The test to detect coronavirus through saliva has similar precision to the nasal swab, in which a swab is placed in the nose and mouth to collect samples from the back of the throat, according to research carried out at the Federal University of Paraná (UFPR).The study, published in March in an international journal, compared three collection methods for detecting the Sars-Cov-2 virus: nasopharyngeal swab, saliva and mouthwash.According to the results of the research, the first two have similar precision, which accredited the use of saliva as a method applied in testing at the university.The technical note was published in the journal Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease and was part of the master's thesis by researcher Gustavo Genelhoud, from the postgraduate program in Genetics, under the guidance of Professor Patrícia Savio de Araújo Souza.According to the professor, the motivation for the research came with the demand for exams, at the beginning of the pandemic.There was pressure in the production chain and low availability of rayon swabs, a condition for collecting samples for the RT-PCR test, considered the gold standard for the diagnosis of Covid-19.In addition, lower cost alternatives were sought that could be performed by the patient himself, without the need for a trained professional.In the study, saliva showed greater sensitivity and accuracy than mouthwash samples.The differential of the UFPR study is that the tests involved paired samples (collected in sequence), which did not occur in many studies that have already been published.Professor Railson Henneberg, head of the Diagnostic and Therapeutic Support Division at the Complexo Hospital de Clínicas (CHC-UFPR), was one of the volunteers who underwent the tests.For him, the fact that the saliva test is painless is an advantage over other methods.“Swab collection brings great anxiety in people because of reports that it hurts, is aggressive, etc.When I collected the saliva, I noticed the advantages of being painless, which increases adherence to the test”, he explains.A total of 229 samples from workers at the Complexo Hospital de Clínicas da UFPR were analyzed between August and November 2020. The volunteers underwent the three tests in a single moment, for comparison of the methods.Among the samples, 41 were positive for Sars-CoV-2 by swab, 40 by saliva and 36 by gargling.Samples with positive results underwent three types of analysis:Specificity: to prove that the positive results translate into the expected condition, that is, having Covid-19.In this case, the three methods had more than 95% specificity, which shows the low incidence of false negatives.Sensitivity: to indicate that, even at low concentrations, it is possible to detect the presence of the virus.That is, if the test was positive for the swab (in 100% of cases), it should also be positive for the other two methods.According to the results, the sensitivity reached 87.8% of the saliva tests and 80.5% of the mouthwash tests.Accuracy: considers the two previous parameters associated, to generate a percentage of agreement with the gold standard test.In comparison with the swab, there were equal diagnoses in 96.9% of the saliva samples and in 95.6% of the gargle samples.With g1 Click here and join our WhatsApp groupImportant notice: The total or partial reproduction of any content (texts, images, infographics, flash files, etc.) of the portal is not allowed and, if configured, may be subject to a complaint both in search engines and in the judicial sphere.If you have a blog or website and want to establish a partnership to reproduce our content, please contact us by e-mail: journalism@opresente.com.br Rua Minas Gerais, 633 - Centro Marechal Cândido Rondon - PR (45) 3254-1842 Data Officer - DPO Flavio Ervino Schmidt flavio@schmidt.adv.br OAB/PR 27.959