Validation of self-swab for virologic confirmation of influenza virus infections in a community setting.
ABSTRACT Few studies have investigated the validity of self-collected nose and throat swabs for influenza confirmation in community settings. We followed outpatients with confirmed influenza with sequential measurement of viral loads and applied log-linear regression models to the viral shedding patterns. Among 176 outpatients with confirmed influenza, the detection of virus and quantitative viral loads obtained from self-swabs was consistent with statistical predictions based on earlier and later measurements, suggesting that self-collected nose and throat swabs can be a valid alternative for virologic confirmation of influenza A or B infection in a community setting.
Article: Comparison of nasopharyngeal flocked swabs and aspirates for rapid diagnosis of respiratory viruses in children.[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The quality of clinical specimens is a crucial determinant for virological diagnosis. We compared the viral diagnostic yield for influenza A and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) from the recently developed nasopharyngeal flocked swabs (NPFS) with nasopharyngeal aspirates (NPA) collected in parallel from 196 hospitalized children with acute respiratory infection during the peak period of influenza A and RSV activity in Hong Kong. Specimens were tested by RT-PCR for influenza A and RSV and viral load determined. They were also tested by direct immunofluorescence (DIF) for influenza A and B, RSV, parainfluenza types 1-3 and adenovirus. Both NPA and NPFS had excellent sensitivity (100%) for detecting influenza A by RT-PCR but NPA was slightly more sensitive than NPFS for detecting RSV by both RT-PCR (100% vs. 92.3%) and DIF (87.2% vs. 84.6%) and for detecting influenza A by DIF (90.2% vs. 82.9%). Viral load for influenza A in NPA and NPFS was not significantly different but that for RSV was higher in NPA. NPA remains the optimal specimen for diagnosis of respiratory infections by RT-PCR and DIF. However, collection of NPFS is easier to perform in an out-patient setting, was more acceptable to parents and less likely to generate aerosols than NPA engendering potentially less infection control hazard.Journal of Clinical Virology 06/2008; 42(1):65-9. · 3.97 Impact Factor