Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41180294›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE2025

Efficacy of swish and gargle and other collection methods with the use of Abbott ID NOW in COVID-19 detection.

Amin Motamed Ektesabi, Greg J German, Le Luu, Claudia Dos Santos, Larissa M Matukas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Amin Motamed EktesabiInstitute of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0089-6826
Greg J GermanKeenan Research Centre for Biomedical Science, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9983-7593
Le LuuUnity Health Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Claudia Dos SantosInstitute of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Larissa M MatukasUnity Health Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7944-1348

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: To evaluate the efficacy of the Abbott ID NOW system in detecting COVID-19 using different specimen collection methods, emphasizing diagnostic accuracy and patient comfort. Methods: Three cohorts were analyzed, including two using the nasopharyngeal (NP) swab technique and one utilizing the swish-and-gargle (SG) method. Positive percent agreement (PPA), negative percent agreement (NPA), and cycle threshold (Ct) values were assessed to determine the system's performance. Results: The PPA for the NP swab cohorts averaged around 70%, while the SG cohort exhibited a higher PPA of 80%. All cohorts maintained high NPAs, close to 100%. The SG method significantly reduced false negatives, especially at lower Ct values, indicative of elevated levels of viral RNA. Additionally, the NP swab method, often uncomfortable, posed challenges in repeated testing scenarios, particularly among healthcare workers. Conclusion: While the Abbott ID NOW system demonstrates reliable COVID-19 detection, the SG method emerges as a superior collection technique to NP swabs, offering enhanced diagnostic accuracy and improved comfort for test takers. This study underscores the importance of selecting appropriate collection methods to ensure accurate and efficient COVID-19 testing.

Identifiers

PMID41180294
PMCPMC12571679

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.