PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
June 30, 2011PLoS ONE180 citationsOpen Access

Comparison of Nasopharyngeal and Oropharyngeal Swabs for the Diagnosis of Eight Respiratory Viruses by Real-Time Reverse Transcription-PCR Assays

CKCuri KimJAJamal AhmedRERachel B. Eidex

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Many acute respiratory illness surveillance systems collect and test nasopharyngeal (NP) and/or oropharyngeal (OP) swab specimens, yet there are few studies assessing the relative measures of performance for NP versus OP specimens. METHODS: We collected paired NP and OP swabs separately from pediatric and adult patients with influenza-like illness or severe acute respiratory illness at two respiratory surveillance sites in Kenya. The specimens were tested for eight respiratory viruses by real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR). Positivity for a specific virus was defined as detection of viral nucleic acid in either swab. RESULTS: Of 2,331 paired NP/OP specimens, 1,402 (60.1%) were positive for at least one virus, and 393 (16.9%) were positive for more than one virus. Overall, OP swabs were significantly more sensitive than NP swabs for adenovirus (72.4% vs. 57.6%, p<0.01) and 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) virus (91.2% vs. 70.4%, p<0.01). NP specimens were more sensitive for influenza B virus (83.3% vs. 61.5%, p = 0.02), parainfluenza virus 2 (85.7%, vs. 39.3%, p<0.01), and parainfluenza virus 3 (83.9% vs. 67.4%, p<0.01). The two methods did not differ significantly for human metapneumovirus, influenza A (H3N2) virus, parainfluenza virus 1, or respiratory syncytial virus. CONCLUSIONS: The sensitivities were variable among the eight viruses tested; neither specimen was consistently more effective than the other. For respiratory disease surveillance programs using qRT-PCR that aim to maximize sensitivity for a large number of viruses, collecting combined NP and OP specimens would be the most effective approach.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Kim et al. (2011) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a212db83789f3ac65342e1ehttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021610
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Comparing Nose-Throat Swabs and Nasopharyngeal Aspirates Collected From Children With Symptoms for Respiratory Virus Identification Using Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction2008 · 166 citations
  2. 2Principles and Practice of Clinical Virology1999 · 460 citations
  3. 3Linking the integrated management of childhood illness (IMCI) and health information system (HIS) classifications: issues and options.1999 · 88 citations
  4. 4Viral Etiology of Acute Respiratory Tract Infections in Children Presenting to Hospital2004 · 161 citations
  5. 5Comparison of nasopharyngeal flocked swabs and aspirates for rapid diagnosis of respiratory viruses in children2008 · 155 citations