Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

The brief comparison of the operational efficiency of pool-testing strategies for COVID-19 mass testing in PCR laboratories

Kirill Vechera
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.14.20151415
Kirill Vechera
LOMT - Laboratory Optimizer for Mass Testing, Jetware
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: cv-c{at}jetware.org
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

This paper addresses the operational efficiency of different pool-testing strategies in typical scenarios of a PCR laboratory working in mass testing for COVID-19 with different values of prevalence, limitations and conditions of testing, and priorities of optimization.

The research employs a model of the laboratory’s testing process, created after interviewing of PCR laboratories and studying their operations. The limitations and operational characteristics of this model were applied in a simulation of the testing process with different pool-testing strategies managed by a computer program developed in the LOMT project.

The efficiency indicators assessed are the number of assays needed to obtain results of a batch of specimens, the number of specimens identified after the first analysis, and total time to obtain all results.

Depending on prevalence, constraints of testing, and priorities of optimization, different pool-testing strategies provide the best operational efficiency. The binary splitting algorithm provides the maximum reduction of the number of assays: from 1.99x reduction for a high prevalence (10%) to 25x reduction for a low prevalence (0.1%), while other algorithms provide the least amount of time to obtain results or the maximum number of the specimens classified after the first analysis.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

European Open Science Cloud, COVID-19 Fast Track Funding

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Data Availability

All data and code is available here at the link provided: https://lomt.jetware.org/download/articles/operational_efficiency_pool_testing-3.tar.xz

https://lomt.jetware.org/download/articles/operational_efficiency_pool_testing-3.tar.xz

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted July 20, 2020.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The brief comparison of the operational efficiency of pool-testing strategies for COVID-19 mass testing in PCR laboratories
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
The brief comparison of the operational efficiency of pool-testing strategies for COVID-19 mass testing in PCR laboratories
Kirill Vechera
medRxiv 2020.07.14.20151415; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.14.20151415
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
The brief comparison of the operational efficiency of pool-testing strategies for COVID-19 mass testing in PCR laboratories
Kirill Vechera
medRxiv 2020.07.14.20151415; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.14.20151415

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Public and Global Health
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (431)
  • Allergy and Immunology (757)
  • Anesthesia (221)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (3298)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (365)
  • Dermatology (280)
  • Emergency Medicine (479)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (1173)
  • Epidemiology (13385)
  • Forensic Medicine (19)
  • Gastroenterology (899)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (5158)
  • Geriatric Medicine (482)
  • Health Economics (783)
  • Health Informatics (3276)
  • Health Policy (1143)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (1193)
  • Hematology (432)
  • HIV/AIDS (1019)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (14637)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (913)
  • Medical Education (478)
  • Medical Ethics (127)
  • Nephrology (525)
  • Neurology (4930)
  • Nursing (262)
  • Nutrition (730)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (886)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (795)
  • Oncology (2524)
  • Ophthalmology (728)
  • Orthopedics (282)
  • Otolaryngology (347)
  • Pain Medicine (323)
  • Palliative Medicine (90)
  • Pathology (544)
  • Pediatrics (1302)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (551)
  • Primary Care Research (557)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (4218)
  • Public and Global Health (7512)
  • Radiology and Imaging (1708)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (1016)
  • Respiratory Medicine (980)
  • Rheumatology (480)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (498)
  • Sports Medicine (424)
  • Surgery (549)
  • Toxicology (72)
  • Transplantation (236)
  • Urology (205)