Outcomes of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Drive-Through Screening at an Academic Military Medical Center

Lindholm, David A; Kiley, John L; Jansen, Nathan K; Hoard, Robert T; Bondaryk, Matthew R.; Stanley, Elizabeth; Alvarado, G; Markelz, Ana E; Cybulski, Robert J.; Okulicz, Jason F.

doi:10.1093/ofid/ofaa306

Cited by 9 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[ 7,8 ] Due to the scale of the COVID‐19 epidemic, an additional burden has been placed on traditional testing sites, such as hospitals, emergency rooms, and walk‐in clinics, thereby challenging their safety. [ 9–11 ]…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High‐Resolution Agent‐Based Modeling of COVID‐19 Spreading in a Small Town

Truszkowska

Behring

Hasanyan

et al. 2021

Advcd Theory and Sims

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Amid the ongoing COVID‐19 pandemic, public health authorities and the general population are striving to achieve a balance between safety and normalcy. Ever changing conditions call for the development of theory and simulation tools to finely describe multiple strata of society while supporting the evaluation of “what‐if” scenarios. Particularly important is to assess the effectiveness of potential testing approaches and vaccination strategies. Here, an agent‐based modeling platform is proposed to simulate the spreading of COVID‐19 in small towns and cities, with a single‐individual resolution. The platform is validated on real data from New Rochelle, NY—one of the first outbreaks registered in the United States. Supported by expert knowledge and informed by reported data, the model incorporates detailed elements of the spreading within a statistically realistic population. Along with pertinent functionality such as testing, treatment, and vaccination options, the model accounts for the burden of other illnesses with symptoms similar to COVID‐19. Unique to the model is the possibility to explore different testing approaches—in hospitals or drive‐through facilities—and vaccination strategies that could prioritize vulnerable groups. Decision‐making by public authorities could benefit from the model, for its fine‐grain resolution, open‐source nature, and wide range of features.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High‐Resolution Agent‐Based Modeling of COVID‐19 Spreading in a Small Town

Truszkowska

Behring

Hasanyan

et al. 2021

Advcd Theory and Sims

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One drive-through testing study calculated the test turnaround time, defined as the time between testing and communication of results. This was found to be 25 hours (IQR 21-29) in-house and 221 hours (IQR 161-269) if outsourced 25 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

A Scoping Review of the Experience of Implementing Population Testing for SARS-CoV-2

Foster

Campbell

Blank

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has led to the swift introduction of population testing programmes in many countries across the world, using testing modalities such as drive-through, walk-through, mobile and home visiting programmes. Here, we provide an overview of the literature describing the experience of implementing population testing for SARS-CoV-2.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review using Embase, Medline and the Cochrane Library in addition to a grey literature search. We identified indicators relevant to process, quality and resource outcomes related to each testing modality.Results2,999 titles were identified from the academic literature and the grey literature search, of which 22 were relevant. Most studies were from the USA and the Republic of Korea. Drive-through testing centres were the most common testing modality evaluated and these provided a rapid method of testing whilst minimising resource use.ConclusionsThe evidence base for population testing lacks high quality studies, however, the literature provides evaluations of the advantages and limitations of different testing modalities. There is a need for robust evidence in this area to ensure that testing is deployed in a safe and effective manner in response to the Covid-19 pandemic.

show abstract

“…In the UK, anecdotal evidence suggests that test results were communicated in 2-3 days (Vize, 2020), which is likely to have undermined tracing efforts considerably. In the US, one report of drive-through testing found that when outsourced, tests (n=476) were turned around in a median of 9.21 days (Lindholm et al 2020). Contact tracing may not be effective with such delays.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effective Contact Tracing for COVID-19: A Systematic Review

Juneau¹,

Briand

Pueyo³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Contact tracing is commonly recommended to control outbreaks of COVID-19, but its effectiveness is unclear. This systematic review aimed to examine contact tracing effectiveness in the context of COVID-19. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, and All EBM Reviews were searched using a range of terms related to contact tracing for COVID-19. Articles were included if they reported on the ability of contact tracing to slow or stop the spread of COVID-19 or on characteristics of effective tracing efforts. Two investigators screened all studies. Results: A total of 32 articles were found. All were observational or modelling studies, so the quality of the evidence was low. Observational studies (n=14) all reported that contact tracing (alone or in combination with other interventions) was associated with better control of COVID-19. Results of modelling studies (n=18) depended on their assumptions. Under assumptions of prompt and thorough tracing with no further transmission, they found that contact tracing could stop an outbreak (e.g. by reducing the reproduction number from 2.2 to 0.57) or that it could reduce infections (e.g. by 24%-71% with a mobile tracing app). Under assumptions of slower, less efficient tracing, modelling studies suggested that tracing could slow, but not stop COVID-19. Conclusions: Observational and modelling studies suggest that contact tracing is associated with better control of COVID-19. Its effectiveness likely depends on a number of factors, including how many and how fast contacts are traced and quarantined, and how effective quarantines are at preventing further transmission. A cautious interpretation suggests that to stop the spread of COVID-19, public health practitioners have 2-3 days from the time a new case develops symptoms to isolate the case and quarantine at least 80% of its contacts, and that once isolated, cases and contacts should infect zero new cases. Less efficient tracing may slow, but not stop, the spread of COVID-19. Inefficient tracing (with delays of 4-5+ days or less than 60% of contacts quarantined with no further transmission) may not contribute meaningfully to control of COVID-19.

show abstract

Outcomes of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Drive-Through Screening at an Academic Military Medical Center

Cited by 9 publications

References 16 publications

High‐Resolution Agent‐Based Modeling of COVID‐19 Spreading in a Small Town

High‐Resolution Agent‐Based Modeling of COVID‐19 Spreading in a Small Town

A Scoping Review of the Experience of Implementing Population Testing for SARS-CoV-2

Effective Contact Tracing for COVID-19: A Systematic Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About