Pilot Evaluations of Two Bluetooth Contact Tracing Approaches on a University Campus: A Mixed Methods Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Many have proposed the use of Bluetooth technology to help scale-up contact tracing for COVID-19. However, much remains unknown about the accuracy of this technology in real-world settings, attitudes of potential users, and differences between delivery formats (mobile applications vs. carriable or wearable devices).

Objective

We pilot-tested two separate Bluetooth contact tracing technologies on a university campus to evaluate their sensitivity and specificity and to learn from the experiences of the participants.

Methods

We used a convergent mixed methods study design, and participants included graduate students and researchers working on a university campus during June-July 2020. We conducted separate two-week pilot studies for each Bluetooth technology, the first for a mobile phone application ("App Pilot") and the second for a small, electronic "tag" ("Tag Pilot"). Participants validated a list of Bluetooth-identified contacts daily and reported additional close contacts not identified by Bluetooth. We used these data to estimate sensitivity and specificity. Participants completed a post-participation survey regarding appropriateness, usability, acceptability, and adherence, and provided additional feedback via free text. We used tests of proportions to evaluate differences in survey responses between participants from each pilot, paired t-tests to measure differences between compatible survey questions, and qualitative analysis to evaluate the survey's free-text responses.

Results

Among the 25 participants in the App Pilot, 53 contact interactions were identified by Bluetooth and 61 by self-report. Among the 17 participants in the Tag Pilot, 171 contact interactions were identified via Bluetooth and four by self-report. The tag had significantly higher sensitivity compared to the app (46/49, 94% vs 35/61, 57%; p<.001), as well as higher specificity (120/126, 95% vs 123/141, 87%; p=.02). Most participants felt that Bluetooth contact tracing was appropriate on campus (26/32, 81%) while significantly fewer participants felt that using other technologies, such as GPS or Wi-Fi, was appropriate (17/31, 55%; p=0.024). Most participants preferred technology developed and managed by the university rather than a third party (27/32, 84%) and preferred not to have tracing applications on their personal phones (21/32, 66%), due to "concerns with privacy." There were no significant differences in self-reported adherence rates across pilots.

Conclusions

Convenient and carriable Bluetooth technology may improve tracing efficiency while alleviating privacy concerns by shifting data collection away from personal devices. With accuracy comparable to, and in this case superior to, mobile phone applications, such approaches may be suitable for workplace or school settings with the ability to purchase and maintain physical devices.

Clinicaltrial

SUBMITTER: Shelby T 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8555945 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature