Skip to content

Study of the Analytical Performance of Different Salivary Self-collection Methods for the Detection of COVID-19

Study of the Analytical Performance of Different Salivary Self-collection Methods for the Detection of COVID-19.

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04550390
Acronym
SAMILCOV
Enrollment
329
Registered
2020-09-16
Start date
2020-09-15
Completion date
2020-10-19
Last updated
2021-03-10

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

SARS-CoV Infection

Brief summary

Since March 2020, the SARS-CoV type coronavirus infection (SARS-CoV-2; nCoV19; COVID-19) is considered pandemic. As early as April 2020, the World Health Organization recommended the implementation of mass screening of populations, with the aim of identifying cases and contacts and controlling viral spread. Since the end of lock-down on May 11, 2020,the screening policy has been intensified to fight against COVID-19. Virological tests by RT-PCR are thus accessible to all, without a prescription and reimbursed by health insurance. The French government has also set a quantitative target of 1 million tests per week. In order to meet this target, the number of sampling centers has been increased (mobile structures, etc.). Screening tests are currently carried out using a nasopharyngeal swab analyzed by RT-PCR for the detection of viral RNA. This type of sample has several technical and logistic constraints. It must be carried out by personnel who are authorized and trained in this procedure and in appropriate hospital hygiene practices. It exposes the sampling personnel to possible contamination through nasopharyngeal secretions or coughing that may occur during sampling. With the increase in screening, there are sometimes insufficient numbers of sampling personnel and there is significant market pressure for swabs and virological transport media. In addition, these swabs are uncomfortable or even painful for the patient, which could imply a reluctance to be screened. They are also complicated in children, whether they are rhino- or oropharyngeal. An alternative to the nasopharyngeal swab, which is the subject of this project, would be to have one or more reliable sampling methods that are less restrictive than the nasopharyngeal swab (gold standard). Thus, we propose to test and compare the results obtained by molecular biology techniques on nasopharyngeal, salivary and buccal swabs.

Interventions

DIAGNOSTIC_TESTSaliva collection

2 saliva samples are self-collected by participants

Sponsors

Direction Centrale du Service de Santé des Armées
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Observational model
COHORT
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* To be at least 18 years of age * To come at hospital for SARS-CoV-2 screening * To be able to receive a nasopharyngeal swab

Exclusion criteria

* People under 18 years of age * Inpatient in intensive care * Pregnant or breastfeeding woman * Individual with dry syndrome (Gougerot-Sjögren syndrome) * Taking treatments that reduce salivary volume (anticholinergic activity) * People with a COVID-19 diagnosis confirmed by a molecular biology method \>7 days ago * Contraindication to oral swabbing

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Qualitative result of molecular tests for the SARS-CoV-2 virus.At enrollment (day 1)Qualitative result may be : positive, negative or invalid. The test results will be compared between the two types of collection method.

Countries

France

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026