Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jan:146:105053.
doi: 10.1016/j.jcv.2021.105053. Epub 2021 Dec 10.

Investigation of saliva, tongue swabs and buccal swabs as alternative specimen types to nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 testing

M C Connor  1 , M Copeland  2 , T Curran  3
Affiliations

Investigation of saliva, tongue swabs and buccal swabs as alternative specimen types to nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 testing

M C Connor et al. J Clin Virol. 2022 Jan.

Abstract

Throughout the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, the recommended sample type for initial diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection has been a nasopharyngeal swab. Shortages in swabs and difficulties in obtaining nasopharyngeal swabs in certain patient groups has prompted research into alternative specimen types for the diagnosis of COVID-19. The aim of this study was to assess how 'simply collected' saliva along with tongue swabs and buccal swabs preformed as an alternative specimen type for SARS-CoV-2 detection. It was observed that saliva samples allowed for the detection of 85.3% of positive patients, tongue swabs allowed for the detection of 67.6% of positive patients and buccal swabs allowed for detection of 20.8% of positive patients, when compared to nasopharyngeal swabs. From this data, it could be concluded that using simple saliva collection can provide a less invasive and reliable alternative method for the detection of SARS-CoV2 particularly in those patients where invasive sampling is difficult and where regular repeat testing is required.

Keywords: Buccal swab; Nasopharyngeal swab; SARS-CoV-2; Saliva; Tongue swab.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no conflicts to declare

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Comparison of Ct values obtained across sample types (ns: p > 0.05; **: p ≤ 0.01).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Center of Disease Control and Prevention. 2021. Interim Guidelines for Collecting, Handling, and Testing Clinical Specimens for COVID-19. 26 Feb.
    1. Pan Y., Zhang D., Yang P., Poon L.L.M., Wang Q. Viral load of SARS-CoV-2 in clinical samples. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2020;20:411–412. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Martinez R.M. Clinical samples for SARS-CoV-2 detection: review of the early literature. Clin. Microbiol. Newsl. 2020;42:121–127. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Procop G.W., Shrestha N.K., Vogel S., van Sickle K., Harrington S., Rhoads D.D., Rubin B.P., Terpeluk P. A direct comparison of enhanced saliva to nasopharyngeal swab for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in symptomatic patients. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2020;58 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kojima N., Turner F., Slepnev V., Bacelar A., Deming L., Kodeboyina S., Klausner J.D. 2020. Self-collected oral fluid and nasal swab specimens demonstrate comparable sensitivity to clinician-collected nasopharyngeal swab specimens for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. Clinical Infectious diseases: ciaa1589. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa1589. - PMC - PubMed