In vitro and in vivo comparison of transport media for detecting nasopharyngeal carriage of Streptococcus pneumoniae
PeerJ, ISSN: 2167-8359, Vol: 2016, Issue: 9, Page: e2449
2016
- 2Citations
- 13Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations2
- Citation Indexes2
- CrossRef2
- Captures13
- Readers13
- 13
Article Description
Background. As a standard method for pneumococcal carriage studies, the World Health Organization recommends nasopharyngeal swabs be transported and stored at cool temperatures in a medium containing skim-milk, tryptone, glucose and glycerol (STGG). An enrichment broth used for transport at room temperature in three carriage studies performed in Norway may have a higher sensitivity than STGG. We therefore compared the media in vitro and in vivo. Methods. For the in vitro component, three strains (serotype 4, 19F and 3) were suspended in STGG and enrichment broth. Recovery was compared using latex agglutination, quantification of bacterial loads by real-time PCR of the lytA gene, and counting colonies from incubated plates. For the in vivo comparison, paired swabs were obtained from 100 children and transported in STGG at cool temperatures or in enrichment broth at room temperature. Carriage was identified by latex agglutination and confirmed by Quellung reaction. Results. In vitro, the cycle threshold values obtained by PCR did not differ between the two media (p = 0.853) and no clear difference in colony counts was apparent after incubation (p = 0.593). In vivo, pneumococci were recovered in 46% of swabs transported in STGG and 51% of those transported in enrichment broth (Kappa statistic 0.90, p=0.063). Discussion. Overall, no statistical differences in sensitivity were found between STGG and enrichment broth. Nevertheless, some serotype differences were observed and STGG appeared slightly less sensitive than enrichment broth for detection of nasopharyngeal carriage of pneumococci by culturing. We recommend the continued use of STGG for transport and storage of nasopharyngeal swabs in pneumococcal carriage studies for the benefit of comparability between studies and settings, including more resource-limited settings.
Bibliographic Details
10.7717/peerj.2449; 10.7717/peerj.2449/fig-1; 10.7717/peerj.2449/fig-3; 10.7717/peerj.2449/table-1; 10.7717/peerj.2449/supp-2; 10.7717/peerj.2449/fig-2; 10.7717/peerj.2449/supp-3; 10.7717/peerj.2449/supp-1
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84991373138&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2449; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27688966; https://peerj.com/articles/2449/fig-1; http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2449/fig-1; https://peerj.com/articles/2449/fig-3; http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2449/fig-3; https://peerj.com/articles/2449/table-1; http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2449/table-1; https://peerj.com/articles/2449/supp-2; http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2449/supp-2; https://peerj.com/articles/2449/fig-2; http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2449/fig-2; https://peerj.com/articles/2449/supp-3; http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2449/supp-3; https://peerj.com/articles/2449/supp-1; http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2449/supp-1; https://peerj.com/articles/2449; https://peerj.com/articles/2449/; https://peerj.com/articles/2449.pdf; https://peerj.com/articles/2449.html
PeerJ
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know