ライフサイエンスコーパス: nasal swab

1 Participants first provided a self-collected nasal swab.

2 en when they test positive for COVID-19 on a nasal swab.

3 ultures of the acute-phase serum samples and nasal swabs.

4 ected by vaginal swabs compared to rectal or nasal swabs.

5 s identified by axillary samples paired with nasal swabs.

6 cher's cerebrospinal fluid and from 2 of the nasal swabs.

7 vaccinated animals also controlled virus in nasal swabs.

8 We applied 16S rRNA gene sequencing to all nasal swabs.

9 viral transport media and 45% when using dry nasal swabs.

10 esistant organisms, and negative/absent MRSA nasal swabs.

11 lness completed questionnaires and submitted nasal swabs.

12 al diagnosis, and frequently also present in nasal swabs.

13 and neutralising antibodies were detected in nasal swabs.

14 load in the lungs but not viral shedding in nasal swabs.

15 arance for the direct detection of MRSA from nasal swabs.

16 ee stools (0.3%) and for the first time in a nasal swab (0.1%).

17 a modest prevalence of M. bovis shedding in nasal swabs (2.9%) and milk (1.4%) and of B. abortus in

18 Trained parents collected nasal swabs 3 weeks after hospitalization and, when heal

19 Among these developments is the RHINOstic nasal swab, a plastic anterior nares swab built into the

20 hAdOx1 nCoV-19 reduces detection of virus in nasal swabs after challenging vaccinated macaques and ha

21 ete protection in bronchoalveolar lavage and nasal swabs after SARS-CoV-2 challenge.

22 e intestine (by faecal counts) and nares (by nasal swabs) after intervention (30-day regimen of B sub

23 n oropharyngeal swab, compared with use of a nasal swab alone, increased the frequency of detection o

24 haryngeal swabs, compared with collection of nasal swabs alone, for detection of common respiratory v

25 Anterior nasal swabs (AN), oropharyngeal swabs (OP), and saliva s

26 steurella multocida were isolated by using a nasal swab and a transtracheal swab from individual calv

27 e similarity of the isolates obtained from a nasal swab and from a transtracheal swab was compared by

28 Cytology of nasal smear by taking with nasal swab and Hansel's staining was performed.

29 ancer routinely tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA by nasal swab and real-time polymerase chain reaction betwe

30 the two sample types, as the combination of nasal swab and saliva resulted in 94.6% SARS-CoV-2 detec

31 Nasal swab and serum samples were collected prior to ons

32 solation of DNA from an anthrax spore-spiked nasal swab and the subsequent on-chip amplification of t

33 We performed nasopharyngeal or nasal swabbing and/or serum sampling (n = 148) in Lancas

34 resulted in reduced virus concentrations in nasal swabs and a reduction in viral loads in bronchoalv

35 orrelated with peak SARS-CoV-2 RNA levels in nasal swabs and accelerated viral clearance.

36 er 2020, we mailed specimen collection kits (nasal swabs and blood spots) to a random sample of Georg

37 ated with modestly diminished viral loads in nasal swabs and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid following i

38 Weekly stool and nasal swabs and daily symptom diaries were collected.

39 sses were mailed a survey and self-collected nasal swabs and dried blood spot cards.

40 es was described in South Africa from bovine nasal swabs and environmental samples from the Hluhluwe-

41 OROV RNA was detected in plasma and nasal swabs and infection-induced high levels of innate

42 orrelated with a reduction in viral titer in nasal swabs and lungs, following challenge with H1N1 pan

43 were assessed by determining virus titers in nasal swabs and respiratory tissues, which were also use

44 These data show that midturbinate nasal swabs and saliva are suitable sources for self-col

45 servational cohort study was conducted using nasal swabs and sinonasal tissue biopsies obtained from

46 Regular bacterial analyses of nasal swabs and sputum were performed, and clinical even

47 ts had blood samples collected and completed nasal swabs and surveys at least weekly, irrespective of

48 ble rapid broad-spectrum pathogen testing on nasal swabs and therefore allow implementation of infect

49 e initial evaluation consisted of 403 paired nasal swabs and was done using the specimen preparation

50 For 6 months, biweekly nasal swabs and weekly surveys were conducted within 139

51 ive isolation of B. parapertussis from ovine nasal swabs and, in successfully excluding overgrowth wi

52 ctively self-collected paired anterior-nares nasal-swab and saliva samples twice daily for viral-load

53 determined by culturing ear, umbilicus, and nasal swabs, and (iii) the distribution of GBS serotypes

54 was 85% with nasopharyngeal swabs, 78% with nasal swabs, and 69% with nasopharyngeal washes.

55 of mucosal antibody titers in rectal swabs, nasal swabs, and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid.

56 Weekly stool and nasal swabs, and daily symptom diaries, were collected.

57 ch as blood, probang samples, and saliva and nasal swabs, and herd-level samples, such as air samples

58 NA levels were similar in patient saliva and nasal swabs, and viral loads measured by RT-PCR and the

59 ngeal swabs (NPS) to self-collected anterior nasal swabs (ANS) and straight saliva for the diagnosis

60 Automation-friendly nasal swabs are an important tool for high-throughput pr

61 Saliva and midturbinate (MT) nasal swabs are attractive alternatives, as they allow f

62 Subsets of the 100 top-upregulated genes in nasal swabs are upregulated in the heart, lung, kidney,

63 ral loads in both bronchoalveolar lavage and nasal swabs as compared with sham animals.

64 e-motif 21 (TRIM21) messenger RNA indexes in nasal swabs as potential biomarkers of viral respiratory

65 was associated with a positive culture from nasal swabs at discharge.

66 We collected nasopharyngeal or nasal swabs at enrollment and tested for SARS-CoV-2 usin

67 ticipate in the SNIFF study and self-collect nasal swabs at home twice weekly for SARS-CoV-2 testing

68 symptoms); participants submitted additional nasal swabs at the onset of any symptoms.

69 sulted in significantly lower viral loads in nasal swabs, bronchial cytology brush samples, and lung

70 d COVID-19 testing utilizing easy-to-collect nasal swabs but demonstrated <100% PPA compared to PCR.

71 virus-associated RTI episodes confirmed from nasal swabs by using nucleic acid testing.

72 From 31 March through 31 May 2021, HCWs had nasal swabs collected and questionnaires administered we

73 HCWs were followed up for 3 weeks with nasal swabs collected at baseline and weekly (total: 4 v

74 ildren by analyzing blood samples and weekly nasal swabs collected before, during, and after infectio

75 rmed by using 16S rDNA pyrosequencing of 872 nasal swabs collected biweekly from 47 unselected infant

76 In addition, IBV was detected in 3 nasal swabs collected from PRRSV-seropositive pigs by re

77 Nasal swabs collected from the patient and from one of h

78 Participants received nasal swab collection kits via rapid delivery within 24

79 interviewed by research staff, and underwent nasal swab collection.

80 These results suggest that a nasal swab culture can be predictive of the bacterial pa

81 ng with the primary cases who self-collected nasal swabs daily for influenza molecular testing and co

82 individuals) provided concurrent symptom and nasal swab data for 4166 person-weeks.

83 titative polymerase chain reaction of weekly nasal swabs (days 7, 14, 21) or by seroconversion at day

84 Nasal swabs demonstrated high virus exposure, which was

85 ty symptomatic pilgrims underwent additional nasal swabs during their pilgrimage in the KSA, of which

86 Participants provided self-collected nasal swabs every week and serum every six months for RT

87 tional study were interviewed and provided a nasal swab for S. aureus analysis.

88 in viral transport media for Cepheid and dry nasal swabs for Abbott ID Now.

89 Regular self-collected nasal swabs for detecting respiratory viruses in a commu

90 gia and collected data on other symptoms and nasal swabs for influenza real-time reverse transcriptio

91 ia, and collected data on other symptoms and nasal swabs for influenza rRT-PCR testing.

92 loped influenza-like symptoms self-collected nasal swabs for PCR testing of SARS-CoV-2, influenza A/B

93 ARS-CoV-2 testing by providing mid-turbinate nasal swabs for qualitative and quantitative reverse-tra

94 alth, courier deliveries, and self-collected nasal swabs for remotely conducted study visits.

95 21, participants self-collected midturbinate nasal swabs for reverse transcription-polymerase chain r

96 US sites provided weekly symptom reports and nasal swabs for reverse transcription-polymerase chain r

97 g with SARS-CoV-2 antibody multiplex assays, nasal swabs for reverse-transcription PCR, and symptom i

98 Participants self-collected nasal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 and influenza reverse transcr

99 mitting regular COVID-19 symptom surveys and nasal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PC

100 questionnaires and submitted self-collected nasal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 qualitative real-time reverse

101 ticipants self-collected weekly midturbinate nasal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription-polymer

102 Data included weekly nasal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 testing, reports on exposures

103 wed up 3 times a week for 6 weeks to collect nasal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 testing.

104 rmance of nasopharyngeal, oropharyngeal, and nasal swabs for the detection of influenza virus using r

105 We examined the children and obtained nasal swabs for the detection of RSV during each respira

106 The children were examined and nasal swabs for the detection of RSV were obtained durin

107 icipants collected daily symptom diaries and nasal swabs for up to 7 days.

108 visits were made to identify ARI and obtain nasal swabs for viral detection using real-time reverse-

109 Nasal lavage for flow cytometry and nasal swabs for viral PCR were performed at enrollment a

110 arriage were screened with eight consecutive nasal swabs (four standard rayon, four charcoal-coated r

111 ory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in a nasal swab from a sick cow.

112 Nasal swabs from 11 of 17 (65%) employees tested positiv

113 Methods: Nasal swabs from 13 children with CF and at least one F5

114 Human coronavirus was detected by RT-PCR in nasal swabs from 3 of 20 patients but in no sinus secret

115 Cerebrospinal fluid from the teacher and nasal swabs from 4 children who were febrile were positi

116 used to characterize viral nucleic acids in nasal swabs from 63 apparently healthy young children.

117 axillary aspirates from 8 (40%) patients and nasal swabs from 9 (45%) patients, by reverse transcript

118 ective ability of MBM was evaluated with 200 nasal swabs from conventionally reared sheep, and B. par

119 tively collecting weekly symptom diaries and nasal swabs from families for 1 year, (2) analyzed data

120 ters researchers collected clinical data and nasal swabs from infants hospitalized for bronchiolitis.

121 Nasal swabs from patients positive by Xpert MRSA PCR and

122 In our study, we analyzed paired plasma and nasal swabs from patients presenting with influenza A or

123 Home visits were conducted to obtain nasal swabs from persons with ARI/ILI.

124 rlpools and taping gel and from 35 of the 84 nasal swabs from players and staff members (42 percent).

125 IBV was detected in 3 nasal swabs from PRRSV-seropositive pigs by real-time re

126 h 84 primary isolation plates generated from nasal swabs from swine with clinical signs of atrophic r

127 Here we collect nasal swabs from the anterior nares of 547 children (mea

128 ly ill patients and also being asked to test nasal swabs from the potentially exposed.

129 ms for a year and collected 4,190 individual nasal swabs from three distinct pig subpopulations.

130 formance with self-collected anterior nares (nasal) swabs from children younger than 14 years because

131 Nasal swabs had equal or greater sensitivity than oropha

132 samples were bacteriologically positive the nasal swab identified the same bacterial species as the

133 s, myalgias), staff obtained a mid-turbinate nasal swab in participants' homes.

134 sting reliability is on par with that of the nasal swabs in detecting infected cases, and has potenti

135 accine groups, with a 1-log(10) reduction in nasal swabs in the 100-ug group.

136 V-19/AZD1222 reduced virus concentrations in nasal swabs in two different SARS-CoV-2 animal models, w

137 Participants collected weekly nasal swabs irrespective of symptoms, participated in an

138 ymptoms) and submitted weekly self-collected nasal swabs (irrespective of symptoms); participants sub

139 Mastery of self-collected lower nasal swabs is possible for children 5 years and older.

140 The nasal swab isolate was genetically identical to the tran

141 One hundred percent of archival nasal swab lysates yielded the expected PCR results when

142 4 weeks, facilitating detection of MRSA from nasal swab lysates, and may decrease the amount of unuse

143 NxG assay with prospectively collected rayon nasal swabs (n = 1,103) and flocked swab (ESwab) nasal s

144 ntained milk from 10 animals and in 56.2% of nasal swabs (n = 121) from cattle from tuberculin test-p

145 Nasal swabs (n = 147) were collected from both cattle an

146 SARS-CoV-2 RNA was only detected in nasal swab, nasal turbinates, and mesenteric lymph node,

147 encing viral RNA from participants' anterior nasal swabs, nirmatrelvir resistance mutations were dete

148 re, a simplified collection approach using a nasal swab (NS) is described.

149 specimens to NP aspirate (NPA), NPS, and/or nasal swab (NS) RT-PCR resulted in statistically nonsign

150 or detection of SARS-CoV-2 in 3,750 anterior nasal swab (NS) specimens and nasopharyngeal swab (NPS)

151 ears were enrolled; members collected weekly nasal swabs (NS) and additional NS with respiratory illn

152 , the detection sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 in nasal swabs (NS) and saliva was compared to that of NPS

153 Self-collected foam nasal swabs (NS) obtained after instillation of saline s

154 Nasal swabs (NS), endotracheal aspirates (ETA), and bloo

155 The prospective study collected MRSA from nasal swabbing of residents of 26 nursing homes in Orang

156 rich and sequence viral nucleic acids in the nasal swabs of 50 young dairy cattle with symptoms of BR

157 was, however, isolated from the tonsils and nasal swabs of the asymptomatic T15 pigs at 26 days post

158 Thirty-one carriers had two or more positive nasal swabs; of these, the isolates in all swabs from a

159 in; 999 participants self-collected anterior nasal swabs on day 1 (n = 945), day 5 (n = 871), and day

160 generally measure SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA from nasal swabs or antibodies against the virus from blood.

161 Optimal specimen type (e.g. nasal swabs or saliva), timing of sampling, viral marker

162 This assay can detect SPPV in buffy coats, nasal swabs, oral swabs, scabs, and skin lesions as well

163 y tract infections based on parent-collected nasal swabs over the winter months.

164 Virus titers from nasal swabs peaked on day 2, and low titers were detecte

165 Compared to PCR, direct plating of nasal swabs performed poorly, especially for patients wi

166 , and multi-system involvement) as well as a nasal swab positive for the S aureus strain and presence

167 Nasal swabs positive for SARS-CoV-2 underwent viral isol

168 DNA (CRESS-DNA) virus, were also detected in nasal swabs, possibly reflecting environmental contamina

169 Here, we assessed the concordance of paired nasal swabs processed using commercial PCR and culture a

170 apertussis in conventionally reared sheep by nasal swabbing proved futile with existing selective med

171 fection up to 4.5 days before viral loads in nasal swabs reached concentrations detectable by low-ana

172 For most participants, nasal swabs reached higher peak viral loads than saliva

173 ins of the H3N8 subtype were evaluated using nasal swabs received for routine diagnosis and swabs col

174 124 (12.8%) and 17 of 8100 (0.2%) stool and nasal swabs, respectively.

175 sham controls in bronchoalveolar lavage and nasal swabs, respectively.

176 11,124 (12.8%) and 17/8,100 (0.2%) stool and nasal swabs, respectively.

177 These measurements were compared to the nasal swab results for each patient performed by a certi

178 ssay for direct detection of SARS-CoV-2 from nasal swab RNA that can be read with a mobile phone micr

179 ization of viral variants between saliva and nasal swab sample sites in many individuals.

180 ntal teams took a combined oropharyngeal and nasal swab sample using standardized Viral Transport Med

181 Matching criteria were center, date of first nasal swab sample, and exposure time.

182 Nasal swabs sampled and frozen at ICU admission were tes

183 95% confidence interval [CI]: 97.9, 99.3) in nasal swab samples and 99.0% (95% CI: 98.2, 99.4) in nas

184 ion of respiratory syncytial virus spiked in nasal swab samples and achieves a detection limit of ~10

185 Nasal swab samples are an attractive alternative; howeve

186 detect H3N2 IAVs directly from nasal wash or nasal swab samples collected from laboratory-challenged

187 le not known to have COVID-19 self-collected nasal swab samples for SARS-CoV-2 reverse-transcription

188 hildren's Hospital; clinical staff collected nasal swab samples from 25 patients and then operated te

189 In this pilot study, nasal swab samples from 75 rhinoceros with defined infec

190 rthermore, we analysed by BuV qPCR stool and nasal swab samples from 955 children with gastroenteriti

191 We performed HBoV testing on nasal swab samples from a prospective, longitudinal stud

192 Residual nasal swab samples from adult volunteers were used for t

193 CRISPR assay diagnostic results obtained nasal swab samples of individuals with suspected COVID-1

194 ith phone follow-up on day 120 and collected nasal swab samples on days 1-10.

195 The sensitivity of this test, using nasal swab samples taken from both symptomatic and asymp

196 influenza or respiratory syncytial virus had nasal swab samples tested for rhinovirus, coronavirus OC

197 Twenty-three nasal swab samples that tested positive for methicillin-

198 Patients whose nasal swab samples were always negative served as contro

199 Nasal swab samples were collected at age 3, 6, 12, 18, 2

200 Nasal swab samples were collected during respiratory ill

201 SARS-CoV-2 nasal swab samples were collected from University of Pit

202 rticipants completed a survey, and blood and nasal swab samples were collected to assess active SARS-

203 icity and other adverse events and blood and nasal swab samples were obtained following vaccination.

204 Contrived nasal swab samples were prepared using live or inactivat

205 ng HHCs were as follows: 49% (51 of 104) for nasal swab samples, 53.8% (56 of 104) for nasal biopsy s

206 ty among patients were 66.4% (75 of 113) for nasal swab samples, 71.7% (81 of 113) for nasal turbinat

207 specific detection of SARS-CoV-2 from human nasal swab samples, revealing sensitivities in the atto-

208 re screened for spore exposure by collecting nasal swab samples.

209 erial taxa were identified from preoperative nasal swab samples.

210 it was originally developed to work with dry nasal swab samples.

211 cts recorded symptoms and provided blood and nasal swab samples.

212 ative PCR) using total RNA extracted from 63 nasal-swab samples (33 SARS-CoV-2-positive, with cycle-t

213 Our results suggest that large-scale nasal-swab screening for potential exposure to anthrax s

214 In nasal swabs, sgRNA was reduced by 1-log(10), and the vir

215 lonized patients would have been missed with nasal swab specimen culture only.

216 ates but are rather common human isolates, a nasal swab specimen for culture was collected voluntaril

217 ow-up evaluation, 97 patients for whom a dry nasal swab specimen yielded negative results by IDNOW ha

218 od was successfully validated using clinical nasal swab specimens ( n = 30) and has the potential to

219 or the rapid detection of MRSA directly from nasal swab specimens (IDI-MRSA; Infectio Diagnostic, Inc

220 Self- or health care worker (HCW)-collected nasal swab specimens are the preferred sampling method t

221 study (traditional medium used, SBA) and 667 nasal swab specimens from MCW (traditional medium used,

222 For this study, 767 nasal swab specimens from the multicenter study (traditi

223 Supervised oral fluid and nasal swab specimens performed similarly to clinician-co

224 identification of MRSA strains directly from nasal swab specimens taken from the anterior nares.

225 tein-based detection of influenza virus from nasal swab specimens was developed and evaluated in a cl

226 es in bronchoalveolar-lavage (BAL) fluid and nasal swab specimens were assessed by polymerase chain r

227 ruses A and B and adenoviruses (AdV), paired nasal swab specimens were collected from 384 recruits wi

228 Paired nasal swab specimens were collected from patients who we

229 Throat and nasal swab specimens were collected, combined, and teste

230 Three nasal swab specimens were obtained 1 month apart on ente

231 A total of 515 compliant remnant nasal swab specimens were sequentially used to inoculate

232 2 and their household members self-collected nasal swab specimens.

233 assay for the direct detection of MRSA from nasal swab specimens.

234 l, Lenexa, KS), for the detection of MRSA in nasal swab specimens.

235 I), and participants with ARI self-collected nasal swab specimens; after April 2020, participants wit

236 ian-supervised self-collected mid-turbinate (nasal) swab specimens, and clinician-collected nasophary

237 Errors over time for self-collection of nasal swabs such as contaminated swabs and inadequate or

238 er-titer viral isolates from human and swine nasal swabs, supported the replication of isolates that

239 e conducted a retrospective cohort study and nasal-swab survey of 84 St.

240 Viruses from nasal swabs taken 1, 3, and 6 days postvaccination were

241 s and deaths per 100 000 population and with nasal swab test positivity rates.

242 Household members had daily self-collected nasal swabs tested by reverse-transcriptase polymerase c

243 From the 13 781 nasal swabs tested, a total of 2211 viral infections wer

244 -CoV-2 viral RNA in aqueous despite negative nasal swab testing confirmed its presence beyond the blo

245 iod between June and September 2020 received nasal swab testing for SARS-CoV-2 and underwent a releva

246 expected to be high, as we demonstrate that nasal swab testing is likely to miss patients with low v

247 These findings suggest nasal-swab testing be used for situations in which viral

248 Low-analytical-sensitivity nasal-swab testing is commonly used for surveillance and

249 ons detectable by low-analytical-sensitivity nasal-swab tests.

250 us replication in bronchoalveolar lavage and nasal swabs than did WA1/2020 infection.

251 dolescents aged 4 to 14 years self-collected nasal swabs that closely agreed on SARS-CoV-2 detection

252 hain reaction testing of either midturbinate nasal swabs twice weekly (module 1) or once weekly (modu

253 ymptom and temperature data and midturbinate nasal swabs twice weekly irrespective of symptoms; careg

254 amples, such as human blood, saliva, sputum, nasal swabs, urine, and plant tissues.

255 variant status was determined from baseline nasal swabs using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain

256 SARS-CoV-2-infected hamsters also had lower nasal swab viral RNA and exhibited fewer clinical sympto

257 The median time from symptom onset to nasal swab was 2 days; 65.4% of samples were positive fo

258 taken each time for influenza serology and a nasal swab was collected at T1 and T2 for influenza dete

259 A nasal swab was positive for S. aureus on at least one oc

260 sideration of results from oropharyngeal and nasal swabs was as effective as consideration of results

261 signs of FMD, viremia, or viral shedding in nasal swabs was found in the Ad5-boIFN-lambda3-treated a

262 s antiviral effects, RSV RNA viral load from nasal swabs was quantified over time using reverse-trans

263 -resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) from nasal swabs, was evaluated in this multicenter study for

264 in-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in nasal swabs, we compared BD GeneOhm MRSA PCR and various

265 and RT-PCR identification of influenza from nasal swabs, we tracked the course of seasonal and pande

266 ers entered symptom data daily and collected nasal swabs weekly.

267 Midturbinate nasal swabs were collected and tested for RSV and hMPV b

268 Nasal swabs were collected at respiratory illness onset

269 Flocked nasal swabs were collected during 3 influenza seasons (2

270 Plasma and nasal swabs were collected from 56 adults diagnosed with

271 n entire single RSV season in coastal Kenya, nasal swabs were collected from members of 20 households

272 Nasal swabs were collected from participants and tested

273 More than 4,000 nasal swabs were collected from pigs in Cambodia, yieldi

274 Paired mid-turbinate nasal swabs were collected from university students and

275 Serum, pen-based oral fluid samples, and nasal swabs were collected through 70 days postinoculati

276 Rectal and nasal swabs were collected to quantify HCV-RNA levels wi

277 Nasal swabs were collected twice daily from day 2 until

278 Nasal swabs were collected weekly from five sites across

279 Nasal swabs were collected, and the V3 to V4 variable re

280 pants eczema severity was assessed, and skin/nasal swabs were cultured for S aureus.

281 s and until 12-hourly combined oropharyngeal-nasal swabs were negative for viable virus by focus-form

282 Nasal swabs were obtained at ICU admission and weekly th

283 Nasal swabs were obtained before application (baseline)

284 Thirty-seven ocular, urogenital, or nasal swabs were obtained from 21 wild western barred ba

285 Nasal swabs were obtained from a national cohort of midd

286 Nasal swabs were obtained from participants every 2 week

287 188 children with nasal discharge, 64 (34%) nasal swabs were PCR positive.

288 A total of 2,068 nasal swabs were received, corresponding to an 84% swab

289 Nasal swabs were subjected to next generation sequencing

290 Nasal swabs were taken from health-care workers every 4

291 Nasal swabs were tested by Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2/Flu/R

292 Nasal swabs were tested for SARS-CoV-2 by real-time reve

293 Nasopharyngeal and nasal swabs were used.

294 Ct) in self- vs health care worker-collected nasal swabs when tested with a real-time reverse transcr

295 irs completed a questionnaire and provided a nasal swab which was analyzed for S. aureus, methicillin

296 Tracheal wash fluid, nasal swabs, whole blood samples, and serum samples from

297 us virus were 2 to 3 logs lower in ocular or nasal swabs with 51g than with 51gR.

298 The diagnostic sensitivity increased for nasal swabs with a lower cycle threshold by RT-PCR, whic

299 apture and detect MRSA directly from patient nasal swabs with no prior culture and minimal processing

300 Nasal swabs, with or without throat swabs, were systemat