TY - JOUR
T1 - Self-collected compared with professional-collected swabbing in the diagnosis of influenza in symptomatic individuals
T2 - A meta-analysis and assessment of validity
AU - Seaman, Christopher P.
AU - Tran, Luong Thi Tuyet
AU - Cowling, Benjamin J.
AU - Sullivan, Sheena G.
N1 - Funding Information:
The WHO Collaborating Centre for Reference and Research on Influenza is supported by the Australian Government Department of Health . LTTT received an Australian Awards Scholarship, and acknowledges the support of the Australian Government .
Funding Information:
The WHO Collaborating Centre for Reference and Research on Influenza is supported by the Australian Government Department of Health. LTTT received an Australian Awards Scholarship, and acknowledges the support of the Australian Government.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2019/9
Y1 - 2019/9
N2 - Self-collected nasal swabs offer a cheaper alternative to professional-collected swabs for influenza testing. However, the diagnostic accuracy of self-collection has not been quantitatively reviewed. We identified 14 studies that compared diagnostic accuracy of self-collected to professional-collected swabs in influenza symptomatic individuals. Self-collected swabs were found to be highly acceptable, simple and comfortable to use. Data from nine studies were meta-analyzed. Pooled sensitivity was 87% (95% CI: 80%, 92%) and specificity was 99% (95% CI: 98%, 100%), compared to professional-collected swabs in the diagnosis of influenza. Pooled sensitivity and specificity estimates were used to assess the potential bias that would be introduced in studies had self-collected rather than professional-collected samples been used. While self-collected swabbing should not replace the role of clinical testing, our findings support the use of self-collected swabs for influenza research and surveillance. This method will be an important tool for evaluating novel influenza vaccines and vaccination strategies.
AB - Self-collected nasal swabs offer a cheaper alternative to professional-collected swabs for influenza testing. However, the diagnostic accuracy of self-collection has not been quantitatively reviewed. We identified 14 studies that compared diagnostic accuracy of self-collected to professional-collected swabs in influenza symptomatic individuals. Self-collected swabs were found to be highly acceptable, simple and comfortable to use. Data from nine studies were meta-analyzed. Pooled sensitivity was 87% (95% CI: 80%, 92%) and specificity was 99% (95% CI: 98%, 100%), compared to professional-collected swabs in the diagnosis of influenza. Pooled sensitivity and specificity estimates were used to assess the potential bias that would be introduced in studies had self-collected rather than professional-collected samples been used. While self-collected swabbing should not replace the role of clinical testing, our findings support the use of self-collected swabs for influenza research and surveillance. This method will be an important tool for evaluating novel influenza vaccines and vaccination strategies.
KW - Diagnostic accuracy
KW - Influenza
KW - Nasal swabbing
KW - Self-swabbing
KW - Systematic review
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85070193214
U2 - 10.1016/j.jcv.2019.07.010
DO - 10.1016/j.jcv.2019.07.010
M3 - Review Article
C2 - 31400670
AN - SCOPUS:85070193214
SN - 1386-6532
VL - 118
SP - 28
EP - 35
JO - Journal of Clinical Virology
JF - Journal of Clinical Virology
ER -