ArticleBiomedical engineering2021
Comparison of the Physical Properties and Effectiveness of Medical Swabs for Sampling Biomaterials.
Article in Biomedical engineering, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validation of polyester nasal swabs for post-mortem SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis in Karachi, Pakistan: a prospective surveillance analysis.Journal of global health · 2025Observational
- Original article: novelty of Canadian manufacture nasopharyngeal swabs for collection of samples being tested for SARS-CoV-2 in a pandemic setting.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Scanning Electron Microscopy and EDX Spectroscopy of Commercial Swabs Used for COVID-19 Lateral Flow Testing.Toxics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has induced a sharp rise in demand for consumables for laboratory diagnosis and, in particular, for swabs for sampling biomaterials. Test quality depends strongly on swab quality. The aim of this work was to run experimental studies to evaluate the physical and operational properties of fiber-type medical swabs. This study compared swabs from leading manufacturers traditionally regarded as the quality standard on the Russian market in the premium sector: Copan Diagnostics (Italy), Puritan Medical Products (PMP) (USA), and PharmMedPolis (PhMP) (Russia). The following properties were studied: absorption, zeta potential, and surface morphology (by scanning electron microscopy). The techniques for biomaterial collection and release were also considered. Experiments using Streptomyces pneumoniae cultures as an example showed that the Copan Diagnostics swab had a recovery rate (RR) of 78.3%, compared with 84.15% for the Puritan Medical Products swab, 87.49% for the PhMP swab, and 93.72% for the HydraFlock® swab. The HydraFlock® swab was found to be especially effective due to its high ability to absorb water and protein and its high bacterial recovery rate. The second best results were for the PharmMedPolis® swab, followed by the Copan swab and the nylon swab from Puritan Medical Products.
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.