Use of Iris Scanning for Biometric Recognition of Healthy Adults Participating in an Ebola Vaccine Trial in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: Mixed Methods Study

Trésor Zola Matuvanga, Ginger Johnson, Ynke Larivière, Emmanuel Esanga Longomo, Junior Matangila, Vivi Maketa, Bruno Lapika, Patrick Mitashi, Paula Mc Kenna, Jessie De Bie, Jean-Pierre Van Geertruyden, Pierre Van Damme, Hypolite Muhindo Mavoko, Trésor Zola Matuvanga, Ginger Johnson, Ynke Larivière, Emmanuel Esanga Longomo, Junior Matangila, Vivi Maketa, Bruno Lapika, Patrick Mitashi, Paula Mc Kenna, Jessie De Bie, Jean-Pierre Van Geertruyden, Pierre Van Damme, Hypolite Muhindo Mavoko

Abstract

Background: A partnership between the University of Antwerp and the University of Kinshasa implemented the EBOVAC3 clinical trial with an Ebola vaccine regimen administered to health care provider participants in Tshuapa Province, Democratic Republic of the Congo. This randomized controlled trial was part of an Ebola outbreak preparedness initiative financed through Innovative Medicines Initiative-European Union. The EBOVAC3 clinical trial used iris scan technology to identify all health care provider participants enrolled in the vaccine trial, to ensure that the right participant received the right vaccine at the right visit.

Objective: We aimed to assess the acceptability, accuracy, and feasibility of iris scan technology as an identification method within a population of health care provider participants in a vaccine trial in a remote setting.

Methods: We used a mixed methods study. The acceptability was assessed prior to the trial through 12 focus group discussions (FGDs) and was assessed at enrollment. Feasibility and accuracy research was conducted using a longitudinal trial study design, where iris scanning was compared with the unique study ID card to identify health care provider participants at enrollment and at their follow-up visits.

Results: During the FGDs, health care provider participants were mainly concerned about the iris scan technology causing physical problems to their eyes or exposing them to spiritual problems through sorcery. However, 99% (85/86; 95% CI 97.1-100.0) of health care provider participants in the FGDs agreed to be identified by the iris scan. Also, at enrollment, 99.0% (692/699; 95% CI 98.2-99.7) of health care provider participants accepted to be identified by iris scan. Iris scan technology correctly identified 93.1% (636/683; 95% CI 91.2-95.0) of the participants returning for scheduled follow-up visits. The iris scanning operation lasted 2 minutes or less for 96.0% (656/683; 95% CI 94.6-97.5), and 1 attempt was enough to identify the majority of study participants (475/683, 69.5%; 95% CI 66.1-73.0).

Conclusions: Iris scans are highly acceptable as an identification tool in a clinical trial for health care provider participants in a remote setting. Its operationalization during the trial demonstrated a high level of accuracy that can reliably identify individuals. Iris scanning is found to be feasible in clinical trials but requires a trained operator to reduce the duration and the number of attempts to identify a participant.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04186000; https://ichgcp.net/clinical-trials-registry/NCT04186000.

Keywords: Democratic Republic of the Congo; Ebola; acceptability; biometric identification; feasibility; iris recognition; mixed methods; participants' visits; vaccine trial.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

©Trésor Zola Matuvanga, Ginger Johnson, Ynke Larivière, Emmanuel Esanga Longomo, Junior Matangila, Vivi Maketa, Bruno Lapika, Patrick Mitashi, Paula Mc Kenna, Jessie De Bie, Jean-Pierre Van Geertruyden, Pierre Van Damme, Hypolite Muhindo Mavoko. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 09.08.2021.

References

    1. National Research Council of the National Academies . In: Biometric Recognition: Challenges and Opportunities. Pato JN, Millett LI, editors. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2010.
    1. Aslam TM, Tan SZ, Dhillon B. Iris recognition in the presence of ocular disease. J R Soc Interface. 2009 May 06;6(34):489–93. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2008.0530.
    1. Lu L, Mao J, Wang W, Ding G, Zhang Z. A Study of Personal Recognition Method Based on EMG Signal. IEEE Trans Biomed Circuits Syst. 2020 Aug;14(4):681–691. doi: 10.1109/TBCAS.2020.3005148.
    1. Masyn S, Vuchelen A, Santermans E, Rasschaert F, Bangura A, Parys W, Rutten R. Overcoming the challenges of iris scanning to identify minors (1-4 years) in the real-world setting. BMC Res Notes. 2019 Jul 22;12(1):448. doi: 10.1186/s13104-019-4485-8.
    1. Tao X, Chen X, Yang X, Tian J. Fingerprint recognition with identical twin fingerprints. PLoS One. 2012;7(4):e35704. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0035704.
    1. Binder S, Iannone A, Leibner C. Biometric technology in "no-gate border crossing solutions" under consideration of privacy, ethical, regulatory and social acceptance. Multimed Tools Appl. 2020 Dec 29;:1–14. doi: 10.1007/s11042-020-10266-0.
    1. Gassman JJ, Owen WW, Kuntz TE, Martin JP, Amoroso WP. Data quality assurance, monitoring, and reporting. Control Clin Trials. 1995 Apr;16(2 Suppl):104S–136S. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(94)00095-k.
    1. Anne N, Dunbar MD, Abuna F, Simpson P, Macharia P, Betz B, Cherutich P, Bukusi D, Carey F. Feasibility and acceptability of an iris biometric system for unique patient identification in routine HIV services in Kenya. Int J Med Inform. 2020 Jan;133:104006. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.104006.
    1. Cohen JK, Flynn R, Bolan R, Klausner JD. Acceptability of fingerprint scanning for personal identification among patients seeking HIV/STI-related services, Los Angeles, 2011. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2012 Dec 01;61(4):e59–60. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0b013e318271481a.
    1. Unar J.A, Seng WC, Abbasi A. A review of biometric technology along with trends and prospects. Pattern Recognition. 2014 Aug;47(8):2673–2688. doi: 10.1016/j.patcog.2014.01.016. doi: 10.1016/j.patcog.2014.01.016.
    1. Odei-Lartey EO, Boateng D, Danso S, Kwarteng A, Abokyi L, Amenga-Etego S, Gyaase S, Asante KP, Owusu-Agyei S. The application of a biometric identification technique for linking community and hospital data in rural Ghana. Glob Health Action. 2016;9:29854.
    1. White EB, Meyer AJ, Ggita JM, Babirye D, Mark D, Ayakaka I, Haberer JE, Katamba A, Armstrong-Hough M, Davis JL. Feasibility, Acceptability, and Adoption of Digital Fingerprinting During Contact Investigation for Tuberculosis in Kampala, Uganda: A Parallel-Convergent Mixed-Methods Analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2018 Nov 15;20(11):e11541. doi: 10.2196/11541.
    1. Study to Evaluate the Immunogenicity and Safety of a Heterologous Vaccine Regimen Against Ebola (EBOVAC3DRC) [2019-12-04]. .
    1. IMVAMUNE® Smallpox Vaccine in Adult Healthcare Personnel at Risk for Monkeypox in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. [2016-11-30]. .
    1. Corby PM, Schleyer T, Spallek H, Hart TC, Weyant RJ, Corby AL, Bretz WA. Using biometrics for participant identification in a research study: a case report. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2006;13(2):233–5. doi: 10.1197/jamia.M1793.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors en medewerkers

Medische omstandigheden

Geneesmiddelinterventies

3
Abonneren