Keywords
Abstract
This study aims to evaluate the clinical application effect of an improved nasopharyngeal swab sampling method for COVID-19 nucleic acid testing. A total of 100 nasopharyngeal swab samplers were randomly divided into two groups: a control group using the conventional sitting position method and a study group employing a lying position method combined with a protective face shield. The sensitivity scores and levels of patient cooperation were compared between the two groups. Results showed that the mean patient cooperation scores were 6.90 ± 1.23 in the control group and 8.25 ± 0.56 in the study group, indicating significantly better performance in the study group (p < 0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions, including nausea, sneezing, and coughing, was also lower in the study group (1 case of nausea, 0 cases of sneezing, and 1 case of coughing) compared to the control group (3 cases of nausea, 2 cases of sneezing, and 2 cases of coughing; p < 0.05). Furthermore, safety and psychological assessments revealed that patients in the study group had lower fear and perceived exposure scores than those in the control group (p < 0.05). In conclusion, the improved nasopharyngeal swab sampling method for COVID-19 nucleic acid testing demonstrated enhanced effectiveness and patient comfort, making it a suitable approach for preliminary screening.
References
[1] Wang XJ, Wang HJ. Comparative study of pathogen identification in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid and nasopharyngeal swabs from patients with lower respiratory tract infections. J Intern Med Emerg Crit Care. 2022;28(1):42-45,53.
[2] Wang BW, Li GK, Yang L, et al. Effects of different sample preservation conditions on nucleic acid testing of respiratory pathogens in nasopharyngeal swabs. J Clin Lab Med. 2021;39(11):836-838. doi:10.13602/j.cnki.jcls.2021.11.08
[3] Shan JN, Wang TL, Zhao SA, Fan LY, Liu L. Comparison of respiratory virus antigen detection rates in nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs. J Lab Med. 2021;36(7):719-721.
[4] Li JB, Zheng FZ, Cai JT, et al. Analysis of nucleic acid test results of nasopharyngeal and pharyngeal swab specimens in COVID-19 infection cases. Virol J. 2021;37(1):1-4. doi:10.13242/j.cnki.bingduxuebao.003847
[5] Zhu YF, Wang XC, Wang JY, Cheng XY, Liu SY. Comparison of positive rates of nucleic acid testing in oropharyngeal and nasopharyngeal swabs from COVID-19 patients. J Hunan Norm Univ Med Sci Ed. 2020;17(5):57-60.
[6] Qian Y, Zeng TY, Wang H, et al. Safety management of nasopharyngeal swab specimen collection in patients suspected of COVID-19 infection. Chin J Nurs. 2020;55(3):359-361.
[7] Zhou L, Xiao XF, Han X, Luo XF, Wu CY. Practice exploration of infection prevention and control in temporary sampling sites for COVID-19 nucleic acid testing. Med Equip. 2022;35(15):63-66.
[8] Chen JY, Huang D, Geng Z, Chen FH. Analytical performance evaluation of four types of COVID-19 nucleic acid test kits. J Clin Hematol. 2022;35(8):547-551. doi:10.13201/j.issn.1004-2806.2022.08.003
[9] Chen Q, Shan ZM, Song C, Kang FF, Jin J, Li WE. Analysis of the quality status of newly built COVID-19 nucleic acid testing laboratories in Zhejiang region. J Lab Med. 2022;37(7):669-673.
[10] Pan J, Yan H, Li Z, et al. An external quality assessment for the molecular testing of the SARS-CoV-2 virus genome in Zhejiang Province, China. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2022;104(3):115766.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2025 Sujuan Wang, Zhaozhao Wang