Self-swabbing versus assisted swabbing for viral detection by qRT-PCR: the experience from SARS-CoV-2 based on a meta-analysis of six prospectively designed evaluations conducted in a UK setting.

PURPOSE: In April 2020, the UK Government implemented NHS Test and Trace to provide SARS-CoV-2 quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) testing for the public, with nose-and-throat swabbing for samples performed by trained staff. Self-swabbing (SS) would allow rapid scale-up of testing capacity and access. Six studies were undertaken to determine whether SS was as effective for detecting SARS-CoV-2 as swabbing performed by trained staff. METHODS: Six prospective studies were conducted between April-October 2020, using six swab/media combinations. Differences between assisted swabbing (AS) and SS were evaluated for concordance, positivity, sensitivity, cycle threshold (Ct) values and void rates. Statistical analysis was performed using 95% confidence intervals (CIs), paired t-tests and model-based methods. RESULTS: Overall, 3,253 individuals were recruited (median age 37 years, 49% female), with 2,933 having valid paired qRT-PCR results. Pooled concordance rate was 98% (95% CI: 96%, 99%). Positivity rate differences for SS (8.1%) and AS (8.4%) and differences in pooled sensitivities between SS (86%; 95% CI: 78%, 92%) and AS (91%; 95% CI: 78%, 96%) were nonsignificant. Both types of swabbing led to pooled void rates below 2% and strongly correlated Ct values. Age, sex and previous swabbing experience did not have a significant impact on concordance or sensitivity. CONCLUSION: The UK adopted a policy to promote self-testing for SARS-CoV-2 based on data demonstrating equivalence of SS versus AS. Positive outcomes with SS are likely generalisable to testing for other respiratory pathogens, and we consider self-sampling and self-testing essential for future pandemic preparedness.

Internet Tool to Support Self-Assessment and Self-Swabbing of Sore Throat: Development and Feasibility Study.

BACKGROUND: Sore throat is a common problem and a common reason for the overuse of antibiotics. A web-based tool that helps people assess their sore throat, through the use of clinical prediction rules, taking throat swabs or saliva samples, and taking throat photographs, has the potential to improve self-management and help identify those who are the most and least likely to benefit from antibiotics. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to develop a web-based tool to help patients and parents or carers self-assess sore throat symptoms and take throat photographs, swabs, and saliva samples for diagnostic testing. We then explored the acceptability and feasibility of using the tool in adults and children with sore throats. METHODS: We used the Person-Based Approach to develop a web-based tool and then recruited adults and children with sore throats who participated in this study by attending general practices or through social media advertising. Participants self-assessed the presence of FeverPAIN and Centor score criteria and attempted to photograph their throat and take throat swabs and saliva tests. Study processes were observed via video call, and participants were interviewed about their views on using the web-based tool. Self-assessed throat inflammation and pus were compared to clinician evaluation of patients' throat photographs. RESULTS: A total of 45 participants (33 adults and 12 children) were recruited. Of these, 35 (78%) and 32 (71%) participants completed all scoring elements for FeverPAIN and Centor scores, respectively, and most (30/45, 67%) of them reported finding self-assessment relatively easy. No valid response was provided for swollen lymph nodes, throat inflammation, and pus on the throat by 11 (24%), 9 (20%), and 13 (29%) participants respectively. A total of 18 (40%) participants provided a throat photograph of adequate quality for clinical assessment. Patient assessment of inflammation had a sensitivity of 100% (3/3) and specificity of 47% (7/15) compared with the clinician-assessed photographs. For pus on the throat, the sensitivity was 100% (3/3) and the specificity was 71% (10/14). A total of 89% (40/45), 93% (42/45), 89% (40/45), and 80% (30/45) of participants provided analyzable bacterial swabs, viral swabs, saliva sponges, and saliva drool samples, respectively. Participants were generally happy and confident in providing samples, with saliva samples rated as slightly more acceptable than swab samples. CONCLUSIONS: Most adult and parent participants were able to use a web-based intervention to assess the clinical features of throat infections and generate scores using clinical prediction rules. However, some had difficulties assessing clinical signs, such as lymph nodes, throat pus, and inflammation, and scores were assessed as sensitive but not specific. Many participants had problems taking photographs of adequate quality, but most were able to take throat swabs and saliva samples.

Evaluation of self-swabbing coupled with a telephone health helpline as an adjunct tool for surveillance of influenza viruses in Ontario.

BACKGROUND: Calls to a telephone health helpline (THHL) have been previously evaluated for the ability to monitor specific syndromes, such as fever and influenza-like-illness or gastrointestinal illness. This method of surveillance has been shown to be highly correlated with traditional surveillance methods, and to have potential for early detection of community-based illness. Self-sampling, or having a person take his/her own nasal swab, has also proven successful as a useful method for obtaining a specimen, which may be used for respiratory virus detection. METHODS: This study describes a self-swabbing surveillance system mediated by a nurse-led THHL in Ontario whereby syndromic surveillance concepts are used to recruit and monitor participants with influenza-like illness. Once recruited, participants collect a nasal specimen obtained by self-swabbing and submit for testing and laboratory confirmation. Enumeration of weekly case counts was used to evaluate the timeliness of the self-swabbing surveillance system through comparison to other respiratory virus and influenza surveillance systems in Ontario. The operational efficiency of the system was also evaluated. RESULTS: The mean and median number of days between the day that a participant called the THHL, to the day a package was received at the laboratory for testing were approximately 10.4 and 8.6 days, respectively. The time between self-swab collection and package reception was 4.9 days on average, with a median of 4 days. The self-swabbing surveillance system adequately captured the 2014 influenza B season in a timely manner when compared to other Ontario-based sources of influenza surveillance data from the same year; however, the emergence of influenza B was not detected any earlier than with these other surveillance systems. Influenza A surveillance was also evaluated. Using the THHL self-swabbing system, a peak in the number of cases for influenza A was observed approximately one week after or during the same week as that reported by the other surveillance systems. CONCLUSION: This one-year pilot study suggests that the THHL self-swabbing surveillance system has significant potential as an adjunct tool for the surveillance of influenza viruses in Ontario. Recommendations for improving system efficacy are discussed.

Impact of Swabbing Location, Self-Swabbing, and Food Intake on SARS-CoV-2 RNA Detection.

This study compared SARS-CoV-2 RNA loads at different anatomical sites, and the impact of self-swabbing and food intake. Adult symptomatic patients with SARS-CoV-2 or non-SARS-CoV-2 respiratory tract infection were included between 2021 and 2022. Patients performed a nasal and buccal swab before a professionally collected nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swab (NOPS). Buccal swabs were collected fasting and after breakfast in a subgroup of patients. SARS-CoV-2 RNA loads were determined by nucleic acid testing. Swabbing convenience was evaluated using a survey. The median age of 199 patients was 54 years (interquartile range 38-68); 42% were female and 52% tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. The majority of patients (70%) were hospitalized. The mean SARS-CoV-2 RNA load was 6.6 log10 copies/mL (standard deviation (SD), ±1.5), 5.6 log10 copies/mL (SD ± 1.9), and 3.4 log10 copies/mL (SD ± 1.9) in the professionally collected NOPS, and self-collected nasal and buccal swabs, respectively (p < 0.0001). Sensitivity was 96.1% (95% CI 90.4-98.9) and 75.3% (95% CI 63.9-81.8) for the nasal and buccal swabs, respectively. After food intake, SARS-CoV-2 RNA load decreased (p = 0.0006). Buccal swabbing was the preferred sampling procedure for the patients. In conclusion, NOPS yielded the highest SARS-CoV-2 RNA loads. Nasal self-swabbing emerged as a reliable alternative in contrast to buccal swabs. If buccal swabs are used, they should be performed before food intake.

"Doing it on my own terms": Transgender and nonbinary adults' experiences with HPV self-swabbing home testing kits.

The human papillomavirus (HPV) carries a significant health risk for people with a cervix. Among transgender and nonbinary people, however, testing and treatment for HPV can pose difficulties, and even be traumatic at times. This current study is part of a larger mixed methods study conducted in Michigan in 2020, and it explores the experiences of transmasculine and nonbinary people with at-home self-swabbing HPV test kits and knowledge of HPV transmission/screenings. Phenomenological methods were used by conducting virtual qualitative interviews with ten transmasculine and nonbinary individuals with cervixes, ages 23-59. Interviews were independently coded by members of the research team and a tabletop theming method was used. Four themes were generated from the data: 1) Multilevel barriers; 2) "Get it done, so I know that I am safe"; 3) Contrasting preferences for care; and 4) Community calls for change. The discussion focuses on the implications of these findings for improving sexual health care for the transgender and nonbinary community, along with directions for further research.

Self-collected compared with professional-collected swabbing in the diagnosis of influenza in symptomatic individuals: A meta-analysis and assessment of validity.

Self-collected nasal swabs offer a cheaper alternative to professional-collected swabs for influenza testing. However, the diagnostic accuracy of self-collection has not been quantitatively reviewed. We identified 14 studies that compared diagnostic accuracy of self-collected to professional-collected swabs in influenza symptomatic individuals. Self-collected swabs were found to be highly acceptable, simple and comfortable to use. Data from nine studies were meta-analyzed. Pooled sensitivity was 87% (95% CI: 80%, 92%) and specificity was 99% (95% CI: 98%, 100%), compared to professional-collected swabs in the diagnosis of influenza. Pooled sensitivity and specificity estimates were used to assess the potential bias that would be introduced in studies had self-collected rather than professional-collected samples been used. While self-collected swabbing should not replace the role of clinical testing, our findings support the use of self-collected swabs for influenza research and surveillance. This method will be an important tool for evaluating novel influenza vaccines and vaccination strategies.

Feasibility study for the use of self-collected nasal swabs to identify pathogens among participants of a population-based surveillance system for acute respiratory infections (GrippeWeb-Plus)-Germany, 2016.

BACKGROUND: Internet-based participatory surveillance systems, such as the German GrippeWeb, monitor the frequency of acute respiratory illnesses on population level. In order to interpret syndromic information better, we devised a microbiological feasibility study (GrippeWeb-Plus) to test whether self-collection of anterior nasal swabs is operationally possible, acceptable for participants and can yield valid data. METHODS: We recruited 103 GrippeWeb participants (73 adults and 30 children) and provided them with a kit, instructions and a questionnaire for each sample. In the first half of 2016, participants took an anterior nasal swab and sent it to the Robert Koch Institute whenever an acute respiratory illness occurred. Reporting of illnesses through the GrippeWeb platform continued as usual. We analysed swabs for the presence of human c-myc-DNA and 22 viral and bacterial pathogens. After the study, we sent participants an evaluation questionnaire. We analysed timeliness, completeness, acceptability and validity. RESULTS: One hundred and two participants submitted 225 analysable swabs. Ninety per cent of swabs were taken within 3 days of symptom onset. Eighty-nine per cent of swabs had a corresponding reported illness in the GrippeWeb system. Ninety-nine per cent of adults and 96% of children would be willing to participate in a self-swabbing scheme for a longer period. All swabs contained c-myc-DNA. In 119 swabs, we identified any of 14 viruses but no bacteria. The positivity rate of influenza was similar to that in the German physician sentinel. CONCLUSION: Self-collection of anterior nasal swabs proofed to be feasible, was well accepted by participants, gave valid results and was an informative adjunct to syndromic data.

Rectal swab screening assays of public health importance in molecular diagnostics: Sample adequacy control.

Rectal swabs are routinely used by public health authorities to screen for multi-drug resistant enteric bacteria including vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) and carbapenem-resistant enterobacteriaceae (CRE). Screening sensitivity can be influenced by the quality of the swabbing, whether performed by the patient (self-swabbing) or a healthcare practitioner. One common exclusion criterion for rectal swabs is absence of "visible soiling" from fecal matter. In our institution, this criterion excludes almost 10% of rectal swabs received in the microbiology laboratory. Furthermore, over 30% of patients in whom rectal swabs are cancelled will not be re-screened within the next 48h, resulting in delays in removing infection prevention measures. We describe two quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR)-based assays, human RNAse P and eubacterial 16S rDNA, which might serve as suitable controls for sampling adequacy. However, lower amounts of amplifiable human DNA make the 16s rDNA assay a better candidate for sample adequacy control.

Serial home-based self-collection of anterior nasal swabs to detect Staphylococcus aureus carriage in a randomized population-based study in Germany.

OBJECTIVES: Participant-collected serial nasal swabs would be a cost-efficient feature of prospective population-based microbiological studies. We examined the feasibility of serial anterior nasal self-swabbing for Staphylococcus aureus detection in a prospective population-based study in Braunschweig, Germany, and assessed the impact of three interventions on participation and compliance. METHODS: Two thousand twenty-six inhabitants were selected randomly from the resident registries and asked to self-collect a nasal swab monthly from July 2012 to January 2013 and return it by mail. The swabs were tested for the presence of S. aureus. Participation and compliance were assessed in four study groups (incremental cash incentive, participation in a lottery, reminder by mail, and control group without incentive or reminder). RESULTS: Baseline participation was highest in the cash incentive group (24%; 123/504) and lowest in the reminder group (16%; 83/509). Approximately 90% of the participants in all groups returned the swabs each month, demonstrating high compliance irrespective of the intervention. Laboratory analyses showed that most swabs were usable for bacteriological studies. S. aureus was detected at the expected frequency of 20-27%. CONCLUSIONS: Home-based serial nasal self-swabbing proved to be feasible and highly acceptable and promises to be a cost-efficient tool for large-scale prospective population-based studies on bacterial infection or colonization.