Some are more equal--a comparative study on swab uptake and release of bacterial suspensions
Swabs are widely used to collect samples for microbiological analyses from various clinical settings. They vary by material, size, and structure of the tip. This study investigates the uptake and release capacities for liquid and bacteria. Five swabs were analyzed for their uptake and release capaci...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | PloS one 2014-07, Vol.9 (7), p.e102215-e102215 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | e102215 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 7 |
| container_start_page | e102215 |
| container_title | PloS one |
| container_volume | 9 |
| creator | Warnke, Philipp Warning, Liesa Podbielski, Andreas |
| description | Swabs are widely used to collect samples for microbiological analyses from various clinical settings. They vary by material, size, and structure of the tip. This study investigates the uptake and release capacities for liquid and bacteria.
Five swabs were analyzed for their uptake and release capacities of Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis suspensions. Two approaches were investigated providing volume-restricted and unrestricted amounts of bacterial suspensions to mimic various clinical situations. Volume and bacterial uptake and release were measured in milligrams and by counting colony forming units (CFU), respectively.
Volume uptake and release in the unrestricted setting varied highly significant between 239.6 mg and 88.7 mg (p |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1371/journal.pone.0102215 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_1544377292</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A418636082</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_d61b8cc077b2424c9589fd9c161cd807</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A418636082</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-68b5b582ad01d4e0eb026327b4e1bb84d950582de74505d8bd887d568540ea23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNk29r1TAUxosobk6_gWhBEH3Ra5KmafpGGMM_FwYDN3wlhDQ5vbfXtOmSdLpvb-rtxq3shTQ0Ifk9T5KTc5LkJUYrnJf4w86OrpdmNdgeVggjQnDxKDnGVU4yRlD--GB8lDzzfodQkXPGniZHpIgCSshx8uPSdpBKB2ln4w-uR2myTKbKdoN0MrQ3kPow6tvU9qn_Jet0HIL8GSW9Th0YkB5S26S1VAFcK03qRz9A71vb--fJk0YaDy_m_iS5-vzp6uxrdn7xZX12ep4pVpGQMV4XdcGJ1AhrCghqRFhOypoCrmtOdVWguKyhpHGgea05L3XBeEERSJKfJK_3toOxXsxx8QIXlOZlSaqJWO8JbeVODK7tpLsVVrbi74R1GyFdaJUBoRmuuVKoLGtCCVVVwatGVwozrDRHZfT6OO821h1oBX1w0ixMlyt9uxUbeyMoqgjGOBq8mw2cvR7BB9G1XoExsgc77s9d5iy2iL75B334djO1kfECbd_YuK-aTMUpxZzlDPGJWj1AxU9D16qYRE0b5xeC9wtBZAL8Dhs5ei_Wl9_-n734vmTfHrBbkCZsvTVjmFJmCdI9qJz13kFzH2SMxFQDd9EQUw2IuQai7NXhA92L7pI-_wPZNQAL</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1544377292</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Some are more equal--a comparative study on swab uptake and release of bacterial suspensions</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Warnke, Philipp ; Warning, Liesa ; Podbielski, Andreas</creator><contributor>Kluytmans, Jan</contributor><creatorcontrib>Warnke, Philipp ; Warning, Liesa ; Podbielski, Andreas ; Kluytmans, Jan</creatorcontrib><description>Swabs are widely used to collect samples for microbiological analyses from various clinical settings. They vary by material, size, and structure of the tip. This study investigates the uptake and release capacities for liquid and bacteria.
Five swabs were analyzed for their uptake and release capacities of Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis suspensions. Two approaches were investigated providing volume-restricted and unrestricted amounts of bacterial suspensions to mimic various clinical situations. Volume and bacterial uptake and release were measured in milligrams and by counting colony forming units (CFU), respectively.
Volume uptake and release in the unrestricted setting varied highly significant between 239.6 mg and 88.7 mg (p<0.001) and between 65.2 mg and 2.2 mg (p<0.001), respectively. In the volume-restricted setting the complete volume was absorbed by all swabs, volume release could only be detected for flocked swabs (2.7 mg; p<0.001). Highest amount of CFU release was detected for the MWE Dryswab in the unrestricted setting for both S. aureus and S. epidermidis with 1544 CFU and 553 CFU, respectively, lowest release for the Sarstedt neutral swab with 32 CFU and 17 CFU, respectively (p<0.001). In the volume-restricted setting MWE Σ-Swab released the highest bacterial amount with 135 CFU S. aureus and 55 CFU S. epidermidis, respectively, the lowest amount was released by Mast Mastaswab with 2 CFU S. aureus and 1 CFU S. epidermidis, respectively (p<0.001). Within the range of the utilized bacterial concentrations, uptake/release ratios were identical for the particular swab types and independent of the bacterial species.
The influence of the swab type on subsequent diagnostic results is often underestimated. Uptake and release of the investigated bacteria vary significantly between different swab types and sampling conditions. For best diagnostic outcome swabs should be chosen according to the examined situation and the swab performance profile.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0102215</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25010422</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Bacteria ; Bacterial infections ; Biology and Life Sciences ; Colony Count, Microbial ; Comparative analysis ; Comparative studies ; Diagnostic systems ; Humans ; Hygiene ; Laboratories ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; Microbiology ; Ovis aries ; Quality control ; Skin ; Specimen Handling ; Staphylococcal Infections - diagnosis ; Staphylococcal Infections - microbiology ; Staphylococcus aureus ; Staphylococcus aureus - isolation & purification ; Staphylococcus aureus - pathogenicity ; Staphylococcus epidermidis ; Staphylococcus epidermidis - isolation & purification ; Staphylococcus epidermidis - pathogenicity ; Staphylococcus infections ; Stem Cells - microbiology ; Suspensions ; Virology</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2014-07, Vol.9 (7), p.e102215-e102215</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2014 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2014 Warnke et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2014 Warnke et al 2014 Warnke et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-68b5b582ad01d4e0eb026327b4e1bb84d950582de74505d8bd887d568540ea23</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-68b5b582ad01d4e0eb026327b4e1bb84d950582de74505d8bd887d568540ea23</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4092111/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4092111/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,2102,2928,23866,27924,27925,53791,53793,79472,79473</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25010422$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Kluytmans, Jan</contributor><creatorcontrib>Warnke, Philipp</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Warning, Liesa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Podbielski, Andreas</creatorcontrib><title>Some are more equal--a comparative study on swab uptake and release of bacterial suspensions</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>Swabs are widely used to collect samples for microbiological analyses from various clinical settings. They vary by material, size, and structure of the tip. This study investigates the uptake and release capacities for liquid and bacteria.
Five swabs were analyzed for their uptake and release capacities of Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis suspensions. Two approaches were investigated providing volume-restricted and unrestricted amounts of bacterial suspensions to mimic various clinical situations. Volume and bacterial uptake and release were measured in milligrams and by counting colony forming units (CFU), respectively.
Volume uptake and release in the unrestricted setting varied highly significant between 239.6 mg and 88.7 mg (p<0.001) and between 65.2 mg and 2.2 mg (p<0.001), respectively. In the volume-restricted setting the complete volume was absorbed by all swabs, volume release could only be detected for flocked swabs (2.7 mg; p<0.001). Highest amount of CFU release was detected for the MWE Dryswab in the unrestricted setting for both S. aureus and S. epidermidis with 1544 CFU and 553 CFU, respectively, lowest release for the Sarstedt neutral swab with 32 CFU and 17 CFU, respectively (p<0.001). In the volume-restricted setting MWE Σ-Swab released the highest bacterial amount with 135 CFU S. aureus and 55 CFU S. epidermidis, respectively, the lowest amount was released by Mast Mastaswab with 2 CFU S. aureus and 1 CFU S. epidermidis, respectively (p<0.001). Within the range of the utilized bacterial concentrations, uptake/release ratios were identical for the particular swab types and independent of the bacterial species.
The influence of the swab type on subsequent diagnostic results is often underestimated. Uptake and release of the investigated bacteria vary significantly between different swab types and sampling conditions. For best diagnostic outcome swabs should be chosen according to the examined situation and the swab performance profile.</description><subject>Bacteria</subject><subject>Bacterial infections</subject><subject>Biology and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Colony Count, Microbial</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Comparative studies</subject><subject>Diagnostic systems</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Hygiene</subject><subject>Laboratories</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>Microbiology</subject><subject>Ovis aries</subject><subject>Quality control</subject><subject>Skin</subject><subject>Specimen Handling</subject><subject>Staphylococcal Infections - diagnosis</subject><subject>Staphylococcal Infections - microbiology</subject><subject>Staphylococcus aureus</subject><subject>Staphylococcus aureus - isolation & purification</subject><subject>Staphylococcus aureus - pathogenicity</subject><subject>Staphylococcus epidermidis</subject><subject>Staphylococcus epidermidis - isolation & purification</subject><subject>Staphylococcus epidermidis - pathogenicity</subject><subject>Staphylococcus infections</subject><subject>Stem Cells - microbiology</subject><subject>Suspensions</subject><subject>Virology</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNk29r1TAUxosobk6_gWhBEH3Ra5KmafpGGMM_FwYDN3wlhDQ5vbfXtOmSdLpvb-rtxq3shTQ0Ifk9T5KTc5LkJUYrnJf4w86OrpdmNdgeVggjQnDxKDnGVU4yRlD--GB8lDzzfodQkXPGniZHpIgCSshx8uPSdpBKB2ln4w-uR2myTKbKdoN0MrQ3kPow6tvU9qn_Jet0HIL8GSW9Th0YkB5S26S1VAFcK03qRz9A71vb--fJk0YaDy_m_iS5-vzp6uxrdn7xZX12ep4pVpGQMV4XdcGJ1AhrCghqRFhOypoCrmtOdVWguKyhpHGgea05L3XBeEERSJKfJK_3toOxXsxx8QIXlOZlSaqJWO8JbeVODK7tpLsVVrbi74R1GyFdaJUBoRmuuVKoLGtCCVVVwatGVwozrDRHZfT6OO821h1oBX1w0ixMlyt9uxUbeyMoqgjGOBq8mw2cvR7BB9G1XoExsgc77s9d5iy2iL75B334djO1kfECbd_YuK-aTMUpxZzlDPGJWj1AxU9D16qYRE0b5xeC9wtBZAL8Dhs5ei_Wl9_-n734vmTfHrBbkCZsvTVjmFJmCdI9qJz13kFzH2SMxFQDd9EQUw2IuQai7NXhA92L7pI-_wPZNQAL</recordid><startdate>20140710</startdate><enddate>20140710</enddate><creator>Warnke, Philipp</creator><creator>Warning, Liesa</creator><creator>Podbielski, Andreas</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140710</creationdate><title>Some are more equal--a comparative study on swab uptake and release of bacterial suspensions</title><author>Warnke, Philipp ; Warning, Liesa ; Podbielski, Andreas</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-68b5b582ad01d4e0eb026327b4e1bb84d950582de74505d8bd887d568540ea23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Bacteria</topic><topic>Bacterial infections</topic><topic>Biology and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Colony Count, Microbial</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Comparative studies</topic><topic>Diagnostic systems</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Hygiene</topic><topic>Laboratories</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>Microbiology</topic><topic>Ovis aries</topic><topic>Quality control</topic><topic>Skin</topic><topic>Specimen Handling</topic><topic>Staphylococcal Infections - diagnosis</topic><topic>Staphylococcal Infections - microbiology</topic><topic>Staphylococcus aureus</topic><topic>Staphylococcus aureus - isolation & purification</topic><topic>Staphylococcus aureus - pathogenicity</topic><topic>Staphylococcus epidermidis</topic><topic>Staphylococcus epidermidis - isolation & purification</topic><topic>Staphylococcus epidermidis - pathogenicity</topic><topic>Staphylococcus infections</topic><topic>Stem Cells - microbiology</topic><topic>Suspensions</topic><topic>Virology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Warnke, Philipp</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Warning, Liesa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Podbielski, Andreas</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Proquest Nursing & Allied Health Source</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Warnke, Philipp</au><au>Warning, Liesa</au><au>Podbielski, Andreas</au><au>Kluytmans, Jan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Some are more equal--a comparative study on swab uptake and release of bacterial suspensions</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2014-07-10</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>9</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>e102215</spage><epage>e102215</epage><pages>e102215-e102215</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>Swabs are widely used to collect samples for microbiological analyses from various clinical settings. They vary by material, size, and structure of the tip. This study investigates the uptake and release capacities for liquid and bacteria.
Five swabs were analyzed for their uptake and release capacities of Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis suspensions. Two approaches were investigated providing volume-restricted and unrestricted amounts of bacterial suspensions to mimic various clinical situations. Volume and bacterial uptake and release were measured in milligrams and by counting colony forming units (CFU), respectively.
Volume uptake and release in the unrestricted setting varied highly significant between 239.6 mg and 88.7 mg (p<0.001) and between 65.2 mg and 2.2 mg (p<0.001), respectively. In the volume-restricted setting the complete volume was absorbed by all swabs, volume release could only be detected for flocked swabs (2.7 mg; p<0.001). Highest amount of CFU release was detected for the MWE Dryswab in the unrestricted setting for both S. aureus and S. epidermidis with 1544 CFU and 553 CFU, respectively, lowest release for the Sarstedt neutral swab with 32 CFU and 17 CFU, respectively (p<0.001). In the volume-restricted setting MWE Σ-Swab released the highest bacterial amount with 135 CFU S. aureus and 55 CFU S. epidermidis, respectively, the lowest amount was released by Mast Mastaswab with 2 CFU S. aureus and 1 CFU S. epidermidis, respectively (p<0.001). Within the range of the utilized bacterial concentrations, uptake/release ratios were identical for the particular swab types and independent of the bacterial species.
The influence of the swab type on subsequent diagnostic results is often underestimated. Uptake and release of the investigated bacteria vary significantly between different swab types and sampling conditions. For best diagnostic outcome swabs should be chosen according to the examined situation and the swab performance profile.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>25010422</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0102215</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1932-6203 |
| ispartof | PloS one, 2014-07, Vol.9 (7), p.e102215-e102215 |
| issn | 1932-6203 1932-6203 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_plos_journals_1544377292 |
| source | MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Public Library of Science (PLoS); EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry |
| subjects | Bacteria Bacterial infections Biology and Life Sciences Colony Count, Microbial Comparative analysis Comparative studies Diagnostic systems Humans Hygiene Laboratories Medicine and Health Sciences Microbiology Ovis aries Quality control Skin Specimen Handling Staphylococcal Infections - diagnosis Staphylococcal Infections - microbiology Staphylococcus aureus Staphylococcus aureus - isolation & purification Staphylococcus aureus - pathogenicity Staphylococcus epidermidis Staphylococcus epidermidis - isolation & purification Staphylococcus epidermidis - pathogenicity Staphylococcus infections Stem Cells - microbiology Suspensions Virology |
| title | Some are more equal--a comparative study on swab uptake and release of bacterial suspensions |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T20%3A44%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Some%20are%20more%20equal--a%20comparative%20study%20on%20swab%20uptake%20and%20release%20of%20bacterial%20suspensions&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Warnke,%20Philipp&rft.date=2014-07-10&rft.volume=9&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=e102215&rft.epage=e102215&rft.pages=e102215-e102215&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0102215&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA418636082%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1544377292&rft_id=info:pmid/25010422&rft_galeid=A418636082&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_d61b8cc077b2424c9589fd9c161cd807&rfr_iscdi=true |