Can self-testing be enhanced to hasten safe return of healthcare workers in pandemics? Random order, open label trial using two manufacturers' SARS-CoV-2 lateral flow devices concurrently
Zhang, X.; Cheyne, C. P.; Jones, C.; Humann, M.; Leeming, G.; Smith, C.; Hughes, D. M.; Burnside, G.; Dodd, S.; Penrice-Randal, R.; Dong, X.; Semple, M. G.; Neal, T.; Tunkel, S.; Fowler, T.; Turtle, L.; Garcia-Finana, M.; Buchan, I. E.
Show abstract
BackgroundCovid-19 healthcare worker testing, isolation and quarantine policies had to balance risks to patients from the virus and from staff absence. The emergence of the Omicron variant led to dangerous levels of key-worker absence globally. We evaluated whether using two manufacturers lateral flow tests (LFTs) concurrently improved SARS-CoV-2 Omicron detection and was acceptable to hospital staff. In a nested study, to understand risks of return to work after a 5-day isolation/quarantine period, we examined virus culture 5-7 days after positive test or significant exposure. MethodsFully-vaccinated Liverpool (UK) University Hospitals staff participated (February-May 2022) in a random-order, open-label trial testing whether dual LFTs improved SARS-CoV2 detection, and whether dual swabbing was acceptable to users. Participants used nose-throat swab Innova and nose-only swab Orient Gene LFTs in daily randomised order for 10 days. A user-experience questionnaire was administered on exit. Selected participants gave swabs for viral culture on Days 5-7. Cultures were considered positive if cytopathic effect was apparent or SARs-COV2 N gene sub-genomic RNA was detected. Results226 individuals reported 1466 pairs of LFT results. Tests disagreed in 127 cases (8.7%). Orient Gene was more likely (78 cf. 49, P=0.03) to be positive. Orient Gene positive Innova negative result-pairs became more frequent over time (P<0.001). If Innova was swabbed second, it was less likely to agree with a positive Orient Gene result (P=0.005); swabbing first with Innova made no significant difference (P=0.85). Of 311 individuals completing the exit questionnaire, 90.7% reported dual swabbing was easy, 57.1% said it was no barrier to their daily routine and 65.6% preferred dual testing. Respondents had more confidence in dual c.f. single test results (P<0.001). Viral cultures from Days 5-7 were positive for 6/31 (19.4%, 7.5%-37.5%) and indeterminate for 11/31 (35.5%, 19.2%-54.6%) LFT-positive participants, indicating they were likely still infectious. ConclusionsDual brand testing increased LFT detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen by a small but meaningful margin and was acceptable to hospital workers. Viral cultures demonstrated that policies recommending safe return to work [~]5 days after Omicron infection/exposure were flawed. Key-workers should be prepared for dynamic self-testing protocols in future pandemics. Trial registrationhttps://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN47058442 (IRAS:311842)
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- A prospective diagnostic evaluation of accuracy of self-taken and healthcare worker-taken swabs for rapid COVID-19 testing 96%
- Detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection by saliva and nasopharyngeal sampling in frontline healthcare workers: an observational cohort study 95%
- Adapting COVID-19 research infrastructure to capture influenza and RSV alongside SARS-CoV-2 in UK healthcare workers winter 2022/23: Evaluation of the SIREN Winter Pressures pilot study 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Perceptions on undertaking regular asymptomatic self-testing for COVID-19 using lateral flow tests: A qualitative study of university students and staff 95%
- Cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 and associated risk factors among healthcare workers in the Eastern Cape, South Africa 94%
- First and second SARS-CoV-2 waves in inner London: A comparison of admission characteristics and the impact of the B.1.1.7 variant 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Scoping Review of the Experience of Implementing Population Testing for SARS-CoV-2 95%
- Public health information on COVID-19 for international travellers: Lessons learned from a rapid mixed-method evaluation in the UK containment phase 91%
- Learning about COVID-19 across borders: Public health information and adherence among international travellers to the UK 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Multicentre evaluation of two multiplex PCR platforms for the rapid microbiological investigation of nosocomial pneumonia in UK ICUs: the INHALE WP1 study 93%
- Drive-through testing for SARS-CoV-2 in symptomatic health and social care workers and household members: an observational cohort study in Tayside, Scotland 92%
- Long-Term Acceptability of Hygiene, Face Covering, and Social Distancing Interventions to Prevent Exacerbations in people living with Airways Diseases 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 seropositivity in South-Central Uganda, during 2019 - 2021 93%
- Diagnostic performance of the combined nasal and throat swab in patients admitted to hospital with suspected COVID-19 93%
- Antibody seroprevalence and rate of asymptomatic infections with SARS-CoV-2 in Austrian hospital personnel 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.