Before or after these two self-samples, the investigator sampled the nares and pharynx using the same technique as described above.
A recent pilot study has shown high degree of agreement between self-samples and investigator samples (93% agreement, κ 0.85 for nasal swabs and 83% agreement, κ 0.60 for throat swabs).
An investigator samples only cases with this design and compares each patient's exposure during a short time period just before a case event (hazard period) with the participant's exposure at other times (reference periods) without leading to case event.
Trial and publication quality were assessed in terms of randomization and allocation concealment, blinding of patients and investigators, sample size estimation, handling and reporting of trial discontinuations, application of the intent-to-treat principle, and relevant data inconsistencies.
One hundred and five nursing personnel members were sampled 4 times in random order after viewing an instruction paper: 1) nasal self-sample, 2) pharyngeal self-sample, 3) nasal investigator-sample, and 4) pharyngeal investigator-sample.
From nursing and technical personnel working in different wards in the Amphia hospital in Breda, the Netherlands, 4 samples were taken in random order: 1) nasal self-sample, 2) pharyngeal self-sample, 3) nasal investigator-sample, and 4) pharyngeal investigator-sample.
In both sampling sites self-samples even detected more S. aureus than investigator-samples.
In both sampling sites self-samples even dectected more S. aureus than investigator-samples. B. Pharyngeal samples.
Lastly, three investigators were involved in taking the investigator-samples, which might lead to slightly different sampling techniques.
Furthermore, when looking at the discordant pairs, nasal self-samples tend to yield more S. aureus compared to investigator-samples.
