Back

Asymptomatic Employee Screening for SARS-CoV-2: Implementation of and Reactions to an Employer-Based Testing Program.

Goetz, L.; DeLaughder, T. L.; Kennedy, K. L.; Schork, N.; McDaniel, T.; Trent, J.; Engelthaler, D.

2020-11-10 occupational and environmental health
10.1101/2020.11.06.20227314 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionAsymptomatic testing for SARS-CoV-2 among healthcare workers or other essential personnel could remove infected carriers from the workforce, decreasing chances for transmission and workplace outbreaks. Results from one-time testing programs have been reported but data regarding longitudinal testing, including information about employees reactions to such programs, is not readily available. MethodsTo identify asymptomatic carriers of SARS-CoV-2, we implemented a longitudinal screening program for critical on-site employees within our research institute in early April 2020. We conducted a survey of both on-site employees and those working from home in order to measure their reactions to the testing program. Statistical analysis of the survey was conducted with general linear regression and Pearsons Chi-Square tests. ResultsDespite an ongoing high community prevalence rate of COVID-19, to date only two asymptomatic employees tested positive out of 1050 tests run during 7 months of the program. However, 12 symptomatic employees not participating in the program have tested positive. The employee survey was completed by 132/306 (43%) employees, with 93% agreeing that asymptomatic employee screening led to a better and safer working environment and 75% agreeing with on-site public health measures to help contain the virus, but only 58% feeling COVID-19 was a serious threat to their health. ConclusionOur results suggest that a longitudinal asymptomatic employee screening program for SARS-CoV-2 can be accepted by employees and can be used to maintain the health of the workforce, potentially keeping positivity rates below community levels in the face of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.8%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 16%
12.4%
3
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
10.1%
4
Occupational and Environmental Medicine
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.2%
5
Journal of Occupational Health
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.9%
6
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.9%
50% of probability mass above
7
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.3%
8
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.3%
9
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.6%
10
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 6%
3.6%
11
Frontiers in Psychiatry
83 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.6%
12
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 50%
2.1%
13
CMAJ Open
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.8%
14
Archives of Public Health
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
15
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
16
American Journal of Infection Control
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.5%
17
The Lancet Public Health
20 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.2%
18
Journal of Hospital Infection
27 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.1%
19
Epidemiology and Infection
84 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
20
Systematic Reviews
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
21
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology
17 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
22
Journal of General Internal Medicine
20 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.8%
23
Pilot and Feasibility Studies
12 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.8%
24
International Journal of Epidemiology
74 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
25
Journal of Public Health
23 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
26
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.6%
27
Medicine
30 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%
28
Transboundary and Emerging Diseases
34 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.6%