a Department of Clinical Sciences , Infectious Disease Research Unit, Skåne University Hospital , Malmö , Sweden.
b Department of Infectious Diseases/Virology , Institute of Biomedicine, University of Gothenburg , Gothenburg , Sweden.
Infect Dis (Lond). 2016;48(3):246-50. doi: 10.3109/23744235.2015.1096956. Epub 2015 Oct 15.
Fifty adult emergency room patients with symptoms of respiratory tract infections or acute onset of extreme fatigue were sampled by both nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA) and flocked nasal swab (fNS). Respiratory agents were detected by a qualitative influenza PCR and an 18-valent multiplex PCR in 20 of 29 patients with a clinical diagnosis of respiratory tract infection, and in 3 of 21 without such a diagnosis. PCR detected influenza A and B in NPA samples from 11 patients and in fNS samples from 10 patients. Little or no discomfort was perceived by 60% of the patients when sampled by NPA and by 66% when sampled by fNS. We conclude that NPA and fNS were equally sensitive for detection of respiratory agents by multiplex PCR, and the two sampling methods did not differ significantly regarding discomfort perceived by patients (p = 0.171, Wilcoxon signed rank test). Hence less invasive sampling by fNS might be preferable in certain settings and situations.
采集了 50 名出现呼吸道感染症状或突发极度疲劳的成年急诊患者的鼻咽抽吸物（NPA）和鼻拭子（fNS）样本。对 29 名临床诊断为呼吸道感染的患者中的 20 名患者，以及 21 名无此类诊断的患者中的 3 名患者，通过定性流感 PCR 和 18 价多重 PCR 检测呼吸道病原体。PCR 在 11 名患者的 NPA 样本和 10 名患者的 fNS 样本中检测到了流感 A 和 B。60%的患者在接受 NPA 采样时和 66%的患者在接受 fNS 采样时表示只有轻微或没有不适。我们得出结论，多重 PCR 检测呼吸道病原体时，NPA 和 fNS 的敏感性相同，两种采样方法在患者感知的不适方面没有显著差异（p = 0.171，Wilcoxon 符号秩检验）。因此，在某些情况下，fNS 的侵入性较小的采样可能更可取。
