has been promising, but compared to the well-established and-accepted use of sniffer dogs by the police, army and customs for substances such as money, explosives or drugs, the deployment of medical detection dogs is still in its infancy. There are several factors to be considered for standardisation prior to deployment of canine scent detection dogs. Individual odours in disease consist of different volatile organic molecules that differ in magnitude, volatility and concentration. Olfaction can be influenced by various parameters like genetics, environmental conditions, age, hydration, nutrition, microbiome, conditioning, training, management factors, diseases and pharmaceuticals. This review discusses current knowledge on the function and importance of canines' olfaction and evaluates its limitations and the potential role of the dog as a biomedical detector for infectious and non-infectious diseases.

Scent dog identification of SARS-CoV-2 infections in different body fluids.

BACKGROUND: The main strategy to contain the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic remains to implement a comprehensive testing, tracing and quarantining strategy until vaccination of the population is adequate. Scent dogs could support current testing strategies. METHODS: Ten dogs were trained for 8 days to detect SARS-CoV-2 infections in beta-propiolactone inactivated saliva samples. The subsequent cognitive transfer performance for the recognition of non-inactivated samples were tested on three different body fluids (saliva, urine, and sweat) in a randomised, double-blind controlled study. RESULTS: Dogs were tested on a total of 5242 randomised sample presentations. Dogs detected non-inactivated saliva samples with a diagnostic sensitivity of 84% (95% CI: 62.5-94.44%) and specificity of 95% (95% CI: 93.4-96%). In a subsequent experiment to compare the scent recognition between the three non-inactivated body fluids, diagnostic sensitivity and specificity were 95% (95% CI: 66.67-100%) and 98% (95% CI: 94.87-100%) for urine, 91% (95% CI: 71.43-100%) and 94% (95% CI: 90.91-97.78%) for sweat, 82% (95% CI: 64.29-95.24%), and 96% (95% CI: 94.95-98.9%) for saliva respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The scent cognitive transfer performance between inactivated and non-inactivated samples as well as between different sample materials indicates that global, specific SARS-CoV-2-associated volatile compounds are released across different body secretions, independently from the patient's symptoms. All tested body fluids appear to be similarly suited for reliable detection of SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals.

Scent dog identification of samples from COVID-19 patients - a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to spread, early, ideally real-time, identification of SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals is pivotal in interrupting infection chains. Volatile organic compounds produced during respiratory infections can cause specific scent imprints, which can be detected by trained dogs with a high rate of precision. METHODS: Eight detection dogs were trained for 1 week to detect saliva or tracheobronchial secretions of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients in a randomised, double-blinded and controlled study. RESULTS: The dogs were able to discriminate between samples of infected (positive) and non-infected (negative) individuals with average diagnostic sensitivity of 82.63% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 82.02-83.24%) and specificity of 96.35% (95% CI: 96.31-96.39%). During the presentation of 1012 randomised samples, the dogs achieved an overall average detection rate of 94% (±3.4%) with 157 correct indications of positive, 792 correct rejections of negative, 33 incorrect indications of negative or incorrect rejections of 30 positive sample presentations. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary findings indicate that trained detection dogs can identify respiratory secretion samples from hospitalised and clinically diseased SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals by discriminating between samples from SARS-CoV-2 infected patients and negative controls. This data may form the basis for the reliable screening method of SARS-CoV-2 infected people.

[Assessment of a Bull Terrier bloodline regarding possible hypertrophic aggressive behaviour in situations of dog-dog-contact of the temperament test of Lower Saxony]. / Untersuchung einer Bullterrier-Zuchtlinie hinsichtlich einer möglichen Hypertrophie des Aggressionsverhaltens im Hund- Hund-Kontakt des Niedersächsischen Wesenstests.

The expertise on the interpretation of and 11 b TierSchG assumes that a hypertrophy of aggressive behaviour exists in some blood lines of Bull Terriers, American Staffordshire Terriers and Pitbull type dogs. This study was carried out to detect whether a hypertrophy of aggressive behaviour occurred in a certain Bull Terrier breed line. A total of 38 dogs representing this line were tested according to the guidelines of the Dangerous Animals Act of Lower Saxony, Germany (GefTVO) enacted on July 5th, 2000. Furthermore, the results of their behaviour towards other dogs during the test were compared to those of 347 dogs tested by Böttjer (2003) in order to investigate possible significant differences in the occurrence of inadequate or disturbed aggressive behaviour. The comparison was aimed at exposing a possible significant accumulation of intraspecific aggressive behaviour. In the situations of dog-dog-contact of the test, 25 threatening behaviour"was displayed by 9 dogs (23.68%). Four dogs (10.53%) responded with "non-stationary threatening behaviour". All Bull Terriers reacted appropriately in every situation. A significant difference when comparing the results of the Bull Terriers to those of the dogs examined by Böttjer (2003) was not found. In conclusion, there were no indications for inadequate or disturbed aggressive behaviour in this Bull Terrier breed line. Furthermore, the broad majority of dogs proved to possess excellent social skills as well as the ability to communicate competently and to solve conflicts appropriately.

[Assessment of a Bullterrier bloodline in the temperament test of Lower Saxony--comparison with six dog breeds affected by breed specific legislation and a control group of Golden Retrievers]. / Untersuchung einer Bullterrier-Zuchtlinie hinsichtlich ihres Verhaltens im Nds. Wesenstest--Vergleich mit sechs von der Gesetzgebung betroffenen Hunderassen und einer Kontrollgruppe von Golden Retrievern.

The expertise on the interpretation of section 11b TierSchG implies a hypertrophy of aggressive behaviour in some bloodlines of Bullterriers, American Staffordshire Terriers, and Pitbull type dogs. This study aimed at finding out whether a hypertrophy of aggressive behaviour occurred in a certain Bullterrier bloodline. Dogs of this line were tested according to the guidelines of the Dangerous Animals Act of Lower Saxony, Germany (GefTVO) enacted on July 5th 2000. The Bullterriers' test results towards humans and environment were compared to those of 415 dogs affected by the legislation (Mittmann, 2002) and those of 70 Golden Retrievers (Johann, 2004) in order to detect possible differences in the occurrence of inadequate or disturbed aggressive behaviour. Of 38 Bullterriers, ten showed no aggressive behaviour towards humans and the environment. 27 dogs displayed visual or acoustic threats at most. Only one dog reacted by "biting or attacking with preceding threatening behaviour". Thus, according to the test guidelines, 37 dogs (97.37%) reacted appropriately in all test situations. Only one dog (2.63%) displayed inadequate agressive behaviour. No indication for inadequate or disturbed aggressive behaviour in this Bullterrier bloodline was found. Furthermore, no significant differences were found when comparing Bullterriers and dogs of the two others studies concerning inadequate or disturbed aggressive towards humans and the environment. On the contrary, throughout the entire study the broad majority of dogs proved to possess excellent social skills as well as the ability to communicate competently and to solve conflicts appropriately.