Displaying all 2 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Zahedi FD, Husain S, Wan Hamizan AK, Tuang GJ, Gendeh HS, Oui TJ, et al.
    J Laryngol Otol, 2023 Feb;137(2):174-177.
    PMID: 35469585 DOI: 10.1017/S0022215121004709
    BACKGROUND: Olfactory impairment may be present among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 self-perceived as asymptomatic. This study aimed to assess olfactory function among these individuals.

    METHODS: A cross-sectional study involving patients with coronavirus disease 2019 self-perceived as asymptomatic was conducted. Assessments included the subjective Malaysian Smell and Taste Questionnaire and the culturally adapted Malaysian version of the objective Sniffin' Sticks Identification smell test.

    RESULTS: In 81 participants (mean age of 31.59 ± 12.04 years), with mean time from diagnosis to smell test of 7.47 ± 3.79 days, subjective assessment showed that 80.2 per cent were asymptomatic (questionnaire score of 6) and 19 per cent had mild symptoms (questionnaire score of 7 and 8). The mean objective smell test score was 10.89 ± 2.11. The prevalence of olfactory impairment was 76.6 per cent among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 self-perceived as asymptomatic. There was no association between the questionnaire and the smell test scores (p = 0.25). There was a correlation between the smell test score and the duration from diagnosis to smell test (p = 0.04).

    CONCLUSION: The objective assessment demonstrated that coronavirus disease 2019 patients who perceived themselves as asymptomatic showed olfactory impairment.

  2. Rao M, Rashid FA, Sabri FSAH, Jamil NN, Zain R, Hashim R, et al.
    Clin Infect Dis, 2021 05 04;72(9):e352-e356.
    PMID: 32761244 DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciaa1156
    BACKGROUND: The ideal severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARs-CoV-2) testing method would be accurate and also be patient-performed to reduce exposure to healthcare workers. The aim of this study was to compare patient-performed testing based on a morning saliva sample with the current standard testing method, healthcare worker-collected sampling via a nasopharyngeal swab (NPS).

    METHODS: This was a prospective single center study which recruited 217 asymptomatic adult male participants in a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) quarantine center who had tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 8-10 days prior to isolation. Paired NPS and saliva specimens were collected and processed within 5 hours of sample collection. Real time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) targeting Envelope (E) and RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) genes was performed and the results were compared.

    RESULTS: Overall, 160 of the 217 (74%) participants tested positive for COVID-19 based on saliva, NPS, or both testing methods. The detection rate for SARS-CoV-2 was higher in saliva compared to NPS testing (93.1%, 149/160 vs 52.5%, 84/160, P < .001). The concordance between the 2 tests was 45.6% (virus was detected in both saliva and NPS in 73/160), whereas 47.5% were discordant (87/160 tested positive for 1 whereas negative for the other). The cycle threshold (Ct) values for E and RdRp genes were significantly lower in saliva specimens compared to NP swab specimens.

    CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that saliva is a better alternative specimen for detection of SARS-CoV-2. Taking into consideration, the simplicity of specimen collection, shortage of PPE and the transmissibility of the virus, saliva could enable self-collection for an accurate SARS-CoV-2 surveillance testing.

Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links