Dataset Information

Willingness to Seek Diagnostic Testing for SARS-CoV-2 With Home, Drive-through, and Clinic-Based Specimen Collection Locations.

ABSTRACT:

Background

SARS-CoV-2 virus testing for persons with COVID-19 symptoms, and contact tracing for those testing positive, will be critical to successful epidemic control. Willingness of persons experiencing symptoms to seek testing may determine the success of this strategy.

Methods

A cross-sectional online survey in the United States measured willingness to seek testing if feeling ill under different specimen collection scenarios: home-based saliva, home-based swab, drive-through facility swab, and clinic-based swab. Instructions clarified that home-collected specimens would be mailed to a laboratory for testing. We presented similar willingness questions regarding testing during follow-up care.

Results

Of 1435 participants, comprising a broad range of sociodemographic groups, 92% were willing to test with a home saliva specimen, 88% with home swab, 71% with drive-through swab, and 60% with clinic-collected swab. Moreover, 68% indicated they would be more likely to get tested if there was a home testing option. There were no significant differences in willingness items across sociodemographic variables or for those currently experiencing COVID-19 symptoms. Results were nearly identical for willingness to receive testing for follow-up COVID-19 care.

Conclusions

We observed a hierarchy of willingness to test for SARS-CoV-2, ordered by the degree of contact required. Home specimen collection options could result in up to one-third more symptomatic persons seeking testing, facilitating contact tracing and optimal clinical care. Remote specimen collection options may ease supply chain challenges and decrease the likelihood of nosocomial transmission. As home specimen collection options receive regulatory approval, they should be scaled rapidly by health systems.

SUBMITTER: Siegler AJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7337815 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn most high HIV burden countries, many HIV patients do not have reliable access to required diagnostic laboratory tests. Task shifting of clinical tasks to lower cadres of health care workers and lay counselors has been successful in scaling up treatment for HIV and may also be an effective strategy in expanding access to essential diagnostic testing.MethodsWe screened major electronic databases between 1 January 2005 to 26 August 2018 to identify studies assessing ease of use and accuracy of task shifting of HIV-related diagnostic testing and/or specimen collection to non-laboratory health staff. Two independent reviewers screened all titles and abstracts for studies that analyzed diagnostic accuracy, patient impact, ease-of-use, or cost-effectiveness. Studies were assessed for quality, bias, and applicability following the QUADAS-2 framework. We generated summary estimates using random-effects meta-analyses.ResultsWe identified 42 relevant studies. Overall, point-of-care CD4 testing performed by non-laboratory staff had a mean bias of -54.44 (95% CI: -72.40 --36.48) compared to conventional laboratory-based. Though studies were limited, the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care alanine transaminase enzyme (ALT) and hemoglobin testing performed by non-laboratory staff was comparable to conventional laboratory-based testing by laboratory professionals. Point-of-care testing and/or specimen collection were generally found to be acceptable and easy to use for non-laboratory staff.ConclusionsTask shifting of testing using point-of-care technologies to non-laboratory staff was comparable to laboratory professionals operating the same technology in the laboratory. Some variability was observed comparing the performance of point-of-care CD4 testing by non-laboratory staff to conventional laboratory-based technologies by laboratory professionals indicating potential lower performance was likely technological rather than operator caused. The benefits of task shifting of testing may outweigh any possible harms as task shifting allows for increased decentralization, access of specific diagnostics, and faster result delivery.

Project description:ImportanceCriterion-standard specimens for tuberculosis diagnosis in young children, gastric aspirate (GA) and induced sputum, are invasive and rarely collected in resource-limited settings. A far less invasive approach to tuberculosis diagnostic testing in children younger than 5 years as sensitive as current reference standards is important to identify.ObjectiveTo characterize the sensitivity of preferably minimally invasive specimen and assay combinations relative to maximum observed yield from all specimens and assays combined.Design, setting, and participantsIn this prospective cross-sectional diagnostic study, the reference standard was a panel of up to 2 samples of each of 6 specimen types tested for Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex by Xpert MTB/RIF assay and mycobacteria growth indicator tube culture. Multiple different combinations of specimens and tests were evaluated as index tests. A consecutive series of children was recruited from inpatient and outpatient settings in Kisumu County, Kenya, between October 2013 and August 2015. Participants were children younger than 5 years who had symptoms of tuberculosis (unexplained cough, fever, malnutrition) and parenchymal abnormality on chest radiography or who had cervical lymphadenopathy. Children with 1 or more evaluable specimen for 4 or more primary study specimen types were included in the analysis. Data were analyzed from February 2015 to October 2020.Main outcomes and measuresCumulative and incremental diagnostic yield of combinations of specimen types and tests relative to the maximum observed yield.ResultsOf the 300 enrolled children, the median (interquartile range) age was 2.0 (1.0-3.6) years, and 151 (50.3%) were female. A total of 294 met criteria for analysis. Of 31 participants with confirmed tuberculosis (maximum observed yield), 24 (sensitivity, 77%; interdecile range, 68%-87%) had positive results on up to 2 GA samples and 20 (sensitivity, 64%; interdecile range, 53%-76%) had positive test results on up to 2 induced sputum samples. The yields of 2 nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA) samples (23 of 31 [sensitivity, 74%; interdecile range, 64%-84%]), of 1 NPA sample and 1 stool sample (22 of 31 [sensitivity, 71%; interdecile range, 60%-81%]), or of 1 NPA sample and 1 urine sample (21.5 of 31 [sensitivity, 69%; interdecile range, 58%-80%]) were similar to reference-standard specimens. Combining up to 2 each of GA and NPA samples had an average yield of 90% (28 of 31).Conclusions and relevanceNPA, in duplicate or in combination with stool or urine specimens, was readily obtainable and had diagnostic yield comparable with reference-standard specimens. This combination could improve tuberculosis diagnosis among children in resource-limited settings. Combining GA and NPA had greater yield than that of the current reference standards and may be useful in certain clinical and research settings.