The purpose of this analysis was to compare the efficacy of the different swab types for AIV detection.
To confirm that any differences in DNA recovery observed were due to the higher drying rate and not differences in the swab materials, an experiment was performed at Eurofins Medigenomix GmbH, Ebersberg, Germany, to compare the influence of the different swab head materials on DNA release.
However, the use of different swabs did not cause significant differences in test performance, which might even give room to the question if a simple Dacron swab used without transport medium might be an acceptable alternative.
Despite high diversity, multiple GAS isolates from patients (different colonies from the same swab or different swabs; n = 37) were of the same type for each patient.
We did not simulate the effect of pre-test factors that may influence the sensitivity of the screening, e.g., use of different swabs or multi-site swabbing.
Although the two study populations were sampled with different swabs and specimens had different transportation/storage times prior to pathogen identification, prior studies (unpublished data by our group) have shown stability of MRSA/MSSA on different swab types at different temperatures and storage times.
Two structurally different swabs are available for microbial sampling in the upper airways: rayon swabs and nylon flocked swabs.
In this study we used different swabs for S-WET and S-DRY.
According to our macroscopic findings internal organs, blood, faeces and different swabs were sent for further examination.
Swabs of different samples 690 were generally collected from different sites (wound, burn, blood culture, subaxillary, urine, stool, sputum, throat, ear, skin lesion, high vaginal, and other different swabs).
