Volume 8, Number 10—October 2002
THEME ISSUE
Bioterrorism-related Anthrax
Bioterrorism-related Anthrax
Surface Sampling Methods for Bacillus anthracis Spore Contamination
Table 4
HEPA vacuum vs. wet swab | HEPA vacuum vs. wipe | Wet swab vs. wipe | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
No. samples | 58 | 58 | 67 | |||
Levelsa agreeb | 22 | 38% | 26 | 45% | 24 | 36% |
Negative | 10 | 5 | 8 | |||
Low | 1 | 2 | 0 | |||
Medium | 0 | 8 | 10 | |||
High | 11 | 11 | 6 | |||
Levels disagree | 36 | 62% | 32 | 55% | 43 | 64% |
Higher levels | 34 | HEPA vacuum | 23 | HEPA vacuum | 13 | Wet swab |
Higher levels | 2 | Wet swab | 9 | Wipe | 30 | Wipe |
Kendall’s tau-b | 0.58 | 0.66 | 0.47 | |||
Spearman’s correlation rs (p value)c | 0.73 (<0.0001) | 0.81 (<0.0001) | 0.52 (<0.0001) |
aLevel of B. anthracis (CFU/cm2): negative = 0, low = 01–1.6, medium=1.7–15.5, and high=>15.5.
bTwo samples from the same location agree if they are concordant and are both in the same grouping.
cp value for null hypothesis of zero correlation.
Page created: July 19, 2010
Page updated: July 19, 2010
Page reviewed: July 19, 2010
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.