Search

Quantitative PCR (qPCR) is a leading screening tool, permitting rapid detection of pathogens and the maintenance of effective infection control programs. Unfortunately, qPCR assays frequently do not incorporate Sample Adequacy Control (SAC). A SAC controls for the quantity, quality and adequacy of the specimen. Without SAC, the confidence in a negative result remains questionable and the efficacy of screening is compromised. Ultimately, the exclusion of SAC from qPCR may result in false negative results. One should consider SAC to be an integral critical type of laboratory control; addressing diverse analytical problems, such as sample adequacy, sample processing and assay inhibition. Following distribution of cycle threshold values (Cq) of Influenza A positive results and Cq values of SAC, obtained from nasopharyngeal swabs, we showed that the confidence in a negative result cannot be guaranteed in the presence of a weak positive SAC signal (late Cq values). Herein, we explain why widespread inclusion of sample adequacy control in routine screening is blocked. A protocol and methods for SAC threshold establishment are offered., (Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Rectal swabs are routinely used by public health authorities to screen for multi-drug resistant enteric bacteria including vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) and carbapenem-resistant enterobacteriaceae (CRE). Screening sensitivity can be influenced by the quality of the swabbing, whether performed by the patient (self-swabbing) or a healthcare practitioner. One common exclusion criterion for rectal swabs is absence of "visible soiling" from fecal matter. In our institution, this criterion excludes almost 10% of rectal swabs received in the microbiology laboratory. Furthermore, over 30% of patients in whom rectal swabs are cancelled will not be re-screened within the next 48h, resulting in delays in removing infection prevention measures. We describe two quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR)-based assays, human RNAse P and eubacterial 16S rDNA, which might serve as suitable controls for sampling adequacy. However, lower amounts of amplifiable human DNA make the 16s rDNA assay a better candidate for sample adequacy control., (Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)