从使用过的外科口罩中检测 SARS-COV-2 的效果与标准检测方法的比较

IF 3.5 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Uraporn Phumisantiphong , Anan Manomaipiboon , Yuttana Apichatbutr , Kittisak Pholtawornkulchai , Chunlanee Sangketchon , Busaba Supawattanabodee , Thananda Trakarnvanich
{"title":"从使用过的外科口罩中检测 SARS-COV-2 的效果与标准检测方法的比较","authors":"Uraporn Phumisantiphong ,&nbsp;Anan Manomaipiboon ,&nbsp;Yuttana Apichatbutr ,&nbsp;Kittisak Pholtawornkulchai ,&nbsp;Chunlanee Sangketchon ,&nbsp;Busaba Supawattanabodee ,&nbsp;Thananda Trakarnvanich","doi":"10.1016/j.bsheal.2023.12.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test is the gold standard for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection. Proper specimen collection and obtaining a sufficient specimen are the most essential steps for laboratory diagnosis. The nasopharyngeal (NP) swab is recommended as the reference collection method. However, NP swab collection is invasive and uncomfortable for patients and poses some risk to healthcare workers. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection from surgical masks with the NP swab method using RT-PCR testing. Of 269 patients, RT-PCR RNA from NP swabs was detected among 82 patients (30.5%) and was undetected among 187 patients (69.5%). All patients were tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA from surgical masks. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in 25/82 (30.5%) surgical mask filters, while undetected among 57 (69.5%). For the surgical mask with an average use time of 7.05 h, the sensitivity was 30.5%, the specificity was 100.0%, with positive predictive value of 100.0% and negative predictive value of 76.2%. Therefore, surgical masks could be an alternative non-invasive specimen source for SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing. The results of our study suggest that the test could be employed after wearing surgical masks for at least 8-12 h, with increased sensitivity when used for more than 12 h.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36178,"journal":{"name":"Biosafety and Health","volume":"6 1","pages":"Pages 35-39"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590053623001544/pdfft?md5=4f3ea2cfc201bb2d805f6d26766e1f60&pid=1-s2.0-S2590053623001544-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 detection from used surgical masks compared with standard detection method\",\"authors\":\"Uraporn Phumisantiphong ,&nbsp;Anan Manomaipiboon ,&nbsp;Yuttana Apichatbutr ,&nbsp;Kittisak Pholtawornkulchai ,&nbsp;Chunlanee Sangketchon ,&nbsp;Busaba Supawattanabodee ,&nbsp;Thananda Trakarnvanich\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.bsheal.2023.12.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test is the gold standard for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection. Proper specimen collection and obtaining a sufficient specimen are the most essential steps for laboratory diagnosis. The nasopharyngeal (NP) swab is recommended as the reference collection method. However, NP swab collection is invasive and uncomfortable for patients and poses some risk to healthcare workers. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection from surgical masks with the NP swab method using RT-PCR testing. Of 269 patients, RT-PCR RNA from NP swabs was detected among 82 patients (30.5%) and was undetected among 187 patients (69.5%). All patients were tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA from surgical masks. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in 25/82 (30.5%) surgical mask filters, while undetected among 57 (69.5%). For the surgical mask with an average use time of 7.05 h, the sensitivity was 30.5%, the specificity was 100.0%, with positive predictive value of 100.0% and negative predictive value of 76.2%. Therefore, surgical masks could be an alternative non-invasive specimen source for SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing. The results of our study suggest that the test could be employed after wearing surgical masks for at least 8-12 h, with increased sensitivity when used for more than 12 h.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36178,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biosafety and Health\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"Pages 35-39\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590053623001544/pdfft?md5=4f3ea2cfc201bb2d805f6d26766e1f60&pid=1-s2.0-S2590053623001544-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biosafety and Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590053623001544\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biosafety and Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590053623001544","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

实时反转录聚合酶链反应(RT-PCR)检验是检测严重急性呼吸系统综合征冠状病毒 2(SARS-CoV-2)的黄金标准。正确采集标本和获得足够的标本是实验室诊断的最基本步骤。推荐使用鼻咽(NP)拭子作为参考采集方法。然而,鼻咽拭子采集是一种侵入性方法,患者会感到不舒服,而且对医护人员也有一定风险。本研究旨在比较使用 RT-PCR 测试法从外科口罩和 NP 拭子中检测 SARS-CoV-2 RNA 的效果。在 269 名患者中,82 名患者(30.5%)从 NP 拭子中检测到 RT-PCR RNA,187 名患者(69.5%)未检测到。对所有患者的手术口罩进行了 SARS-CoV-2 RNA 检测。在每 82 个手术口罩过滤器中,有 25 个(30.5%)检测到 SARS-CoV-2 RNA,有 57 个(69.5%)未检测到 SARS-CoV-2 RNA。平均使用时间为 7.05 小时的手术口罩的灵敏度为 30.5%,特异性为 100.0%,阳性预测值为 100.0%,阴性预测值为 76.2%。因此,外科口罩可以作为 SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR 检测的另一种无创样本来源。我们的研究结果表明,佩戴外科口罩至少 8-12 小时后即可进行检测,超过 12 小时后检测灵敏度会提高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 detection from used surgical masks compared with standard detection method

The real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test is the gold standard for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection. Proper specimen collection and obtaining a sufficient specimen are the most essential steps for laboratory diagnosis. The nasopharyngeal (NP) swab is recommended as the reference collection method. However, NP swab collection is invasive and uncomfortable for patients and poses some risk to healthcare workers. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection from surgical masks with the NP swab method using RT-PCR testing. Of 269 patients, RT-PCR RNA from NP swabs was detected among 82 patients (30.5%) and was undetected among 187 patients (69.5%). All patients were tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA from surgical masks. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in 25/82 (30.5%) surgical mask filters, while undetected among 57 (69.5%). For the surgical mask with an average use time of 7.05 h, the sensitivity was 30.5%, the specificity was 100.0%, with positive predictive value of 100.0% and negative predictive value of 76.2%. Therefore, surgical masks could be an alternative non-invasive specimen source for SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing. The results of our study suggest that the test could be employed after wearing surgical masks for at least 8-12 h, with increased sensitivity when used for more than 12 h.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Biosafety and Health
Biosafety and Health Medicine-Infectious Diseases
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
116
审稿时长
66 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信