Home collection of nasal swabs for detection of influenza in the Household Influenza Vaccine Evaluation Study

  1. Ryan E. Malosh
  2. Joshua G. Petrie
  3. Amy P. Callear
  4. Arnold S. Monto
  5. Emily T. Martin

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background

Community‐based studies of influenza and other respiratory viruses (eg, SARS‐CoV‐2) require laboratory confirmation of infection. During the current COVID‐19 pandemic, social distancing guidelines require alternative data collection in order to protect both research staff and participants. Home‐collected respiratory specimens are less resource‐intensive, can be collected earlier after symptom onset, and provide a low‐contact means of data collection. A prospective, multi‐year, community‐based cohort study is an ideal setting to examine the utility of home‐collected specimens for identification of influenza.

Methods

We describe the feasibility and reliability of home‐collected specimens for the detection of influenza. We collected data and specimens between October 2014 and June 2017 from the Household Influenza Vaccine Evaluation (HIVE) Study. Cohort participants were asked to collect a nasal swab at home upon onset of acute respiratory illness. Research staff also collected nose and throat swab specimens in the study clinic within 7 days of onset. We estimated agreement using Cohen's kappa and calculated sensitivity and specificity of home‐collected compared to staff‐collected specimens.

Results

We tested 336 paired staff‐ and home‐collected respiratory specimens for influenza by RT‐PCR; 150 staff‐collected specimens were positive for influenza A/H3N2, 23 for influenza A/H1N1, 14 for influenza B/Victoria, and 31 for influenza B/Yamagata. We found moderate agreement between collection methods for influenza A/H3N2 (0.70) and B/Yamagata (0.69) and high agreement for influenza A/H1N1 (0.87) and B/Victoria (0.86). Sensitivity ranged from 78% to 86% for all influenza types and subtypes. Specificity was high for influenza A/H1N1 and both influenza B lineages with a range from 96% to 100%, and slightly lower for A/H3N2 infections (88%).

Conclusions

Collection of nasal swab specimens at home is both feasible and reliable for identification of influenza virus infections.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1111/irv.12822
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.03.24.20042556: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: This study was reviewed and approved by the institutional review board at the University of Michigan Medical School.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.03.24.20042556v1 on medRxiv