Feasibility and acceptability of daily testing at school as an alternative to self-isolation following close contact with a confirmed case of COVID-19: A qualitative analysis
Feasibility and acceptability of daily testing at school as an alternative to self-isolation following close contact with a confirmed case of COVID-19: A qualitative analysis
Background
Daily testing using a rapid Lateral Flow Device (LFD) has been suggested as an alternative to self-isolation. A randomised trial comparing daily contact testing (DCT) in schools with self-isolation found that SARS-CoV-2 transmission within school was comparable and low in both groups. However, if this approach is to be adopted widely, it is critical that we understand the perspective of those who will be delivering and receiving DCT. The aim of this qualitative process study embedded in the randomised controlled trial (RCT) was to improve understanding of a range of behavioural factors that could influence implementation.
Methods
Interviews were conducted with 63 participants, including staff, students, and parents of students who had been identified as being in close contact with someone with COVID-19. The topic guide explored perceptions of daily testing, understanding of positive and negative test results, and adherence to guidance. Data were analysed using an inductive thematic approach.
Results
Results were organised under three main headings: (1) factors influencing daily testing (2) interpretation of test results (3) behaviour during testing period. Participants recognized that daily testing may allow students to remain in school, which was viewed as necessary for both education and social needs. Whilst some felt safer as a result of daily testing, others raised concerns about safety. Participants did not always understand how to interpret and respond to test results, and although participants reported high levels of adherence to the guidance, improved communications were desired.
Conclusion
Daily testing may be a feasible and acceptable alternative to self-isolation among close contacts of people who test positive. However, improved communications are needed to ensure that all students and parents have a good understanding of the rationale for testing, what test results mean, how test results should be acted on, and how likely students are to test positive following close contact. Support is needed for students and parents of students who have to self-isolate and for those who have concerns about the safety of daily testing.
Covid-19, Lateral flow device, Qualitative, Schools, Testing
Denford, Sarah
8970b5a7-8cad-4356-ad0e-88297b67db37
Towler, Lauren
ebb4fb4e-703f-4e52-a9dc-53e72ca68e8f
Ali, Behiye
087c839f-79c3-4e5b-83ee-e04d0139e3da
Treneman-Evans, Georgia
aa12c5e1-3674-453e-83a4-19d1f3d5a7ba
Bloomer, Rachael
59126ea8-6613-4616-be3b-a66421f358ee
Peto, T.
369ad5c4-56cb-4764-99d6-db3c255f0007
Young, Bernadette
56e12044-1937-4d8a-ae41-73fe12fc909b
Yardley, Lucy
64be42c4-511d-484d-abaa-f8813452a22e
13 April 2022
Denford, Sarah
8970b5a7-8cad-4356-ad0e-88297b67db37
Towler, Lauren
ebb4fb4e-703f-4e52-a9dc-53e72ca68e8f
Ali, Behiye
087c839f-79c3-4e5b-83ee-e04d0139e3da
Treneman-Evans, Georgia
aa12c5e1-3674-453e-83a4-19d1f3d5a7ba
Bloomer, Rachael
59126ea8-6613-4616-be3b-a66421f358ee
Peto, T.
369ad5c4-56cb-4764-99d6-db3c255f0007
Young, Bernadette
56e12044-1937-4d8a-ae41-73fe12fc909b
Yardley, Lucy
64be42c4-511d-484d-abaa-f8813452a22e
Denford, Sarah, Towler, Lauren, Ali, Behiye, Treneman-Evans, Georgia, Bloomer, Rachael, Peto, T., Young, Bernadette and Yardley, Lucy
(2022)
Feasibility and acceptability of daily testing at school as an alternative to self-isolation following close contact with a confirmed case of COVID-19: A qualitative analysis.
BMC Public Health, 22 (1), [742].
(doi:10.1186/s12889-022-13204-x).
Abstract
Background
Daily testing using a rapid Lateral Flow Device (LFD) has been suggested as an alternative to self-isolation. A randomised trial comparing daily contact testing (DCT) in schools with self-isolation found that SARS-CoV-2 transmission within school was comparable and low in both groups. However, if this approach is to be adopted widely, it is critical that we understand the perspective of those who will be delivering and receiving DCT. The aim of this qualitative process study embedded in the randomised controlled trial (RCT) was to improve understanding of a range of behavioural factors that could influence implementation.
Methods
Interviews were conducted with 63 participants, including staff, students, and parents of students who had been identified as being in close contact with someone with COVID-19. The topic guide explored perceptions of daily testing, understanding of positive and negative test results, and adherence to guidance. Data were analysed using an inductive thematic approach.
Results
Results were organised under three main headings: (1) factors influencing daily testing (2) interpretation of test results (3) behaviour during testing period. Participants recognized that daily testing may allow students to remain in school, which was viewed as necessary for both education and social needs. Whilst some felt safer as a result of daily testing, others raised concerns about safety. Participants did not always understand how to interpret and respond to test results, and although participants reported high levels of adherence to the guidance, improved communications were desired.
Conclusion
Daily testing may be a feasible and acceptable alternative to self-isolation among close contacts of people who test positive. However, improved communications are needed to ensure that all students and parents have a good understanding of the rationale for testing, what test results mean, how test results should be acted on, and how likely students are to test positive following close contact. Support is needed for students and parents of students who have to self-isolate and for those who have concerns about the safety of daily testing.
Text
DENFORD - BMC Public Health - Feasibility_and_acceptability_of_daily_testing_at_
- Accepted Manuscript
Text
s12889-022-13204-x
- Version of Record
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 8 April 2022
Published date: 13 April 2022
Additional Information:
Funding Information:
This study was funded by the UK Government Department of Health and Social Care and supported by the UK Government Department for Education and Office for National Statistics. The work was also supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Healthcare Associated Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance at Oxford University in partnership with UKHSA (NIHR200915), the NIHR HPRU in Behavioural Science and Evaluations, a partnership between UKHSA and the University of Bristol, and the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR, UKHSA or the Department of Health and Social Care.
Funding Information:
LY is an NIHR Senior Investigator and her research programme is partly supported by NIHR Applied Research Collaboration (ARC)-West, NIHR Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Behavioural Science and Evaluation, and the NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre (BRC).
Funding Information:
SD is supported by the NIHR Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Behavioural Science and Evaluation at the University of Bristol, a partnership between the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) and the University of Bristol.
Funding Information:
BCY, TEAP, SD and LY received grants from the Department of Health and Social Care to fund this work.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022, The Author(s).
Copyright:
Copyright 2022 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Covid-19, Lateral flow device, Qualitative, Schools, Testing
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 456643
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/456643
ISSN: 1471-2458
PURE UUID: 72c267bd-eea7-47b7-82f9-650de89301eb
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 05 May 2022 17:00
Last modified: 09 Aug 2024 01:54
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Sarah Denford
Author:
Lauren Towler
Author:
Behiye Ali
Author:
Georgia Treneman-Evans
Author:
Rachael Bloomer
Author:
T. Peto
Author:
Bernadette Young
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics