Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35809350›Full record

Observational studyPublic health2022

An evaluation of a pilot of daily testing of SARS-CoV-2 contacts in acute hospital and ambulance trusts in England.

S M A Bow, A Goddard, G Cope, N Sharp, J Schick, C Woods, K Jeffery, D Harrington, S Williams, A J Rodger and 4 more

Abstract readObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

S M A BowNHS Test and Trace, Department of Health and Social Care, UK. Electronic address: steve.bow@nhs.net.
A GoddardNHS Test and Trace, Department of Health and Social Care, UK.
G CopeNHS Test and Trace, Department of Health and Social Care, UK.
N SharpNHS Test and Trace, Department of Health and Social Care, UK.
J Schick
C WoodsLancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Lancashire, UK.
K JefferyOxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
D HarringtonBarts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
S WilliamsRoyal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
A J RodgerRoyal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
S FinerNHS Test and Trace, Department of Health and Social Care, UK.
T FowlerNHS Test and Trace, Department of Health and Social Care, UK; William Harvey Research Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
S HopkinsNHS Test and Trace, Department of Health and Social Care, UK; Public Health England, UK.
S A TunkelNHS Test and Trace, Department of Health and Social Care, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesHealthcare worker (HCW) SARS-CoV-2 contacts in England have been required to quarantine, creating staff shortages. We piloted daily contact testing (DCT) to assess its feasibility as an alternative. STUDY

designObservational service evaluation.

methodsWe conducted an observational service evaluation of 7-day DCT using antigen lateral flow devices (LFDs) at four acute hospital trusts and one ambulance trust in England. Mixed methods were used, using aggregate and individual-level test monitoring data, semi-structured interviews, and a survey of eligible contacts.

resultsIn total, 138 HCWs were identified as contacts of a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 case. Of these, 111 (80%) consented to daily LFD testing, of whom 82 (74%) completed the required programme without interruption and 12 (11%) completed with interruption. Fifty-eight participants (52%) and two non-participants (7.4%) completed the survey. In total, 28 interviews were conducted with participants, site and infection control leads, and union representatives. One participant tested positive on LFD and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test. Three participants tested positive on PCR but not LFD. DCT was well-accepted by trusts and staff. Participants reported no relaxation of their infection prevention and control behaviours. No incidents of transmission were detected. An estimated 729 potential days of work absence were averted.

conclusionsDCT can be acceptably operated in a healthcare setting, averting quarantine-related work absences in HCW SARS-CoV-2 contacts.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2AmbulancesEnglandHospitalsHumansCOVID-19Daily contact testingHealthcare workersLateral flowSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID35809350
PMCPMC9174334

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.