ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
An evaluation of barriers and facilitators to implementing multiplex rapid antigen testing for SARS-CoV-2 and influenza A and B in congregate living settings.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Point of care multiplex rapid antigen testing (RAT) is a tool that can be used to mitigate and respond to facility-based infectious disease outbreaks. However, little is known about how to optimally implement this testing in congregate living settings (CLSs), including long term care homes (LTCHs), retirement homes (RHs), and shelters serving people experiencing homelessness. Our objective was to explore the barriers and facilitators to implementing a new device for multiplex RAT for COVID-19 and influenza across CLSs in the Greater Toronto Area, Canada. Materials and methods: Using key informant interviews, we assessed barriers and facilitators to implementing multiplex RAT across CLSs. Qualitative coding using the framework approach was used to identify themes. We used the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to identify individual and contextual-level barriers and facilitators to implementation. Identified barriers were then mapped to implementation strategies using theoretically-rooted frameworks and tools. Results: We completed 45 interviews with staff at CLSs (8 LTCHs, 4 RHs, 12 shelters) between January 2022 and March 2023. Four barriers to RAT implementation in CLSs emerged including: limited material resources for implementation; insufficient staff capacity to perform RAT testing; complexity of RAT implementation; and reluctance among staff to adopt a new testing process. Five facilitators to implementation were described including: training and implementation support for staff at the CLSs; site-level implementation champions; access to materials to support testing; perceived advantages of simultaneous testing for COVID-19 and influenza; and the usability and functionality of the RAT testing device. Twenty implementation strategies were identified through implementation strategy mapping. Discussion: Multiplex RAT options can empower CLS staff to promptly identify and respond to viral respiratory outbreaks. The use of evidence-based implementation strategies can enhance the effectiveness of using multiplex RAT to control outbreaks in CLSs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.