Abstract
The tests currently used for the direct identification of SARS-CoV-2 include specimens taken from upper and lower respiratory tract; recommendations from Word Health Organization prioritise nasopharyngeal swab (NS). In literature there are not available paediatric studies about the identification of SARS-CoV-2 through nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA), but the use of NPA is deemed to be better than NS to identify respiratory viruses in children. The aim of our study is to evaluate diagnostic performances of NS compared to NPA for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in children. We collected 300 paired samples (NS and NPA) from children hospitalized and followed up in our paediatric unit. We calculated the sensitivity and specificity of NS referred to NPA of the whole sample and then, considering both the age (≥ and < 6 years old) and the period of collection (March vs follow up) as covariates in different analysis. The NS has a low sensitivity in detecting SARS-CoV-2 in children when referred to NPA; whereas its specificity results high. In children under 6 years of age, our results suggest to prefer the collection of NS, whenever possible. Though statistically not significant, the sensitivity of NS becomes higher if it is performed before NPA.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No 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:
Comitato Etico Milano Area 2 Approval 370_2020
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
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 and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data referred to in the manuscript are available
