Pandemic printing: a novel 3D-printed swab for detecting SARS-CoV-2
Pandemic printing: a novel 3D-printed swab for detecting SARS-CoV-2
复制标题
DOI：
10.5694/mja2.50726
复制
发表时间：
2020-09-01
影响因子：
11.4
通讯作者：
Williamson, Deborah A.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Williams, Eloise;Bond, Katherine;Williamson, Deborah A.
目的设计并评价3D打印鼻拭子用于采集SARS-CoV-2检测样本。设计采用迭代设计过程。实验室评价包括对加标两种不同浓度γ射线照射的SARS-CoV-2的模拟鼻咽样本进行体外评估。一项前瞻性临床研究比较了通过3D打印拭子和标准鼻咽拭子回收SARS-CoV-2和人类细胞材料。设置，参与者皇家墨尔本医院，2020年5月。临床评估的参与者包括参加COVID-19筛查诊所的50名医院工作人员和两名实验室确诊的COVID-19住院患者。干预在临床评价中，使用CopanESwab采集了一个植绒鼻咽拭子样本，使用3D打印拭子采集了另一个鼻腔的中鼻样本。结果在实验室评价中，3D打印拭子和两种标准拭子采集的模拟样本中SARS-CoV-2检测的定性一致性是完全的。在临床评价中，使用标准和3D打印拭子从50名医院工作人员采集的样本中的RNase P检测（充分收集人类细胞材料的替代指标）的定性一致性是完整的。在来自两名实验室确认的SARS-CoV-2住院患者的三对3D打印的中鼻和标准拭子样本中，SARS-CoV-2检测的定性一致性也是完全的。结论使用3D打印拭子收集鼻样本进行SARS-CoV-2检测是可行的，患者和医护人员可以接受，而且方便。目标：设计和评估用于收集SARS-CoV-2检测样本的3D打印鼻拭子。设计：采用迭代设计过程。实验室评价包括对加标两种不同浓度伽马辐照SARS-CoV-2的模拟鼻咽样本进行体外评估。一项前瞻性临床研究比较了3D打印拭子和标准鼻咽拭子对SARS-CoV-2和人类细胞物质的回收情况。研究地点：皇家墨尔本医院。2020年5月。临床评估的参与者是参加COVID-19筛查诊所的50名医院工作人员和两名实验室确诊的COVID-19住院患者。干预：在临床评估中，使用科潘ESwab采集了一份植绒鼻咽拭子样本，并使用3D打印拭子采集了另一份鼻腔中段样本。在实验室评估中，使用3D打印拭子和两种标准拭子采集的模拟样本中SARS-CoV-2检测的定性一致性是完全的。在临床评价中。在从50名医院工作人员采集的样本中，使用标准和3D打印拭子进行RNase P检测（充分收集人体细胞材料的替代指标）的定性一致性是完整的。从两名实验室确诊的SARS-CoV-2住院患者的三对3D打印中鼻和标准拭子样本中检测SARS-CoV-2的定性协议也是完整的。结论：使用3D打印拭子收集鼻样本进行SARS-CoV-2检测是可行的，患者和医护人员可以接受。而且方便。
Objectives To design and evaluate 3D-printed nasal swabs for collection of samples forSARS-CoV-2 testing. Design An iterative design process was employed. Laboratory evaluation includedin vitroassessment of mock nasopharyngeal samples spiked with two different concentrations of gamma-irradiatedSARS-CoV-2. A prospective clinical study comparedSARS-CoV-2 and human cellular material recovery by 3D-printed swabs and standard nasopharyngeal swabs. Setting, participants Royal Melbourne Hospital, May 2020. Participants in the clinical evaluation were 50 hospital staff members attending aCOVID-19 screening clinic and two inpatients with laboratory-confirmedCOVID-19. Intervention In the clinical evaluation, a flocked nasopharyngeal swab sample was collected with the CopanESwab and a mid-nasal sample from the other nostril was collected with the 3D-printed swab. Results In the laboratory evaluation, qualitative agreement with regard toSARS-CoV-2 detection in mock samples collected with 3D-printed swabs and two standard swabs was complete. In the clinical evaluation, qualitative agreement with regard toRNase P detection (a surrogate measure of adequate collection of human cellular material) in samples collected from 50 hospital staff members with standard and 3D-printed swabs was complete. Qualitative agreement with regard toSARS-CoV-2 detection in three pairs of 3D-printed mid-nasal and standard swab samples from two inpatients with laboratory-confirmedSARS-CoV-2 was also complete. Conclusions Using 3D-printed swabs to collect nasal samples forSARS-CoV-2 testing is feasible, acceptable to patients and health carers, and convenient.Objectives: To design and evaluate 3D-printed nasal swabs for collection of samples for SARS-CoV-2 testing.Design: An iterative design process was employed. Laboratory evaluation included in vitro assessment of mock nasopharyngeal samples spiked with two different concentrations of gamma irradiated SARS-CoV-2. A prospective clinical study compared SARS-CoV-2 and human cellular material recovery by 3D-printed swabs and standard nasopharyngeal swabs.Setting, participants: Royal Melbourne Hospital. May 2020. Participants in the clinical evaluation were 50 hospital staff members attending a COVID-19 screening clinic and two inpatients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19.Intervention: In the clinical evaluation, a flocked nasopharyngeal swab sample was collected with the Copan ESwab and a mid-nasal sample from the other nostril was collected with the 3D-printed swab.Results: In the laboratory evaluation, qualitative agreement with regard to SARS-CoV-2 detection in mock samples collected with 3D-printed swabs and two standard swabs was complete. In the clinical evaluation. qualitative agreement with regard to RNase P detection (a surrogate measure of adequate collection of human cellular material) in samples collected from 50 hospital staff members with standard and 3D-printed swabs was complete. Qualitative agreement with regard to SARS-CoV-2 detection in three pairs of 3D-printed mid-nasal and standard swab samples from two inpatients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 was also complete.Conclusions: Using 3D-printed swabs to collect nasal samples for SARS-CoV-2 testing is feasible, acceptable to patients and health carers. and convenient.