Strike may delay critical blood testing and cause postponement of many surgical procedures
Medical technicians, phlebotomists, and clinical laboratory scientists in New Zealand are once again going on strike for fairer pay in various areas around the island nation. And their complaints mirror similar complaints by healthcare and clinical laboratory workers in the US.
The latest group of New Zealand medical laboratory workers to strike are in the South Island and Wellington regions. They were scheduled to walk off the job on July 28 after a negotiated agreement was not reached between APEX, a “specialist union representing over 4,000 allied, scientific, and technical health professionals,” according to the union’s website, and Awanui Labs, one of the country’s largest hospital and clinical laboratory services providers.
Medical laboratory workers in New Zealand are among some of the poorest paid healthcare professionals in the country’s medical industry, according to New Zealand Institute of Medical Laboratory Science President Terry Taylor who told the New Zealand Doctor that some workers aren’t making a living wage. “These people worked their butts off during the pandemic, so you’d think [Awanui] would be able to come up with a decent offer for its staff,” Taylor said.
On the picket line, New Zealand phlebotomists and medical laboratory technicians express that they do not feel they are being compensated properly. “Without your blood samples, you don’t get your results, you don’t get your treatments, you don’t get admissions, your hospital appointments, your operations,” a phlebotomist told 1News. Clinical laboratory workers in the US who experienced the enormous pressure during the COVID-19 lockdowns would likely agree. (Photo copyright: Otago Daily Times.)
Phlebotomists and lab workers in an around New Zealand are demanding a pay wage to put them on par with healthcare workers in the public sector. According to The Southland Times this raise would average around 23.5%.
However, to date Awanui has only offered the medical laboratory workers a 5% pay increase. The APEX union says that is far below what is acceptable for them.
“It doesn’t even get them to parity with colleagues from the public hospitals, and with inflation the way it is at the moment, it’s effectively a wage cut. So, it looks like these strikes are continuing,” David Munroe, Apex Union Advocacy Lead, told 1News New Zealand.
Patients in these regions can expect to see delays on blood test results as medical laboratories and phlebotomy collection centers close due to the strike action.
Poorest Paid Health Professionals in New Zealand
Last year, Dark Daily reported on a similar strike of New Zealand’s 10,000 healthcare workers—including its 4,000 medical laboratory scientists and technicians—which was scheduled to take place in March.
That strike was also over low pay and poor working conditions.
This year, unionized workers met with Awanui on May 23, but the company declined to make an offer to prevent the strike. A second day of bargaining was scheduled for May 24, but according to Munroe, Awanui refused to show up for negotiations. However, Vicki McKnight, an Awanui General Manager, claimed the company was willing to come to the table but that “APEX declined,” New Zealand Doctor reported.
“To date, there has only been one day of bargaining and the collective agreement has not yet expired, so we are surprised by the comments on potential industrial action after just one day of negotiations,” McKnight told New Zealand Doctor.
McKnight said the parties were unable to come to an agreement because of a significant gap between the claims the parties brought to the bargaining table.
Awanui Pays Out Dividends in the Millions
In reaction to workers taking to the picket line, Awanui Labs acknowledged the strike. The company’s Chief People Officer Emma Kelly told 1News, “We do value our people, and it’s a difficult position to be in strikes for our people, for our patients, for everyone. So, I just want to go into this situation with empathy and respect for all of those involved.”
However, one of the things the New Zealand clinical laboratory workers took particular issue with, in light of Awanui’s 5% offer, was that in the last financial year Awanui paid out $41 million in dividends to its shareholders. According to Munroe, the workers want the company to invest in them—instead of the shareholders.
“They are the business. You can’t run laboratories without scientists, technicians, and phlebotomists. They know it, and it’s about time the company knows it too,” Munroe told 1News.
The medical laboratory workers plan to remain on the picket line until a deal is made.
Clinical laboratory managers in the US should take heed of what the New Zealand strikers are saying about low pay and poor working conditions—situations mirrored in many nations following the COVID-19 pandemic.
Of 27 BSL-4 labs assessed, Global Biolabs ranked only seven as having ‘good’ biosafety management
In a new report, a research firm assessed the conditions at the handful of laboratories across the world that handle the most dangerous pathogens. In the wake of the SARS-CoV-2 global pandemic, there is heightened awareness of the risks of a lab accident that might release such pathogens into the environment, putting humans at risk.
Medical laboratory scientists working in clinical laboratories worldwide understand the critical nature of biosafety laboratory (BSL) criteria. Nearly all clinical laboratories that test for infectious disease agents are biosafety level-1 and -2 (BSL-1, BSL-2).
Other high-containment laboratories (HCL) that handle deadly, highly transmissible pathogens are typically government-run or university-affiliated. HCL labs have BSL-3 and BSL-4 levels and require rigorous adherence to protocols that ensure worker safety and prevent escape of dangerous pathogens.
Thus, the new report from Global Biolabs, which is critical of biorisk management protocols at existing and planned BSL-4 laboratories—especially given the increasing construction of new HCL labs worldwide—will be of interest to medical technologists, pathologists, and clinical scientists working with highly infectious diseases.
The biosafety experts who make up the Global Biolabs research team conduct risk-assessments and “provide key policy recommendations for strengthening biorisk management in BSL-4 labs,” according to the organization’s website.
“The more labs and people working with dangerous pathogens, the risks go up,” biosecurity expert Filippa Lentzos, PhD (above), Associate Professor, Science and International Security, King’s College London, told Science magazine. Lentzos was part of the team that created the Global Biolabs mapping project two years ago. Clinical laboratory managers may want to review the findings in the Global Biolabs report. (Photo copyright: King’s College London.)
Only Seven Out of 27 Countries Get ‘Good’ Overall Score
“The boom in BSL-4 lab construction appears, so far, not to have been accompanied by strengthened biorisk management oversight,” according to the Global Biolabs 2023 report from the Global Biolabs Initiative. “Additionally, most planned BSL-4 labs will be in countries with relatively low scores for governance and stability,” the report’s authors wrote.
The report included a ranking of countries by total biorisk management score, the Daily Mail noted, adding:
Of 27 countries analyzed, seven ranked as good (above 70%) for biorisk policies,
15 scored medium (above 30%),
five scored below.
Those with the best biorisk management scores (maximum 48):
Canada scored 46 (96%),
US scored 42 (88%),
Australia and the United Kingdom each scored 40 (83%).
Notably, China “scored zero on modifying pathogen rules.” According to the Daily Mail, “China’s overall management score (33) was in the middle of the pack, 69%.”
Associate Professor in Science and International Security, King’s College London, and Gregory Koblentz, PhD, Associate Professor and Director Biodefense Graduate Program, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia. The organization tracks maximum containment labs worldwide, noting trends that raise biosafety and biosecurity concerns.
According to the Daily Mail, Lentzos noted “that a particular worrying aspect of the BSL-4 boom was those countries looking to open their first lab were the bottom scorers in terms of good biorisk management.
“Many of the countries building new labs, some for the first time, score poorly on biorisk management. However, there is still time to strengthen national laws and regulations on biosafety, biosecurity, and dual-use research [biological research that could cause harm] to bring them up to international standards,” the Global Biolabs researchers wrote in their report.
Global Mapping of BSL-4 Labs
There are 51 BSL-4 labs operating worldwide, and 18 are planned or under construction, according to Global BioLab’s report. Here’s where they are located:
Europe: 24
North America: 12
Asia: 9
Oceania: 4
Africa: 2
South America: 0
Also, BSL-3+ labs total 55:
Europe: 21
North America: 18
Asia: 10
South America: 3
Africa: 2
Oceania: 1
The report also noted:
Of the 18 BSL-4 labs under construction, 11 are planned to open in Asia.
About half of BSL-4 labs are “less than the size of a tennis court.”
“Eighty percent (of BSL-4 labs) are located in urban areas, which heightens concerns about accidents at these facilities,” Koblentz told the Daily Mail.
According to Science, the number of BSL-4 labs has doubled since 2013. Growth in BLS-4 labs began around the time of the 2001 anthrax attacks and picked up speed in 2003 following the SARS outbreak, University World News reported.
Biosecurity and Biosafety Analyzed
Global Biolabs’ analysis included countries’ biosecurity and biosafety scores. Just 12 out of 27 countries with BSL-4 labs scored high on biosecurity, nine scored medium, and six scored low.
A high score for biosecurity—which US and France received—reflects laws for biosecurity, a national list of dangerous pathogens, and whistleblower protection.
Out of 27 countries, 21 with BSL-4 labs scored high on biosafety. However, two countries scored medium, and four scored low. The two countries that earned the highest scores for biosafety—Canada and Australia—have physical/engineering controls, occupational health, and transportation safety, among other areas reviewed.
Opportunities for Improvement
Global Biolabs made the following recommendations in their report:
Nations with BSL-4 and BSL-3 labs need to have in place biorisk management systems including comprehensive laws, regulations, and institutions that require safety and security risk assessments of proposed research.
Strengthening of biorisk management is called for by the World Health Organization and Biological Weapons Convention.
Labs, of all biosafety levels, are advised to aim toward safety, security, and responsible research.
The effort by Global BioLabs to create a public record of how each BSL-4 and BSL-3 laboratory adheres to strict standards of safety and operations demonstrates that some degree of risk exists in the operation of these labs. Whether government and world health authorities make it a priority to address known deficiencies in those labs is a question yet to be answered.
As a deployable medical laboratory, the 1st AML is designed to run field-based clinical laboratory diagnostics and conduct health threat assessments
Clinical laboratory professionals may be surprised to learn that the US Army has a deployable medical laboratory that is equipped to perform the same menu of basic lab tests as their labs here in the United States, but in support of army units deployed in the field. At the same time, the Army’s deployable medical lab has the added responsibility of testing for infectious diseases and chemicals/agents that could be used by terrorists or enemy forces.
“The 1st Area Medical Laboratory identifies and evaluates health hazards through unique medical laboratory analyses and rapid health hazard assessments of nuclear, biological, chemical, endemic disease, occupational, and environmental health threats,” according to an Army new release.
A recent visit by the leaders of this lab unit to meet with their counterparts in Poland highlights the important diagnostic work the military prepares for by using this one-of-a-kind clinical laboratory model.
Col. Matthew Grieser (left), Commander of the 1st Area Medical Laboratory (AML) is shown above meeting with Col. Przemysław Makowski, MD, (right), Deputy Commander of the Military Preventive Medicine Center in Wrocław, Poland. Leaders from the US Army’s 1st AML visited military and medical officials in Poland. “It was a great opportunity to meet our Polish counterparts and to learn from one another,” said Grieser in an Army news release. “We intend to continue to strengthen this relationship … Poland is a great ally, and it was an honor to visit our counterpart organizations.” (Photo copyright: US Army.)
Role and Makeup of the 1st Area Medical Laboratory
The 1st AML traces its roots back to World War II, where it was one of 19 field laboratories spun up in 1944. It was deactivated after the Vietnam War and then reactivated in 2004. It is currently the Army’s only deployable field laboratory, according to the National Library of Medicine.
This specialized unit deploys worldwide to conduct threat detection and medical surveillance, according to the Army. For example, the military can send the 1st AML to locations where samples cannot quickly be transported to a fixed facility, or where there is a need for immediate hazard identification due to chemical or biological contamination or epidemic disease.
During the Ebola outbreak in Liberia in 2014-2015, the 1st AML operated four blood-testing laboratories and helped oversee two others manned by Navy personnel. The goal was to perform quick turnaround times to identify local residents who carried the disease, all while operating with extensive safety measures. More than 4,500 samples were tested during a six-month stay, Army Times reported.
Commanders from the 1st AML recently met with medical officials and chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear experts from the Polish Armed Forces in the Warsaw area of Poland, the Army news release noted.
“It was a great opportunity to meet our Polish counterparts and to learn from one another,” said Col. Matthew Grieser, Commander of the 1st AML.
Maj. Suzanne Mate, the Chief of chemical threat assessment for the 1st AML, said meeting with allies helps to keep NATO ready for any contingency.
“It’s better to know your partners before you have to work together in a high-consequence situation,” said Mate in the Army news release. “We learned the strengths in different mobility platforms for laboratories and the capabilities within fixed scientific institutions to maintain standards and currency in chemical, biological, and radiological [CBR] investigations.
“This knowledge is invaluable when determining how to move a sample quickly and efficiently to characterize a suspected CBR threat when airlift resources are constrained or country treaties prevent movement activities,” she added.
Observant clinical laboratory managers will note similarities between their own jobs and those of the 1st AML. The military needs lab-based capabilities to perform a menu of diagnostic tests in support of Army units in the field and traditional clinical laboratories do the same in support of the healthcare providers they service.
Should this AI-driven technology prove viable in clinical settings, it could contribute to easing the shortage of qualitied phlebotomists for medical laboratories worldwide
Could phlebotomists one day be out of a job? If European medical technology company Vitestro has its way, that could someday become a reality in European hospitals and in clinical laboratories worldwide. Headquartered in the Netherlands, the company has raised EUR 12.7 million ($14,057,947.50 US) in Series A financing to bring to market “the world’s first autonomous blood drawing device,” BioWorld Med Tech reported.
According to Vitestro’s website, the “device combines AI-based, ultrasound-guided 3D reconstruction with robotic needle insertion, ensuring accurate and secure blood collection. The procedure is performed fully automatically, from tourniquet to bandage application.”
This is another example of how artificial intelligence companies are finding opportunities in staffing shortages the healthcare industry is experiencing globally. In this case, the novel technology could help address the lack of qualified phlebotomists. And clinical laboratories around the world could become the proving grounds for new AI-driven devices that end up replacing human healthcare workers.
“This financing round marks a new phase of growth for Vitestro which brings the company closer to its mission of improving the venipuncture procedure for hundreds of millions of patients per year,” said Vitestro CEO and co-founder Toon Overbeeke (above), in a press release. “We look forward to growing the business and transforming patient care with Sonder Capital, leveraging their expertise in successfully commercializing medical robotic technologies.” If proven viable, clinical laboratories around the world suffering from shortages of phlebotomists could benefit from AI-driven autonomous blood draw stations. (Photo copyright: LinkedIn.)
Next Evolution for Clinical Laboratories
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), there are 14 billion clinical laboratory tests ordered annually in the US and 70% of medical decisions depend on laboratory results. One of the more common clinical laboratory procedures—venous blood draws—is pivotal in clinical diagnostics, but a worldwide shortage of skilled phlebotomists is having an impact on this critical testing method.
With the announcement of its completion of a EUR 12.7-million Series A financing round to bring the “world’s first” autonomous blood draw device to market, Vitestro seems poised to impact both the shortage and the job prospects of existing phlebotomists. This financing round was led by San Carlos, California-based Sonder Capital and included investors with experience in the clinical laboratory and medical technology industries.
“Automating this ubiquitous procedure is the next evolution for clinical laboratories, allowing them to improve quality of care for patients while building a more sustainable operation,” stated Andy McGibbon, Managing Partner at Sonder Capital in a March press release.
According to Investopedia, Series A financing refers to “an investment in a privately-held start-up company after it has shown progress in building its business model and demonstrates the potential to grow and generate revenue. It often refers to the first round of venture money a firm raises after seed and angel investors.”
Vitestro says it will utilize the capital from this financing round to accelerate production development, prepare market authorization in the European Union, and initiate production.
Vitestro’s autonomous blood drawing device prototype (above) has been tested on more than 1,000 volunteers and patients. Vitestro plans to continue its studies on the device this year and anticipates entering the European market with the device sometime in 2024. Development of this technology is something that phlebotomists and clinical laboratory managers will want to track. (Photo copyright: Vitestro.)
Coming to a Clinical Laboratory Near You
“Medical robotics will make optimal outcomes available to everyone. I strongly believe Vitestro will set the world standard in autonomous blood drawing,” said Fred Moll, MD, Managing Partner of Sonder Capital in the press release. Moll, who has been heralded as the “father of robotic surgery,” was also appointed as a non-executive board member of Vitestro. Moll co-founded Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Hansen Medical, Restoration Robotics, and Auris Health (acquired by Ethicon, a Johnson and Johnson company).
On April 12, Vitestro announced that leading Dutch clinical laboratory OLVG Lab will be the first healthcare provider to begin using their blood-drawing device. A number of hospitals, clinical laboratories, and blood drawing departments are preparing to use the device and OLVG Lab plans to have the system fully operational by late next year, according to a press release. OLVG lab provides laboratory services to hospitals, clinics, and care providers in the greater Amsterdam area.
“Robotization has become an important topic in diagnostics. Vitestro’s technology will improve the standardization and optimization of the sampling procedure. And it helps solve staff shortages in our blood drawing department,” said Anja Leyte, director of OLVG Lab, in the press release. “But more importantly, the patients are also very positive. Our staff are really enthusiastic as well and can’t wait to start using this breakthrough technology in our healthcare.”
Vitestro’s device is still in the testing phase but could prove to be very beneficial to clinical laboratories and help alleviate the shortage of trained phlebotomists. An automated blood draw machine might also improve the consistency of the blood draw experience for both patients and healthcare professionals.
Viruses are between 27,000 to 48,500 years old and not dangerous, but researchers say thawing permafrost may one day release pathogens capable of infecting humans
Last fall, European researchers working with virologists and genetic scientists at the Aix-Marseille University in France reported having revived and characterized 13 previously unknown “zombie” viruses isolated from Siberian permafrost samples, including one that was almost 50,000 years old. This will be of particular interest to microbiologists and clinical laboratory managers since these organisms are new to science and may be precursors to infectious agents active in the world today.
The work of the European scientists demonstrates how advancements in genome sequencing and analysis of DNA data are becoming, faster, less expensive, and more precise. That’s good because the researchers warned that, should the permafrost continue to thaw, other previously dormant viruses could be released, posing potential risks for public health.
The pathogens isolated by the researchers are so-called “giant viruses” that infect Acanthamoeba, a commonly found genus of amoeba, and thus are not likely to pose an immediate health threat, the researchers wrote.
However, the scientists expressed concern. “We believe our results with Acanthamoeba-infecting viruses can be extrapolated to many other DNA viruses capable of infecting humans or animals. It is thus likely that ancient permafrost … will release these unknown viruses upon thawing,” they stated in their Viruses paper.
It’s unknown how long the viruses “could be infectious once exposed to outdoor conditions (UV light, oxygen, heat), and how likely they will be to encounter and infect a suitable host in the interval,” they added. However, “the risk is bound to increase in the context of global warming, in which permafrost thawing will keep accelerating, and more people will populate the Arctic in the wake of industrial ventures.”
“In nature we have a big natural freezer, which is the Siberian permafrost,” virologist Paulo Verardi, PhD (above), head of the Department of Pathobiology and Veterinary Science at the University of Connecticut, told The Washington Post. “And that can be a little bit concerning.” However, “if you do the risk assessment, this is very low. We have many more things to worry about right now.” Nevertheless, clinical laboratories may want to remain vigilant. (Photo copyright: University of Connecticut.)
Extremely Old, Very Large Viruses
The newly discovered viruses were found in seven different permafrost samples. Radiocarbon dating determined that they had been dormant for 27,000 to 48,500 years. But viruses contained in permafrost could be even older, the researchers wrote, as the time limit is “solely dictated by the validity range of radiocarbon dating.”
In their Viruses paper, the researchers noted that most of the 13 viruses are “at a preliminary stage of characterization,” and others have been isolated in the research laboratory “but not yet published, pending their complete genome assembly, annotation, or detailed analysis.”
“Every time we look, we will find a virus,” study co-author Jean-Michel Claverie, PhD, told The Washington Post. “It’s a done deal. We know that every time we’re going to look for viruses—infectious viruses in permafrost—we are going to find some.”
Claverie is a professor emeritus of genomics and bioinformatics in the School of Medicine at Aix-Marseille Université in Marseille, France. He leads a university laboratory known for its work in “paleovirology,” and in 2003, discovered the first known giant virus, dubbed Mimivirus. The research team included scientists from Germany and Russia.
According to CNN, unlike regular viruses that generally require an electron microscope to be viewed, giant viruses can be seen under a standard light (optical) microscope. Claverie’s laboratory previously isolated giant viruses from permafrost in 2014 and 2015.
Protecting Against Accidental Infection
To demonstrate the infectious potential of the viruses, the researchers inserted the microbes into cultured amoeba cells, which the researchers describes as “virus bait,” The Washington Post reported. One advantage of using Acanthamoeba cultures is to maintain “biological security,” the researchers wrote in their paper.
“We are using [the amoeba’s] billion years of evolutionary distance with human and other mammals as the best possible protection against an accidental infection of laboratory workers or the spread of a dreadful virus once infecting Pleistocene mammals to their contemporary relatives,” the paper noted. “The biohazard associated with reviving prehistorical amoeba-infecting viruses is thus totally negligible compared to the search for ‘paleoviruses’ directly from permafrost-preserved remains of mammoths, woolly rhinoceros, or prehistoric horses.”
The paper cites earlier research noting the presence of bacteria in ancient permafrost samples, “a significant proportion of which are thought to be alive.” These include relatives of contemporary pathogens such as:
“We can reasonably hope that an epidemic caused by a revived prehistoric pathogenic bacterium could be quickly controlled by the modern antibiotics at our disposal,” the researchers wrote, but “the situation would be much more disastrous in the case of plant, animal, or human diseases caused by the revival of an ancient unknown virus.”
However, according to The Washington Post, “Virologists who were not involved in the research said the specter of future pandemics being unleashed from the Siberian steppe ranks low on the list of current public health threats. Most new—or ancient—viruses are not dangerous, and the ones that survive the deep freeze for thousands of years tend not to be in the category of coronaviruses and other highly infectious viruses that lead to pandemics.”
Cornell University virologist Colin Parrish, PhD, President of the American Society for Virology, told The Washington Post that an ancient virus “seems like a low risk compared to the large numbers of viruses that are circulating among vertebrates around the world, and that have proven to be real threats in the past, and where similar events could happen in the future, as we still lack a framework for recognizing those ahead of time.”
Anthony Fauci, MD, former Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), responded to an earlier study from Claverie’s lab by outlining all the unlikely events that would have to transpire for one of these viruses to cause a pandemic. “The permafrost virus must be able to infect humans, it must then [cause disease], and it must be able to spread efficiently from human to human,” he told The Washington Post in 2015. “This can happen, but it is very unlikely.”
Thus, clinical laboratories probably won’t see new diagnostic testing to identify ancient viruses anytime soon. But it’s always best to remain vigilant.
Dogs’ acute sense of smell can even surpass effectiveness of some clinical laboratory testing in detecting certain diseases in humans
When it comes to COVID-19 testing, a recent Italian study demonstrates that trained dogs can detect SARS-CoV-2 with accuracy comparable to rapid molecular tests used in clinical laboratories. The researchers wanted to determine if dogs could be more effective at screening people for COVID-19 at airports, schools, and other high-traffic environments as a way to detect the coronavirus and reduce the spread of this infectious disease.
Scientists at the State University of Milan in Italy conducted a study that shows dogs can be trained to accurately identify the presence of the COVID-19 infection from both biological samples and by simply smelling an individual.
For their validation study, the Italian team trained three dogs named Nala, Otto, and Helix, “to detect the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in sweat samples from infected people. At the end of the training, the dogs achieved an average sensitivity of 93% and a specificity of 99%, showing a level of accuracy highly consistent with that of the RT-PCR [reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction] used in molecular tests and a moderate to strong reproducibility over time,” Nature reported.
RT-PCR tests are the current gold-standard for SARS-CoV-2 detection. This is yet another example of scientists training dogs to smell a disease with “acceptable” accuracy. This time for COVID-19.
“We only recruited dogs that showed themselves predisposed and positively motivated to carry out this type of activity. One of the fundamental aspects was not to cause stress or anxiety in the subjects used,” Federica Pirrone, PhD (above), Associate Professor, Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Sciences, University of Milan, and one of the authors of the study told Lifegate. “Training always takes place using positive reinforcement of a food nature: whether it’s a particularly appetizing morsel, a biscuit, or something that associates the dog’s search with a rewarding prize.” In some instances, dogs have been shown to be as good or more effective at detecting certain diseases than clinical laboratory testing. (Photo copyright: Facebook.)
Dogs More Accurate than Rapid Antigen Testing
Nala and four other dogs (Nim, Hope, Iris and Chaos) were later trained by canine technicians from Medical Detection Dogs Italy (MDDI) to identify the existence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus by directly smelling people waiting in line in pharmacies to get a nasal swab to test for the coronavirus.
Working with their handlers, the five dogs accurately signaled the presence or absence of the virus with 89% sensitivity and 95% specificity. That rate is “well above the minimum required by the WHO [World Health Organization] for rapid swabs for SARS-CoV-2,” according to Nature.
“The results of studies published so far on the accuracy of canine smell in detecting the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in biological samples (e.g., saliva, sweat, urine, trachea-bronchial secretions) from infected people suggest that sniffer dogs might reach percentages of sensitivity and specificity comparable to, or perhaps even higher, than those of RT-PCR,” the scientists wrote in Scientific Reports.
“However, although most of these studies are of good quality, none of them provided scientific validation of canine scent detection, despite this being an important requirement in the chemical analysis practice. Therefore, further applied research in this field is absolutely justified to provide definitive validation of this biodetection method,” the researchers concluded.
Other Studies into Using Dogs for Detecting Disease
Scientists from the Division of Biological and Health Sciences, Department of Agriculture and Livestock at the University of Sonora; and the Canine Training Center Obi-K19, both in Hermosillo, Mexico, conducted the study “as part of a Frontiers of Science Project of the National Council of Science and Technology (CONACYT), in which in addition to analyzing sweat compounds, trained dogs are put to sniff the samples and make detections in people who show symptoms or could be positive for coronavirus,” Mexico Daily Post reported.
The researchers trained four dogs with sweat samples and three dogs with saliva samples of COVID-19 positive patients. The samples were obtained from a health center located in Hermosillo, Sonora, in Mexico. The dogs were restricted to spend five minutes per patient and the researchers calculated the performance of the dogs by measuring sensitivity, specificity, and their 95% confidence intervals (CI).
The researchers concluded that all four of the dogs could detect COVID-19 from either sweat or saliva samples “with sensitivity and specificity rates significantly different from random [sampling] in the field.” According to the Frontiers in Medicine study, the researchers found their results promising because, they said, it is reasonable to expect the detection rate would improve with longer exposure to the samples.
The objective of the Mexican researchers is for the dogs to ultimately reach the sensitivity range requested by WHO for the performance of an antigen test, which is at least 80% sensitivity and 97% specificity. If that goal is achieved, dogs could become important partners in the control of the COVID-19 pandemic, the scientists wrote.
Data obtained so far from these studies indicate that biosensing dogs may represent an effective method of screening for COVID-19 as well as other diseases. More studies and clinical trials are needed before the widespread use of dogs might become feasible. Nevertheless, scientists all over the world are finding that Man’s best friend can be a powerful ally in the fight against the spread of deadly diseases.
In the meantime, the gold standard in COVID-19 testing will continue to be the FDA-cleared assays used by clinical laboratories throughout the United States.
