Article

Comparing nose-throat swabs and nasopharyngeal aspirates collected from children with symptoms for respiratory virus identification using real-time polymerase chain reaction

MBBS, Queensland Paediatric Infectious Diseases Laboratory, Royal Children's Hospital, Herston Queensland 4029, Australia.
PEDIATRICS (Impact Factor: 5.3). 10/2008; 122(3):e615-20. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2008-0691
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The objective of this study was to calculate sensitivity values for the detection of major respiratory viruses of childhood by using combined nose-throat swabs and nasopharyngeal aspirates.
Children who had symptoms and presented to a pediatric teaching hospital and had a diagnostic respiratory specimen collected were enrolled, and paired nose-throat swab and nasopharyngeal aspirate specimens were collected. Parents were asked to collect the nose-throat swab specimen in the first instance but could defer to a health care worker if unwilling. Nose-throat swab collectors were asked to rate perceived quality of collection. All nasopharyngeal aspirates were collected by a health care worker by using a standard protocol. Real-time polymerase chain reaction for 8 respiratory viruses was performed in our hospital's diagnostic laboratory.
Paired nose-throat swab/nasopharyngeal aspirate specimens were collected during 303 illnesses, with at least 1 respiratory virus identified in 186 (61%). For the major pathogens of childhood, influenza A virus and respiratory syncytial virus, collection by using the nose-throat swab had a sensitivity of 91.9% and 93.1%, respectively. A health care worker collected 219 (72%) of the nose-throat swab specimens; concordance with the nasopharyngeal aspirate was not related to health care worker collection or perceived quality of collection.
Nose-throat swab specimens, in combination with sensitive molecular testing, are a less invasive diagnostic respiratory specimen with adequate sensitivity for use in the clinic and hospital outpatient settings and large-scale community studies through parent collection. For children who present to a hospital in which an avian or pandemic strain of influenza virus is reasonably part of the differential diagnosis, nasopharyngeal aspirates or a similar collection technique (eg, nasal washes) should continue to be used.

Full-text

Available from: Theodorus P. Sloots, Aug 14, 2014
1 Bookmark
 · 
253 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background The management of children with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is largely influenced by the development of new molecular diagnostic tests that allow the simultaneous detection of a wide range of pathogens. Objectives Evaluation of a diagnostic approach including multiplex PCR assays for revisiting the epidemiology and aetiology of CAP in children at hospital. Study design Children of all ages consulting at the Emergency Department of the University hospital of Saint-Etienne, France, during the 2012-2013 winter period were included. In addition to bacterial cultures, the following pathogens were detected using biplex commercially-available rt-PCR tests: adenovirus, respiratory syncytial virus, human metapneumovirus, bocavirus, rhinovirus/enterovirus, coronavirus, influenza viruses A and B, parainfluenza viruses, Mycoplasma pneumoniae and Chlamydophila pneumonia. Results From 85 patients with CAP, at least one pathogen was identified in 81 cases (95.3%), including 4 bacterial exclusive infections (4.7%), 53 viral exclusive infections (62.4%) and 24 mixed infections (28.2%). Coinfection by at least two viruses was observed in 37 cases (43.5%). Mean age was higher in the case of documented bacterial infection (P < 0.05). In the subgroup of viral exclusive infection, the mean age of severe cases was 2.0 years vs 3.8 years in mild and moderate cases (P < 0.05). Conclusions These findings highlight the huge proportion of CAP of viral origin, the high number of co-infection by multiple viruses and the low number of bacterial CAP, notably in children under 5 years, and address the need to re-evaluate the indications of empiric antimicrobial treatment in this age group.
    Journal of Clinical Virology 08/2014; 60(4). DOI:10.1016/j.jcv.2014.05.006 · 3.47 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Journal of Infection 09/2014; 70(2). DOI:10.1016/j.jinf.2014.08.011 · 4.02 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: The test-negative design is a variant of the case–control study being increasingly used to study influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE). In these studies, patients with influenza-like illness are tested for influenza. Vaccine coverage is compared between those testing positive versus those testing negative to estimate VE. Objectives: We reviewed features in the design, analysis and reporting of 85 published test-negative studies. Data sources: Studies were identified from PubMed, reference lists and email updates. Study eligibility: All studies using the test-negative design reporting end-of-season estimates were included. Study appraisal: Design features that may affect the validity and comparability of reported estimates were reviewed, including setting, study period, source population, case definition, exposure and outcome ascertainment and statistical model. Results: There was considerable variation in the analytic approach, with 68 unique statistical models identified among the studies. Conclusion: Harmonization of analytic approaches may improve the potential for pooling VE estimates.
    Expert Review of Vaccines 10/2014; 13(12). DOI:10.1586/14760584.2014.966695 · 4.22 Impact Factor