Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.1016/j.tmaid.2021.102144 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1016/j.tmaid.2021.102144 34302954!8294709!34302954     free     free     free Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534       Travel+Med+Infect+Dis 2021 ; 43 (ä): 102144 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=34302954|t=2021. Diagnostic accuracy of fresh drooled saliva for SARS-CoV-2 in travelers |pdf=|usr=}}{{34302954}} gab.com Text Diagnostic accuracy of fresh drooled saliva for SARS-CoV-2 in travelers JO: Travel Med Infect Dis http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=34302954 #FOAvip BACKGROUND: The standard for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis is RT-PCR from nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs. Major airports require COVID-19 screening, and saliva has the potential as a substitute specimen for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. We investigated the utility of fresh drooled saliva against NPS for COVID-19 screening of travelers. METHODS: We recruited 81 travelers and 15 non-travelers (including ten controls) prospectively within a mean of 3.22 days of RT-PCR confirmed COVID-19. Each study participant provided 2 mls of early morning fresh drooled whole saliva separately into a sterile plastic container and GeneFiX saliva collection kit. The saliva specimens were processed within 4 h and tested for SARS-CoV-2 genes (E, RdRP, and N2) and the results compared to paired NPS RT-PCR for diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: Majority of travellers were asymptomatic (75.0%) with a mean age of 34.26 years. 77 travelers were RT-PCR positive at the time of hospitalization whilst three travelers had positive contacts. In this group, the detection rate for SARS-CoV-2 with NPS, whole saliva, and GeneFiX were comparable (89.3%, 50/56; 87.8%, 43/49; 89.6%, 43/48). Both saliva collection methods were in good agreement (Kappa = 0.69). There was no statistical difference between the detection rates of saliva and NPS (p > 0.05). Detection was highest for the N2 gene whilst the E gene provided the highest viral load (mean = 27.96 to 30.10, SD = 3.14 to 3.85). Saliva specimens have high sensitivity (80.4%) and specificity (90.0%) with a high positive predictive value of 91.8% for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Saliva for SARS-CoV-2 screening is a simple accurate technique comparable with NPS RT-PCR. Twit Text FOAVip Diagnostic accuracy of fresh drooled saliva for SARS-CoV-2 in travelers ????Travel Med Infect Dis http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=34302954 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=34302954 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|34302954}}</ref> Diagnostic accuracy of fresh drooled saliva for SARS-CoV-2 in travelers #MMPMID34302954 Mohd Thabit AA; Peariasamy KM; Kuan PX; Fern Ying DK; Nheu N; Cyncynatus C; Mu'iz Arifin MA; Shamsuddin AN; Yamin MA; Mohd Padzil MA; Rajasekaram G; Giddy M; Sivaneson S; Lakhbeer Singh HK; Azman A; Hassan AH; Chidambaram SK Travel Med Infect Dis 2021[Sep]; 43 (ä): 102144 PMID34302954show ga BACKGROUND: The standard for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis is RT-PCR from nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs. Major airports require COVID-19 screening, and saliva has the potential as a substitute specimen for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. We investigated the utility of fresh drooled saliva against NPS for COVID-19 screening of travelers. METHODS: We recruited 81 travelers and 15 non-travelers (including ten controls) prospectively within a mean of 3.22 days of RT-PCR confirmed COVID-19. Each study participant provided 2 mls of early morning fresh drooled whole saliva separately into a sterile plastic container and GeneFiX saliva collection kit. The saliva specimens were processed within 4 h and tested for SARS-CoV-2 genes (E, RdRP, and N2) and the results compared to paired NPS RT-PCR for diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: Majority of travellers were asymptomatic (75.0%) with a mean age of 34.26 years. 77 travelers were RT-PCR positive at the time of hospitalization whilst three travelers had positive contacts. In this group, the detection rate for SARS-CoV-2 with NPS, whole saliva, and GeneFiX were comparable (89.3%, 50/56; 87.8%, 43/49; 89.6%, 43/48). Both saliva collection methods were in good agreement (Kappa = 0.69). There was no statistical difference between the detection rates of saliva and NPS (p > 0.05). Detection was highest for the N2 gene whilst the E gene provided the highest viral load (mean = 27.96 to 30.10, SD = 3.14 to 3.85). Saliva specimens have high sensitivity (80.4%) and specificity (90.0%) with a high positive predictive value of 91.8% for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Saliva for SARS-CoV-2 screening is a simple accurate technique comparable with NPS RT-PCR. |*COVID-19[MESH] |*SARS-CoV-2[MESH] |Adult[MESH] |COVID-19 Testing[MESH] |Humans[MESH] |Nasopharynx[MESH] |Saliva[MESH]Diagnostic accuracy of fresh drooled saliva for SARS-CoV-2 in traveler(epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing