RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Early rehospitalization of frail older adults after hospital discharge is harmful to patients and challenging to hospitals. Mobile integrated health (MIH) programs may be an effective solution for delivering community-based transitional care. The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility and implementation of an MIH transitional care program. DESIGN: Pilot clinical trial of a transitional home visit conducted by MIH paramedics within 72 hours of hospital discharge. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged ≥65 years discharged from an urban hospital with a system-adapted eFrailty index ≥0.24 were eligible to participate. METHODS: Participants were enrolled after hospital discharge. Demographic and clinical information were recorded at enrollment and 30 days after discharge from the electronic health record. Data from a comparison group of patients excluded from enrollment due to geographical location was also abstracted. Primary outcomes were intervention feasibility and implementation, which were reported descriptively. Exploratory clinical outcomes included emergency department (ED) visits and rehospitalization within 30 days. Categorical and continuous group comparisons were conducted using χ2 tests and Kruskal-Wallis testing. Binomial regression was used for comparative outcomes. RESULTS: One hundred of 134 eligible individuals (74.6%) were enrolled (median age 81, 64% female). Forty-seven participants were included in the control group (median age 80, 55.2% female). The complete protocol was performed in 92 (92.0%) visits. Paramedics identified acute clinical problems in 23 (23.0%) visits, requested additional services for participants during 34 (34.0%) encounters, and detected medication errors during 34 (34.0%). The risk of 30-day rehospitalization was lower in the Paramedic-Assisted Community Evaluation after Discharge (PACED) group compared with the control (RR, 0.40; CI, 0.19-0.84; P = .03); there was a trend toward decreased risk of 30-day ED visits (RR, 0.61; CI, 0.37-1.37; P = .23). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: This pilot study of an MIH transition care program was feasible with high protocol fidelity. It yields preliminary evidence demonstrating a decreased risk of rehospitalization in frail older adults.
RESUMEN
Introduction: Cerebrovascular accidents rarely occur in children; the incidence of ischemic stroke in patients <16 years of age is between 0.6-7.9/100,000. However, they are the fourth most common cause of acute neurological deficits in the pediatric population, and possible cases should be evaluated with a high index of suspicion to ensure timely intervention. Case Report: We describe a previously healthy 17-year-old male who presented to the pediatric emergency department with a left facial droop and hemiparesis consistent with a stroke. The patient's age and lack of comorbidities made this an extremely uncommon presentation. Our patient's neurologic symptoms were believed to have been caused by a recent traumatic clavicular injury sustained two weeks prior, which subsequently led to vascular insult. Conclusion: Cerebrovascular accidents are an important cause of morbidity and mortality in pediatric patients. Cerebrovascular accidents in children are most often secondary to congenital causes; however, care should be taken to assess for acquired causes, such as trauma to major blood vessels. While rarely implicated in traumatic injuries, arterial structures posterior to the medial clavicle can result in severe complications.
RESUMEN
Background: Understanding changes in diagnostic performance after symptom onset and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) exposure within different populations is crucial to guide the use of diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2. Methods: The Test Us at Home study was a longitudinal cohort study that enrolled individuals across the United States between October 2021 and February 2022. Participants performed paired antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) and reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests at home every 48â hours for 15 days and self-reported symptoms and known coronavirus disease 2019 exposures immediately before testing. The percent positivity for Ag-RDTs and RT-PCR tests was calculated each day after symptom onset and exposure and stratified by vaccination status, variant, age category, and sex. Results: The highest percent positivity occurred 2 days after symptom onset (RT-PCR, 91.2%; Ag-RDT, 71.1%) and 6 days after exposure (RT-PCR, 91.8%; Ag-RDT, 86.2%). RT-PCR and Ag-RDT performance did not differ by vaccination status, variant, age category, or sex. The percent positivity for Ag-RDTs was lower among exposed, asymptomatic than among symptomatic individuals (37.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.7%-69.4%) vs 90.3% (75.1%-96.7%). Cumulatively, Ag-RDTs detected 84.9% (95% CI, 78.2%-89.8%) of infections within 4 days of symptom onset. For exposed participants, Ag-RDTs detected 94.0% (95% CI, 86.7%-97.4%) of RT-PCR-confirmed infections within 6 days of exposure. Conclusions: The percent positivity for Ag-RDTs and RT-PCR tests was highest 2 days after symptom onset and 6 days after exposure, and performance increased with serial testing. The percent positivity of Ag-RDTs was lowest among asymptomatic individuals but did not differ by sex, variant, vaccination status, or age category.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Medical resuscitations in rugged prehospital settings require emergency personnel to perform high-risk procedures in low-resource conditions. Just-in-Time Guidance (JITG) utilizing augmented reality (AR) guidance may be a solution. There is little literature on the utility of AR-mediated JITG tools for facilitating the performance of emergent field care. STUDY OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate the feasibility and efficacy of a novel AR-mediated JITG tool for emergency field procedures. METHODS: Emergency medical technician-basic (EMT-B) and paramedic cohorts were randomized to either video training (control) or JITG-AR guidance (intervention) groups for performing bag-valve-mask (BVM) ventilation, intraosseous (IO) line placement, and needle-decompression (Needle-d) in a medium-fidelity simulation environment. For the interventional condition, subjects used an AR technology platform to perform the tasks. The primary outcome was participant task performance; the secondary outcomes were participant-reported acceptability. Participant task score, task time, and acceptability ratings were reported descriptively and compared between the control and intervention groups using chi-square analysis for binary variables and unpaired t-testing for continuous variables. RESULTS: Sixty participants were enrolled (mean age 34.8 years; 72% male). In the EMT-B cohort, there was no difference in average task performance score between the control and JITG groups for the BVM and IO tasks; however, the control group had higher performance scores for the Needle-d task (mean score difference 22%; P = .01). In the paramedic cohort, there was no difference in performance scores between the control and JITG group for the BVM and Needle-d tasks, but the control group had higher task scores for the IO task (mean score difference 23%; P = .01). For all task and participant types, the control group performed tasks more quickly than in the JITG group. There was no difference in participant usability or usefulness ratings between the JITG or control conditions for any of the tasks, although paramedics reported they were less likely to use the JITG equipment again (mean difference 1.96 rating points; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated preliminary evidence that AR-mediated guidance for emergency medical procedures is feasible and acceptable. These observations, coupled with AR's promise for real-time interaction and on-going technological advancements, suggest the potential for this modality in training and practice that justifies future investigation.
RESUMEN
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is a common, costly, and morbid condition. Pulmonary rehabilitation, close monitoring, and early intervention during acute exacerbations of symptoms represent a comprehensive approach to improve outcomes, but the optimal means of delivering these services is uncertain. Logistical, financial, and social barriers to providing healthcare through face-to-face encounters, paired with recent developments in technology, have stimulated interest in exploring alternative models of care. The Healthy at Home study seeks to determine the feasibility of a multimodal, digitally enhanced intervention provided to participants with COPD longitudinally over six months. This paper details the recruitment, methods, and analysis plan for the study, which is recruiting 100 participants in its pilot phase. Participants were provided with several integrated services including a smartwatch to track physiological data, a study app to track symptoms and study instruments, access to a mobile integrated health program for acute clinical needs, and a virtual comprehensive pulmonary support service. Participants shared physiologic, demographic, and symptom reports, electronic health records, and claims data with the study team, facilitating a better understanding of their symptoms and potential care needs longitudinally. The Healthy at Home study seeks to develop a comprehensive digital phenotype of COPD by tracking and responding to multiple indices of disease behavior and facilitating early and nuanced responses to changes in participants' health status. This study is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT06000696).
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Emergency services utilization is increasing in older adult populations. Many such encounters may be preventable with better access to acute care in the community. Mobile integrated health (MIH) programs leverage mobile resources to deliver care and services to patients in the out-of-hospital environment and have the potential to improve clinical outcomes and decrease health care costs; however, they have not been widely implemented. We assessed barriers, potential facilitators, and other factors critical to the implementation of MIH programs with key vested partners. METHODS: Professional and community-member partners were purposefully recruited to participate in recorded structured interviews. The study team used the Practical Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) framework to develop an interview guide and codebook. Coders employed a combination of deductive and inductive coding strategies to identify common themes across partner groups. RESULTS: The study team interviewed 22 participants (mean age 56, 68% female). A cohort of professional subject matter experts included physicians, paramedics, public health personnel, and hospital administrators. A cohort of lay community partners included patients and caregivers. Coders identified three prominent themes that impact MIH implementation. First, MIH is disruptive to existing clinical workflows. Second, using MIH to improve patients' experience during acute care encounters is key to intervention adoption. Finally, legislative action is needed to augment central financial and regulatory policies to ensure the adoption of MIH programs. CONCLUSIONS: Common themes impacting the implementation of MIH programs were identified across vested partner groups. Multilevel strategies are needed to address patient adoption, clinical partners' workflow, and legislative policies to ensure the success of MIH programs.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: People with diabetes mellitus, particularly those with limited access to longitudinal care, frequently present to the emergency department (ED). Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has been shown to improve outcomes in ambulatory settings, so we hypothesized that it would be beneficial if initiated upon ED discharge. METHODS: We randomized adults with diabetes who were seen in the ED for hypo- or hyperglycemia to either 14 days of flash CGM or care coordination alone. All participants were scheduled to follow up in our diabetes specialty clinic. Outcomes included clinic attendance, the 3-month change in hemoglobin A1c, and repeat ED utilization. RESULTS: We recruited 30 participants, including 13 with newly diagnosed diabetes. All but one (97%) had type 2 diabetes. We found no significant difference between the CGM (n = 16) and control (n = 14) groups in terms of clinic attendance (75 vs 64%, P = .61) or repeat ED utilization (31 vs 50%, P = .35), although our power was low. The absolute reduction in A1c was greater in the CGM group (5.2 vs 2.4%, P = .08). Among newly diagnosed participants for whom we had data, 7 out of 7 in the CGM group had a follow-up A1c under 7% compared to 1 out of 3 in the control group (P = .03). Over 90% of patients and providers found the CGM useful. CONCLUSIONS: Our data demonstrate the feasibility of starting CGM in the ED, a valuable setting for engaging difficult-to-reach patients. Our pilot study was limited by its small sample size, however, as recruitment in the ED can be challenging.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1 , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Hipoglucemia , Adulto , Humanos , Glucemia , Hemoglobina Glucada , Hipoglucemiantes , Hipoglucemia/diagnóstico , Proyectos Piloto , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/terapia , Automonitorización de la Glucosa Sanguínea , Monitoreo Continuo de Glucosa , Alta del PacienteRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Poor care access and lack of proper triage of medical complaints leads to inappropriate use of acute care resources. Mobile integrated health (MIH) programs may offer a solution by providing adaptable on-demand care. There is little information describing programs that manage undifferentiated complaints in the community. The objective of this study was to assess the safety and feasibility of an MIH program that responds to the community to manage medical complaints in older adults. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study examining a pilot MIH program. Seven ambulatory clinics and their affiliated patients aged 65 and older were oriented to the program and invited to use its services. Visit and follow-up data for all patients who underwent an MIH visit were abstracted, along with 30-day follow-up information. All demographic data and outcomes were reported descriptively. RESULTS: In 21 months, 153 MIH visits were completed, involving 91 patients (mean age 81 years, 60.4% female). The most common chief complaints were generalized weakness (28.8%) and shortness of breath (18.9%). Electrocardiogram (57.5%) and point-of-care bloodwork (34.6%) were the most common diagnostic tests performed. Sixteen visits (10.4%) were followed by an emergency department (ED) visit within 72 h. In 11 encounters, the patient was referred to the ED; in five cases, the ED visit was unforeseen. Fifteen patients (9.8%) were admitted to the hospital after an MIH visit. There were two deaths within 30 days following an index visit. CONCLUSIONS: An MIH program designed to address the acute complaints of community-dwelling older adults was feasible and safe, with low rates of unforeseen emergency services utilizations. MIH programs have valuable diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities and may serve to help triage the acute medical needs of patients. Further study is required to validate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of MIH programs.
Asunto(s)
Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Telemedicina , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Promoción de la Salud , Hospitalización , Triaje , Estudios ProspectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The performance of rapid antigen tests (Ag-RDTs) for screening asymptomatic and symptomatic persons for SARS-CoV-2 is not well established. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of Ag-RDTs for detection of SARS-CoV-2 among symptomatic and asymptomatic participants. DESIGN: This prospective cohort study enrolled participants between October 2021 and January 2022. Participants completed Ag-RDTs and reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing for SARS-CoV-2 every 48 hours for 15 days. SETTING: Participants were enrolled digitally throughout the mainland United States. They self-collected anterior nasal swabs for Ag-RDTs and RT-PCR testing. Nasal swabs for RT-PCR were shipped to a central laboratory, whereas Ag-RDTs were done at home. PARTICIPANTS: Of 7361 participants in the study, 5353 who were asymptomatic and negative for SARS-CoV-2 on study day 1 were eligible. In total, 154 participants had at least 1 positive RT-PCR result. MEASUREMENTS: The sensitivity of Ag-RDTs was measured on the basis of testing once (same-day), twice (after 48 hours), and thrice (after a total of 96 hours). The analysis was repeated for different days past index PCR positivity (DPIPPs) to approximate real-world scenarios where testing initiation may not always coincide with DPIPP 0. Results were stratified by symptom status. RESULTS: Among 154 participants who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, 97 were asymptomatic and 57 had symptoms at infection onset. Serial testing with Ag-RDTs twice 48 hours apart resulted in an aggregated sensitivity of 93.4% (95% CI, 90.4% to 95.9%) among symptomatic participants on DPIPPs 0 to 6. When singleton positive results were excluded, the aggregated sensitivity on DPIPPs 0 to 6 for 2-time serial testing among asymptomatic participants was lower at 62.7% (CI, 57.0% to 70.5%), but it improved to 79.0% (CI, 70.1% to 87.4%) with testing 3 times at 48-hour intervals. LIMITATION: Participants tested every 48 hours; therefore, these data cannot support conclusions about serial testing intervals shorter than 48 hours. CONCLUSION: The performance of Ag-RDTs was optimized when asymptomatic participants tested 3 times at 48-hour intervals and when symptomatic participants tested 2 times separated by 48 hours. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health RADx Tech program.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Estudios Prospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Reacción en Cadena de la Polimerasa , Cognición , Sensibilidad y EspecificidadRESUMEN
Background: Rapid antigen detection tests (Ag-RDT) for SARS-CoV-2 with emergency use authorization generally include a condition of authorization to evaluate the test's performance in asymptomatic individuals when used serially. We aim to describe a novel study design that was used to generate regulatory-quality data to evaluate the serial use of Ag-RDT in detecting SARS-CoV-2 virus among asymptomatic individuals. Methods: This prospective cohort study used a siteless, digital approach to assess longitudinal performance of Ag-RDT. Individuals over 2 years old from across the USA with no reported COVID-19 symptoms in the 14 days prior to study enrollment were eligible to enroll in this study. Participants throughout the mainland USA were enrolled through a digital platform between October 18, 2021 and February 15, 2022. Participants were asked to test using Ag-RDT and molecular comparators every 48 hours for 15 days. Enrollment demographics, geographic distribution, and SARS-CoV-2 infection rates are reported. Key Results: A total of 7361 participants enrolled in the study, and 492 participants tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, including 154 who were asymptomatic and tested negative to start the study. This exceeded the initial enrollment goals of 60 positive participants. We enrolled participants from 44 US states, and geographic distribution of participants shifted in accordance with the changing COVID-19 prevalence nationwide. Conclusions: The digital site-less approach employed in the "Test Us At Home" study enabled rapid, efficient, and rigorous evaluation of rapid diagnostics for COVID-19 and can be adapted across research disciplines to optimize study enrollment and accessibility.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES: Primary care practice-based research networks (PBRNs) participated in a point of care (POC) device study funded by by the National Institutes of Health and led by the University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School (UMass) to speed the development, validation, and commercialization of POC tests to detect SARS-CoV-2. The purposes of this study were to describe the characteristics of participating PBRNs and their respective collaborators in this device trial and describe complications challenging its execution. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with lead personnel from participating PBRNs and UMass. RESULTS: Four PBRNs and UMass were invited to participate and 3 PBRNs and UMass participated. This device trial recruited 321 subjects in 6 months; 65 subjects from PBRNs. Each PBRN and the academic medical center site enrolled and recruited subjects differently. Main challenges identified were having adequate clinic personnel to enroll and aid in consent and questionnaire completion, frequently changing inclusion/exclusion criteria, use of the digital electronic data collection platform, and having access to a -80°C freezer to store supplies. DISCUSSION: This trial involved numerous researchers, primary care clinic leaders and staff, and academic center sponsored program staff and attorneys resulting in a resource-intensive endeavor to enroll 65 subjects in the real-world clinical setting of primary care PBRNs with the academic medical center enrolling the rest. Multiple obstacles to standing up the study were encountered by the PBRNS. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care PBRNs rely largely on the goodwill established between academic health centers and participating practices. For future investigations involving device studies, collaborating PBRN leaders should assess whether recruitment criteria may change, obtain detailed lists of equipment needed, and/or know if the study is likely to be halted suddenly to appropriately prepare their member practices.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , Centros Médicos Académicos , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Facultades de MedicinaRESUMEN
Background: The performance of rapid antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 (Ag-RDT) in temporal relation to symptom onset or exposure is unknown, as is the impact of vaccination on this relationship. Objective: To evaluate the performance of Ag-RDT compared with RT-PCR based on day after symptom onset or exposure in order to decide on 'when to test'. Design Setting and Participants: The Test Us at Home study was a longitudinal cohort study that enrolled participants over 2 years old across the United States between October 18, 2021 and February 4, 2022. All participants were asked to conduct Ag-RDT and RT-PCR testing every 48 hours over a 15-day period. Participants with one or more symptoms during the study period were included in the Day Post Symptom Onset (DPSO) analyses, while those who reported a COVID-19 exposure were included in the Day Post Exposure (DPE) analysis. Exposure: Participants were asked to self-report any symptoms or known exposures to SARS-CoV-2 every 48-hours, immediately prior to conducting Ag-RDT and RT-PCR testing. The first day a participant reported one or more symptoms was termed DPSO 0, and the day of exposure was DPE 0. Vaccination status was self-reported. Main Outcome and Measures: Results of Ag-RDT were self-reported (positive, negative, or invalid) and RT-PCR results were analyzed by a central laboratory. Percent positivity of SARS-CoV-2 and sensitivity of Ag-RDT and RT-PCR by DPSO and DPE were stratified by vaccination status and calculated with 95% confidence intervals. Results: A total of 7,361 participants enrolled in the study. Among them, 2,086 (28.3%) and 546 (7.4%) participants were eligible for the DPSO and DPE analyses, respectively. Unvaccinated participants were nearly twice as likely to test positive for SARS-CoV-2 than vaccinated participants in event of symptoms (PCR+: 27.6% vs 10.1%) or exposure (PCR+: 43.8% vs. 22.2%). The highest proportion of vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals tested positive on DPSO 2 and DPE 5-8. Performance of RT-PCR and Ag-RDT did not differ by vaccination status. Ag-RDT detected 78.0% (95% Confidence Interval: 72.56-82.61) of PCR-confirmed infections by DPSO 4. For exposed participants, Ag-RDT detected 84.9% (95% CI: 75.0-91.4) of PCR-confirmed infections by day five post-exposure (DPE 5). Conclusions and Relevance: Performance of Ag-RDT and RT-PCR was highest on DPSO 0-2 and DPE 5 and did not differ by vaccination status. These data suggests that serial testing remains integral to enhancing the performance of Ag-RDT.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Point-of care-ultrasound (POCUS) has become ubiquitous in emergency medicine practice for the management of emergent pathophysiology. There is growing interest in its potential as a diagnostic tool in the prehospital setting. Few studies have examined the feasibility or efficacy of curricula targeted at teaching POCUS to prehospital personnel. Our objective in this study was to investigate a curriculum for the extended focused assessment with sonography in trauma (eFAST) exam in helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) crews. METHODS: This was a pre/post intervention study of HEMS personnel at a tertiary care center. Subjects were administered a pre-intervention written test and an observed structured clinical evaluation (OSCE). Subsequently, they participated in an educational intervention intended to impart proficiency in performing the eFAST. Subjects underwent post-intervention written exams and OSCEs. We analyzed pre- and post-intervention test performance along with the number and quality of practice ultrasound examinations achieved. RESULTS: Sixteen subjects were enrolled (62.5% male, mean age 44.1). After undergoing the intervention, the mean written test score increased 22.1% (t=3.41; P <0.001) and the mean OSCE score increased by 64.5% (t=6.87, P <0.001). All subjects met "passing" criteria for the written test and OSCE on their post-intervention attempt. Subjects accomplished a mean of 21.1 clinically interpretable eFAST sonographs. Most subjects reported the curriculum was useful (90.1%) and that they would incorporate this skill into clinical practice (90.1%). CONCLUSION: A targeted POCUS curriculum was feasible and effective in establishing clinical proficiency in HEMS crews for performing and interpreting the eFAST exam.
Asunto(s)
Servicios Médicos de Urgencia , Sistemas de Atención de Punto , Humanos , Masculino , Adulto , Femenino , Ultrasonografía , Pruebas en el Punto de Atención , CurriculumRESUMEN
Background: Rapid antigen tests (Ag-RDT) for SARS-CoV-2 with Emergency Use Authorization generally include a condition of authorization to evaluate the test's performance in asymptomatic individuals when used serially. Objective: To describe a novel study design to generate regulatory-quality data to evaluate serial use of Ag-RDT in detecting SARS-CoV-2 virus among asymptomatic individuals. Design: Prospective cohort study using a decentralized approach. Participants were asked to test using Ag-RDT and molecular comparators every 48 hours for 15 days. Setting: Participants throughout the mainland United States were enrolled through a digital platform between October 18, 2021 and February 15, 2022. Ag-RDTs were completed at home, and molecular comparators were shipped to a central laboratory. Participants: Individuals over 2 years old from across the U.S. with no reported COVID-19 symptoms in the 14 days prior to study enrollment were eligible to enroll in this study. Measurements: Enrollment demographics, geographic distribution, and SARS-CoV-2 infection rates are reported. Key Results: A total of 7,361 participants enrolled in the study, and 492 participants tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, including 154 who were asymptomatic and tested negative to start the study. This exceeded the initial enrollment goals of 60 positive participants. We enrolled participants from 44 U.S. states, and geographic distribution of participants shifted in accordance with the changing COVID-19 prevalence nationwide. Limitations: New, complex workflows required significant operational and data team support. Conclusions: The digital site-less approach employed in the 'Test Us At Home' study enabled rapid, efficient, and rigorous evaluation of rapid diagnostics for COVID-19, and can be adapted across research disciplines to optimize study enrollment and accessibility.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: It is important to document the performance of rapid antigen tests (Ag-RDTs) in detecting SARS-CoV-2 variants. OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance of Ag-RDTs in detecting the Delta (B.1.617.2) and Omicron (B.1.1.529) variants of SARS-CoV-2. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study that enrolled participants between 18 October 2021 and 24 January 2022. Participants did Ag-RDTs and collected samples for reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing every 48 hours for 15 days. SETTING: The parent study enrolled participants throughout the mainland United States through a digital platform. All participants self-collected anterior nasal swabs for rapid antigen testing and RT-PCR testing. All Ag-RDTs were completed at home, whereas nasal swabs for RT-PCR were shipped to a central laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Of 7349 participants enrolled in the parent study, 5779 asymptomatic persons who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 on day 1 of the study were eligible for this substudy. MEASUREMENTS: Sensitivity of Ag-RDTs on the same day as the first positive (index) RT-PCR result and 48 hours after the first positive RT-PCR result. RESULTS: A total of 207 participants were positive on RT-PCR (58 Delta, 149 Omicron). Differences in sensitivity between variants were not statistically significant (same day: Delta, 15.5% [95% CI, 6.2% to 24.8%] vs. Omicron, 22.1% [CI, 15.5% to 28.8%]; at 48 hours: Delta, 44.8% [CI, 32.0% to 57.6%] vs. Omicron, 49.7% [CI, 41.6% to 57.6%]). Among 109 participants who had RT-PCR-positive results for 48 hours, rapid antigen sensitivity did not differ significantly between Delta- and Omicron-infected participants (48-hour sensitivity: Delta, 81.5% [CI, 66.8% to 96.1%] vs. Omicron, 78.0% [CI, 69.1% to 87.0%]). Only 7.2% of the 69 participants with RT-PCR-positive results for shorter than 48 hours tested positive by Ag-RDT within 1 week; those with Delta infections remained consistently negative on Ag-RDTs. LIMITATION: A testing frequency of 48 hours does not allow a finer temporal resolution of the analysis of test performance, and the results of Ag-RDTs are based on self-report. CONCLUSION: The performance of Ag-RDTs in persons infected with the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant is not inferior to that in persons with Delta infections. Serial testing improved the sensitivity of Ag-RDTs for both variants. The performance of rapid antigen testing varies on the basis of duration of RT-PCR positivity. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos , Humanos , Estudios Prospectivos , Autoevaluación , Sensibilidad y EspecificidadRESUMEN
Importance: Widespread distribution of rapid antigen tests is integral to the US strategy to address COVID-19; however, it is estimated that few rapid antigen test results are reported to local departments of health. Objective: To characterize how often individuals in 6 communities throughout the United States used a digital assistant to log rapid antigen test results and report them to their local departments of health. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study is based on anonymously collected data from the beneficiaries of the Say Yes! Covid Test program, which distributed more than 3â¯000â¯000 rapid antigen tests at no cost to residents of 6 communities (Louisville, Kentucky; Indianapolis, Indiana; Fulton County, Georgia; O'ahu, Hawaii; Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, Michigan; and Chattanooga, Tennessee) between April and October 2021. A descriptive evaluation of beneficiary use of a digital assistant for logging and reporting their rapid antigen test results was performed. Interventions: Widespread community distribution of rapid antigen tests. Main Outcomes and Measures: Number and proportion of tests logged and reported to the local department of health through the digital assistant. Results: A total of 313â¯000 test kits were distributed, including 178â¯785 test kits that were ordered using the digital assistant. Among all distributed kits, 14â¯398 households (4.6%) used the digital assistant, but beneficiaries reported three-quarters of their rapid antigen test results to their state public health departments (30â¯965 tests reported of 41â¯465 total test results [75.0%]). The reporting behavior varied by community and was significantly higher among communities that were incentivized for reporting test results vs those that were not incentivized or partially incentivized (90.5% [95% CI, 89.9%-91.2%] vs 70.5%; [95% CI, 70.0%-71.0%]). In all communities, positive tests were less frequently reported than negative tests (60.4% [95% CI, 58.1%-62.8%] vs 75.5% [95% CI, 75.1%-76.0%]). Conclusions and Relevance: These results suggest that application-based reporting with incentives may be associated with increased reporting of rapid tests for COVID-19. However, increasing the adoption of the digital assistant may be a critical first step.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Recolección de Datos , Georgia , Humanos , Estudios Prospectivos , Autoevaluación , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
Importance: Wide-spread distribution of rapid-antigen tests is integral to the United States' strategy to address COVID-19; however, it is estimated that few rapid-antigen test results are reported to local departments of health. Objective: To characterize how often individuals in six communities throughout the United States used a digital assistant to log rapid-antigen test results and report them to their local Department of Health. Design: This prospective cohort study is based on anonymously collected data from the beneficiaries of The Say Yes! Covid Test program, which distributed 3,000,000 rapid antigen tests at no cost to residents of six communities between April and October 2021. We provide a descriptive evaluation of beneficiaries' use of digital assistant for logging and reporting their rapid antigen test results. Main Outcome and Measures: Number and proportion of tests logged and reported to the Department of Health through the digital assistant. Results: A total of 178,785 test kits were ordered by the digital assistant, and 14,398 households used the digital assistant to log 41,465 test results. Overall, a small proportion of beneficiaries used the digital assistant (8%), but over 75% of those who used it reported their rapid antigen test results to their state public health department. The reporting behavior varied between communities and was significantly different for communities that were incentivized for reporting test results (p < 0.001). In all communities, positive tests were less reported than negative tests (60.4% vs 75.5%; p<0.001). Conclusions and Relevance: These results indicate that app-based reporting with incentives may be an effective way to increase reporting of rapid tests for COVID-19; however, increasing the adoption of the digital assistant is a critical first step.
RESUMEN
Background: There is a need to understand the performance of rapid antigen tests (Ag-RDT) for detection of the Delta (B.1.61.7; AY.X) and Omicron (B.1.1.529; BA1) SARS-CoV-2 variants. Methods: Participants without any symptoms were enrolled from October 18, 2021 to January 24, 2022 and performed Ag-RDT and RT-PCR tests every 48 hours for 15 days. This study represents a non-pre-specified analysis in which we sought to determine if sensitivity of Ag-RDT differed in participants with Delta compared to Omicron variant. Participants who were positive on RT-PCR on the first day of the testing period were excluded. Delta and Omicron variants were defined based on sequencing and date of first RT-PCR positive result (RT-PCR+). Comparison of Ag-RDT performance between the variants was based on sensitivity, defined as proportion of participants with Ag-RDT+ results in relation to their first RT-PCR+ result, for different duration of testing with rapid Ag-RDT. Subsample analysis was performed based on the result of participants' second RT-PCR test within 48 hours of the first RT-PCR+ test. Results: From the 7,349 participants enrolled in the parent study, 5,506 met the eligibility criteria for this analysis. A total of 153 participants were RT-PCR+ (61 Delta, 92 Omicron); among this group, 36 (23.5%) tested Ag-RDT+ on the same day, and 84 (54.9%) tested Ag-RDT+ within 48 hours as first RT-PCR+. The differences in sensitivity between variants were not statistically significant (same-day: Delta 16.4% [95% CI: 8.2-28.1] vs Omicron 28.2% [95% CI: 19.4-38.6]; and 48-hours: Delta 45.9% [33.1-59.2] vs. Omicron 60.9% [50.1-70.9]). This trend continued among the 86 participants who had consecutive RT-PCR+ result (48-hour sensitivity: Delta 79.3% [60.3-92.1] vs. Omicron: 89.5% [78.5-96.0]). Conversely, the 38 participants who had an isolated RT-PCR+ remained consistently negative on Ag-RDT, regardless of the variant. Conclusions: The performance of Ag-RDT is not inferior among individuals infected with the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant as compared to the Delta variant. The improvement in sensitivity of Ag-RDT noted with serial testing is consistent between Delta and Omicron variant. Performance of Ag-RDT varies based on duration of RT-PCR+ results and more studies are needed to understand the clinical and public health significance of individuals who are RT-PCR+ for less than 48 hours.