IRUS Total

Usability and acceptability of home-based self-testing for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies for population surveillance

File Description SizeFormat 
ciaa1178.pdfAccepted version730.35 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Title: Usability and acceptability of home-based self-testing for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies for population surveillance
Authors: Atchison, C
Pristerà, P
Cooper, E
Papageorgiou, V
Redd, R
Piggin, M
Flower, B
Fontana, G
Satkunarajah, S
Ashrafian, H
Lawrence-Jones, A
Naar, L
Chigwende, J
Gibbard, S
Riley, S
Darzi, A
Elliott, P
Ashby, D
Barclay, W
Cooke, GS
Ward, H
Item Type: Journal Article
Abstract: BACKGROUND: This study assesses acceptability and usability of home-based self-testing for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies using lateral flow immunoassays (LFIA). METHODS: We carried out public involvement and pilot testing in 315 volunteers to improve usability. Feedback was obtained through online discussions, questionnaires, observations and interviews of people who tried the test at home. This informed the design of a nationally representative survey of adults in England using two LFIAs (LFIA1 and LFIA2) which were sent to 10,600 and 3,800 participants, respectively, who provided further feedback. RESULTS: Public involvement and pilot testing showed high levels of acceptability, but limitations with the usability of kits. Most people reported completing the test; however, they identified difficulties with practical aspects of the kit, particularly the lancet and pipette, a need for clearer instructions and more guidance on interpretation of results. In the national study, 99.3% (8,693/8,754) of LFIA1 and 98.4% (2,911/2,957) of LFIA2 respondents attempted the test and 97.5% and 97.8% of respondents completed it, respectively. Most found the instructions easy to understand, but some reported difficulties using the pipette (LFIA1: 17.7%) and applying the blood drop to the cassette (LFIA2: 31.3%). Most respondents obtained a valid result (LFIA1: 91.5%; LFIA2: 94.4%). Overall there was substantial concordance between participant and clinician interpreted results (kappa: LFIA1 0.72; LFIA2 0.89). CONCLUSION: Impactful public involvement is feasible in a rapid response setting. Home self-testing with LFIAs can be used with a high degree of acceptability and usability by adults, making them a good option for use in seroprevalence surveys.
Issue Date: 12-Aug-2020
Date of Acceptance: 4-Aug-2020
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/81988
DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciaa1178
ISSN: 1058-4838
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Start Page: 1
End Page: 10
Journal / Book Title: Clinical Infectious Diseases
Volume: 2020
Copyright Statement: © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
Sponsor/Funder: National Institute for Health Research
National Institute of Health Research
Department of Health
Funder's Grant Number: RP-2016-07-012
Keywords: COVID-19
lateral flow immunoassay
lateral flow immunoassay
06 Biological Sciences
11 Medical and Health Sciences
Publication Status: Published online
Conference Place: United States
Open Access location: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32785665/
Article Number: ciaa1178
Online Publication Date: 2020-08-12
Appears in Collections:Department of Surgery and Cancer
Department of Infectious Diseases
Faculty of Medicine
Institute of Global Health Innovation
Imperial College London COVID-19
School of Public Health

This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons