ArticleBMC infectious diseases2013
Comparison among nasopharyngeal swab, nasal wash, and oropharyngeal swab for respiratory virus detection in adults with acute pharyngitis.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
26 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of detection rate of 16 sampling methods for respiratory viruses: a Bayesian network meta-analysis of clinical data and systematic review.BMJ global health · 2020Pooled it
- Practical Guidance for Clinical Microbiology Laboratories: Viruses Causing Acute Respiratory Tract Infections.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2019Guideline
- Community acquired respiratory virus infections in cancer patients-Guideline on diagnosis and management by the Infectious Diseases Working Party of the German Society for haematology and Medical Oncology.European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) · 2016Guideline
- Do Hospitalized Adult Patients with Acute Pharyngotonsillitis Need Empiric Antibiotics? The Impact on Antimicrobial Stewardship.Microorganisms · 2025Article
- Comparison of "hock-a-loogie" saliva versus nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs for detecting common respiratory pathogens.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Performance Analysis of Self-Collected Nasal and Oral Swabs for Detection of SARS-CoV-2.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Saliva as an alternative specimen to nasopharyngeal swabs for COVID-19 diagnosis: Review.Access microbiology · 2022Review
- Pathogenesis of COVID-19 and the quality control of nucleic acid detection.Biochemical and biophysical research communications · 2022Review
- Nasopharyngeal Swabs vs. Nasal Aspirates for Respiratory Virus Detection: A Systematic Review.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Evaluating Diagnostic Accuracy of Saliva Sampling Methods for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Reveals Differential Sensitivity and Association with Viral Load.The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD · 2021Article
- Role of the otolaryngologist in nasopharyngeal swab training: A case report and review of the literature.Otolaryngology case reports · 2021Article
- Efficacy of Unsupervised Self-Collected Mid-Turbinate FLOQSwabs for the Diagnosis of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).Viruses · 2021Article
- Improved Influenza Diagnostics through Thermal Contrast Amplification.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Concordance between PCR-based extraction-free saliva and nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 testing.HRB open research · 2021Article
- One-Year Update on Salivary Diagnostic of COVID-19.Frontiers in public health · 2021Review
- Value of swab types and collection time on SARS-COV-2 detection using RT-PCR assay.Journal of virological methods · 2020Article
- New COVID-19 saliva-based test: How good is it compared with the current nasopharyngeal or throat swab test?Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2020Review
- Clinical application of an intelligent oropharyngeal swab robot: implication for the COVID-19 pandemic.The European respiratory journal · 2020Article
- Suspension microarray-based comparison of oropharyngeal swab and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid for pathogen identification in young children hospitalized with respiratory tract infection.BMC infectious diseases · 2020Article
- Cellular DNA quantification in respiratory samples for the normalization of viral load: a real need?Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcute pharyngitis is frequently seen in primary care. Acute viral pharyngitis may be easily misdiagnosed as acute bacterial pharyngitis. Laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of respiratory viruses is recommended. The purpose of this study was to compare the sensitivities among oropharyngeal swab (OPS), nasopharyngeal swab (NPS), and nasal wash (NW) in adults with acute pharyngitis.
methodsOPS, NPS, and NW were obtained from each participant with acute pharyngitis. The specimens were tested for 15 respiratory viruses by TaqMan real-time polymerase chain reaction. A sample was considered to be a true positive if any of the specimens was positive. The sensitivities among samples were compared by chi-square test or Fisher's exact test, as appropriate.
resultsOne hundred three triple samples collected consecutively by OPS, NPS, and NW were obtained. In 73 patients, one or more viruses were detected by any of the three methods. Among all viruses, the sensitivity of NPS was significantly higher than that of NW (74% vs. 49%, respectively; p < 0.01) and OPS (74% vs. 49%, respectively; p < 0.01).
conclusionsFlocked NPS collection may be the most effective alternative to NW and OPS for detection of respiratory viruses in adults with acute pharyngitis using TaqMan real-time polymerase chain reaction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.