Take-home kits to detect respiratory viruses among healthcare personnel: Lessons learned from a cluster randomized clinical trial

Jenna Los, Charlotte A Gaydos, Cynthia L Gibert, Geoffrey J Gorse, Jacquelyn Lykken, Ann-Christine Nyquist, Connie S Price, Lewis J Radonovich Jr, Susan Rattigan, Nicholas Reich, Maria Rodriguez-Barradas, Michael Simberkoff, Mary Bessesen, Alexandria Brown, Derek A T Cummings, Trish M Perl, ResPECT Study Team, Jenna Los, Charlotte A Gaydos, Cynthia L Gibert, Geoffrey J Gorse, Jacquelyn Lykken, Ann-Christine Nyquist, Connie S Price, Lewis J Radonovich Jr, Susan Rattigan, Nicholas Reich, Maria Rodriguez-Barradas, Michael Simberkoff, Mary Bessesen, Alexandria Brown, Derek A T Cummings, Trish M Perl, ResPECT Study Team

Abstract

Background: Health care personnel (HCP) working in outpatient settings routinely interact with patients with acute respiratory illnesses. Absenteeism following symptom development and lack of staff trained to obtain samples limit efforts to identify pathogens among infected HCP.

Methods: The Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial assessed respiratory infection incidence among HCP between 2011 and 2015. Research assistants obtained anterior nasal and oropharyngeal swabs from HCP in the workplace following development of respiratory illness symptoms and randomly while asymptomatic. Participants received take-home kits to self-collect swabs when absent from work. Samples mailed to a central laboratory were tested for respiratory viruses by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction.

Results: Among 2,862 participants, 3,467 swabs were obtained from symptomatic participants. Among symptomatic HCP, respiratory virus was detected in 904 of 3,467 (26.1%) samples. Self-collected samples by symptomatic HCP at home had higher rates of viral detection (40.3%) compared to 24% obtained by trained research assistants in the workplace (P < .001).

Conclusions: In this randomized clinical trial, take-home kits were an easily implemented, effective method to self-collect samples by HCP. Other studies have previously shown relative equivalence of self-collected samples to those obtained by trained healthcare workers. Take-home kit self-collection could diminish workforce exposures and decrease the demand for personnel protective equipment worn to protect workers who collect respiratory samples.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01249625.

Keywords: Diagnostics; Feasibility; Influenza; Self-collection; Surveillance.

Copyright © 2021 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. All rights reserved.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
Ratio of pathogens by collection method. (A) Relative proportion of research assistant-obtained (RA) and self-collected (take-home kits, THK) total symptomatic samples collected (left panel) and total positive symptomatic samples (right panel). (B) Relative proportion of positive and negative samples from swabs collected (top panels) and distribution of identified pathogens from positive samples (bottom panels) for all self-collected (THK) swabs (black), RA-obtained swabs (dark gray), and all swabs collected (light grey).

References

    1. Sepkowitz KA. Occupationally acquired infections in health care workers. Part I. Ann Intern Med. 1996;125:826–834.
    1. Salgado CD, Farr BM, Hall KK, Hayden FG. Influenza in the acute hospital setting. Lancet Infect Dis. 2002;2:145–155.
    1. Mitchell R, Ogunremi T, Astrakianakis G, et al. Impact of the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) pandemic on Canadian health care workers: a survey on vaccination, illness, absenteeism, and personal protective equipment. Am J Infect Control. 2012;40:611–616.
    1. Jones RM, Xia Y. Annual burden of occupationally-acquired influenza infections in hospitals and emergency departments in the United States. Risk Anal. 2018;38:442–453.
    1. Mareiniss DP. The impending storm: COVID-19, pandemics and our overwhelmed emergency departments. Am J Emerg Med. 2020;38:1293–1294.
    1. Ton AN, Jethwa T, Waters K, Speicher LL, Francis D. COVID-19 drive through testing: an effective strategy for conserving personal protective equipment. Am J Infect Control. 2020;48:731–732.
    1. Lindholm DA, Kiley JL, Jansen NK, et al. Outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 drive-through screening at an academic military medical center. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2020;7:ofaa306.
    1. Flynn EF, Kuhn E, Shaik M, Tarr E, Scattolini N, Ballantine A. Drive-through COVID-19 testing during the 2020 pandemic: a safe, efficient, and scalable model for pediatric patients and health care workers. Acad Pediatr. 2020;20:753–755.
    1. Shah A, Challener D, Tande AJ, et al. Drive-through testing: a unique, efficient method of collecting large volume of specimens during the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic. Mayo Clin Proc. 2020;95:1420–1425.
    1. Radonovich LJ, Jr., Bessesen MT, Cummings DA, et al. The Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial (ResPECT): a cluster-randomized comparison of respirator and medical mask effectiveness against respiratory infections in healthcare personnel. BMC Infect Dis. 2016;16:243.
    1. Radonovich LJ, Jr., Simberkoff MS, Bessesen MT, et al. N95 respirators vs medical masks for preventing influenza among health care personnel: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2019;322:824–833.
    1. Chiu S, Black CL, Yue X, et al. Working with influenza-like illness: presenteeism among US health care personnel during the 2014-2015 influenza season. Am J Infect Control. 2017;45:1254–1258.
    1. McKevitt C, Morgan M, Dundas R, Holland WW. Sickness absence and 'working through' illness: a comparison of two professional groups. J Public Health Med. 1997;19:295–300.
    1. Gudgeon P, Wells DA, Baerlocher MO, Detsky AS. Do you come to work with a respiratory tract infection? Occup Environ Med. 2009;66:424.
    1. Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)–a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42:377–381.
    1. Akmatov MK, Gatzemeier A, Schughart K, Pessler F. Equivalence of self- and staff-collected nasal swabs for the detection of viral respiratory pathogens. PLoS One. 2012;7:e48508.
    1. Class 6, Division 6.2—Definitions and exceptions. 49: CFR.
    1. Chen KF, Rothman RE, Ramachandran P, et al. Rapid identification viruses from nasal pharyngeal aspirates in acute viral respiratory infections by RT-PCR and electrospray ionization mass spectrometry. J Virol Methods. 2011;173:60–66.
    1. Chen KF, Blyn L, Rothman RE, et al. Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and electrospray ionization mass spectrometry for identifying acute viral upper respiratory tract infections. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2011;69:179–186.
    1. Cooper DL, Smith GE, Chinemana F, et al. Linking syndromic surveillance with virological self-sampling. Epidemiol Infect. 2008;136:222–224.
    1. Dhiman N, Miller RM, Finley JL, et al. Effectiveness of patient-collected swabs for influenza testing. Mayo Clin Proc. 2012;87:548–554.
    1. McGolrick D, Belanger P, Richardson H, Moore K, Maier A, Majury A. Evaluation of self-swabbing coupled with a telephone health helpline as an adjunct tool for surveillance of influenza viruses in Ontario. BMC Public Health. 2016;16:1017.
    1. Plymoth A, Rotzen-Ostlund M, Zweygberg-Wirgart B, et al. Self-sampling for analysis of respiratory viruses in a large-scale epidemiological study in Sweden. Euro Surveill. 2015;20:21063.
    1. Elliot AJ, Bermingham A, Charlett A, et al. Self-sampling for community respiratory illness: a new tool for national virological surveillance. Euro Surveill. 2015;20:21058.
    1. Hall EW, Luisi N, Zlotorzynska M, et al. Willingness to use home collection methods to provide specimens for SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 research: survey study. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22:e19471.
    1. Valentine-Graves M, Hall E, Guest JL, et al. At-home self-collection of saliva, oropharyngeal swabs and dried blood spots for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis and serology: post-collection acceptability of specimen collection process and patient confidence in specimens. PLoS One. 2020;15
    1. Goyal S, Prasert K, Praphasiri P, et al. The acceptability and validity of self-collected nasal swabs for detection of influenza virus infection among older adults in Thailand. Influenza Other Respir Viruses. 2017;11:412–417.
    1. Larios OE, Coleman BL, Drews SJ, et al. Self-collected mid-turbinate swabs for the detection of respiratory viruses in adults with acute respiratory illnesses. PLoS One. 2011;6:e21335.
    1. Wehrhahn MC, Robson J, Brown S, et al. Self-collection: an appropriate alternative during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. J Clin Virol. 2020;128
    1. Therchilsen JH, von Buchwald C, Koch A, et al. Self-collected versus healthcare worker-collected swabs in the diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Diagnostics (Basel) 2020;10:678.
    1. Chu HY, Englund JA, Starita LM, et al. Early detection of Covid-19 through a citywide pandemic surveillance platform. N Engl J Med. 2020;383:185–187.
    1. Garber AM, Phelps CE. Economic foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis. J Health Econ. 1997;16:1–31.
    1. Alsaleh AN, Whiley DM, Bialasiewicz S, et al. Nasal swab samples and real-time polymerase chain reaction assays in community-based, longitudinal studies of respiratory viruses: the importance of sample integrity and quality control. BMC Infect Dis. 2014;14:15.
    1. Johnson FB. Transport of viral specimens. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1990;3:120–131.
    1. Jackson ML, Nguyen M, Kirlin B, Madziwa L. Self-Collected nasal swabs for respiratory virus surveillance. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2015;2:ofv152.
    1. Lunny C, Taylor D, Hoang L, et al. Self-collected versus clinician-collected sampling for chlamydia and gonorrhea screening: a systemic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2015;10
    1. Kuriakose S, Sabeena S, Binesh D, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of self-collected vaginal samples for HPV DNA detection in women from South India. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2020;149:219–224.
    1. Korownyk C, Kraut RY, Kolber MR. Vaginal self-swabs for chlamydia and gonorrhea. Can Fam Physician. 2018;64:448.
    1. Dangerfield Ii DT, Farley JE, Holden J, et al. Acceptability of self-collecting oropharyngeal swabs for sexually transmissible infection testing among men and women. Sex Health. 2019;16:296–298.
    1. Dize L, Agreda P, Quinn N, Barnes MR, Hsieh YH, Gaydos CA. Comparison of self-obtained penile-meatal swabs to urine for the detection of C. trachomatis, N. gonorrhoeae and T. vaginalis. Sex Transm Infect. 2013;89:305–307.
    1. Gaydos CA, Barnes M, Aumakhan B, et al. Can e-technology through the Internet be used as a new tool to address the chlamydia trachomatis epidemic by home sampling and vaginal swabs? Sex Transm Dis. 2009;36:577–580.

Source: PubMed

스폰서 및 공동 작업자

건강 상태

약물 개입

3
구독하다