Comparative survey-based study of non-invasive saliva collection devices

Author:

Kil Yeokyoung (Anne)ORCID,Booeshaghi Ali S.ORCID,Pachter Lior S.ORCID

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundWe compared five saliva collection devices on their saliva collection efficiency, instruction reading rate, user difficulty ratings, and leakage of saliva, all of which are important factors in safe, easy, and efficient saliva collection. The devices evaluated were: Salivette (swab), SuperSAL (swab), SalivaBio Passive Drool, Medschenker Saliva Collection Kit (funnel), and cryovial with funnel used in SwabSeq COVID-19 surveillance tests.Methods56 individuals used five devices in randomized orders by first reading the device’s instruction manual while timed, then self-collecting saliva while timed, to measure the instruction reading rate and saliva collection rate, respectively. For each device, users were asked about the difficulties of instructions; assembly; and saliva collection, and whether there was leakage of saliva. Lastly, unstimulated and stimulated saliva production (=flow) rates for each user were measured. The saliva collection and instruction reading rates were normalized by the individual’s base saliva flow rate and base reading rate. The rates and difficulty ratings for devices were compared using permutation tests and one-way ANOVA.ResultsSalivette had the highest average saliva collection rate and SuperSAL had the lowest. For the instruction reading rate, Medschenker’s funnel device had the highest average and Salivette had the lowest. While all devices showed saliva leakage, passive drool had the highest fraction of leakages and the Medschenker device the lowest. Users found the instructions for Salivette the hardest and those for SwabSeq the easiest. Users found the assembly for Medschenker to be easiest and that for SuperSAL to be hardest. Users rated Salivette easiest to collect saliva with, and SuperSAL most difficult.ConclusionsMedschenker performed well on most qualitative and quantitative metrics while SuperSAL did not perform as well. However, no single saliva collection method or device satisfies all requirements of an ideal device. A device that allows for efficient saliva collection, easy usage, and safe saliva collection without leakage could greatly help standardize saliva collection.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

Reference11 articles.

1. National Cancer Institute [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2023 Jul 11]. NCI dictionary of Cancer Terms. Available from: https://www.cancer.gov/publications/dictionaries/cancer-terms/def/cushing-syndrome

2. Center for Biologics Evaluation, Research. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA; 2022 [cited 2023 Jul 11]. Information regarding the OraQuick In-Home HIV Test. Available from: https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/approved-blood-products/information-regarding-oraquick-home-hiv-test

3. Saliva sampling: Methods and devices. An overview;Trends Analyt Chem [Internet],2020

4. Stability of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in Nonsupplemented Saliva

5. Comparing methods to collect saliva from children to analyze cytokines related to allergic inflammation

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3