Abstract
Implementing public health diagnostic modalities that are simultaneously accurate and acceptable is integral to effective pandemic response. In this regard, saliva has proven to be a reliable alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) for the detection of SARS-COV-2 infections. In particular, the SalivaDirect protocol utilises untreated saliva as its sample type, and removes the need for RNA extraction, thereby decreasing the time and cost of diagnosis by RT-PCR. IN the current study we piloted SalivaDirect in the context of The Bahamas archipelago, where it demonstrated acceptable performance, with 95.2% concordance with NPS. However, there was discordance in 3 of the 8 total SARS-COV-2 positive samples,all of which were above Ct 30 and therefore presumably of low infectivity. Furthermore, a significant majority of survey respondents chose saliva as their preferred sample type and this was associated with citing ‘discomfort’ of NPS sampling as the reason for their choice. These results support the practical use of SalivaDirect in the Bahamas as a mass testing tool.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was approved by The Bahamas Ministry of Health National Medical Ethics Committee.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Paper in collection COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos