Behavioural barriers to COVID-19 testing in Australia: Two national surveys to identify barriers and estimate prevalence by health literacy level

BACKGROUND

Individual behaviour is crucial to the control of COVID-19, but research on non-pharmaceutical strategies for COVID-19 prevention has been underfunded¹. The first step to develop such strategies is diagnosing what behavioural barriers must be addressed to increase compliance with COVID-19 prevention. A key prevention behaviour that has been overlooked in proposed models of COVID-19 prevention is COVID-19 testing².

The successful COVID-19 prevention strategy in Australia has been dependent on people getting tested when they have been in contact with a case, or have COVID-19 symptoms (e.g. fever, cough, sore throat). Community members must then self-isolate at home until they return a negative result. This test-trace-isolate strategy has been used to determine the need for short-term localised restrictions until clusters are brought under control³. According to the COM-B model⁴, such COVID-19 prevention behaviours can be conceptualised in terms of three main drivers: physical/psychological capability (e.g. having the physical ability to drive to and walk up the stairs to access a testing centre, and knowing what to do if you have symptoms), physical/social opportunity (e.g. the availability of testing centres in your area, and social norms that make self-isolation acceptable), and automatic/reflective motivation (e.g. getting into the habit of staying home when you have symptoms, and believing that it’s important to get tested if you develop symptoms)².

There is little research on COVID-19 testing behaviours given the very new nature of this issue, but emerging literature and media reports suggest different barriers exist across countries. For example, countries such as Tanzania have major issues with opportunity barriers in terms of limited access to COVID-19 tests and fake testing kits⁵. Cost may be a barrier in other countries such as the UK and US where health insurance may not cover the testing. This disproportionately affects certain groups such as immigrant and non-citizen communities, who may also fear financial and legal repercussions from testing positive⁶. Testing may be limited to certain criteria (e.g. only if you have symptoms, regardless of exposure to COVID-19 cases) due to lack of supply or staff resource issues⁷. There may also be issues of delivering tests and transporting samples for remote areas⁸. Finally, there may be issues with inadequate communication and low community knowledge about which symptoms require testing and the process to follow⁷.

In terms of opportunity barriers, Australia is fortunate to have efficient and free testing widely available, although this can vary by location. Testing clinics have been set up all around the country, which includes drive through options to minimise contact with others, and results are generally sent by text message within 2 days^9,10. However, the process can take longer and is unpredictable where demand increases in new outbreak areas such as Victoria in July-September 2020^11–13.

For capability barriers, public health messages have focused on basic processes but we know certain groups are less likely to understand and act on COVID-19 prevention advice. For example in Australia, people with lower health literacy and those who speak a language other than English were less likely to be able to identify COVID-19 symptoms and prevention measures¹⁴. Younger people, men and those with less education were more likely to agree with COVID-19 misinformation about prevention, management and cure¹⁵. These groups likely need different communication strategies to ensure everyone understands the message and takes appropriate action.

To address motivation, messaging trials have explored different strategies to increase intentions to follow COVID-19 prevention advice, e.g. framing the behaviour as helping the community rather than avoiding individual risk¹⁶, or testing identity-based messages such as “don’t be a spreader”¹⁷. However, emerging research in this area has neglected testing as a key behavioural outcome for COVID-19 prevention. We need to understand the behavioural barriers² to testing in order to develop and evaluate interventions to address these issues for managing COVID-19 more effectively now. With new variants and unequal access, the vaccine rollout is not guaranteed to eliminate COVID-19 in the near future, so we will be reliant on testing for many months and even years to come¹⁸. Better understanding of testing barriers is a pressing issue for COVID-19, but also essential to improve the management of future pandemics.

AIM

We conducted two Australian studies to address a major gap in our understanding about how to improve COVID-19 prevention. Study 1 aimed to identify the range of barriers to COVID-19 testing. Study 2 aimed to estimate the prevalence of barriers to COVID-19 testing, to target interventions to the most important issues.

METHOD

RESULTS

The sample demographics are shown in Table 1. Study 1 had under-representation of male gender (32%) and lower education (14.5%), with a relatively small sample for low health literacy (8.9%). Quota sampling in Study 2 resulted in a more representative sample for male gender (49.5% male) and lower education (34.6%), which increased the sample for low health literacy (16.5%).

DISCUSSION

These results provide new insights into behavioural barriers to COVID-19 testing, which is central to understanding and controlling the pandemic. Study 1 identified a wide range of barriers to COVID-19 testing that have not previously been described in the COVID-19 literature. These covered all three behavioural drivers in the COM-B model (capability, opportunity and motivation). Study 2 found that the motivation and capability barriers were far more prevalent than opportunity barriers in Australia. The top six most frequently selected barriers were the same as the most important barriers, covering psychological capability and reflective motivation. These issues were around misunderstanding COVID-19 symptoms, preferring to self-isolate rather than get a painful test, and believing there are few local cases. Many of these issues were more prevalent amongst people with lower health literacy. The large range of barriers identified in this study indicate that testing is a complex issue, so it requires a multifaceted approach to improve uptake depending on key barriers in different communities.

The most prevalent category of barriers in this study was motivation (e.g. don’t believe symptoms are COVID-19), which is likely to influence both testing intentions and behaviours. To address low intentions to test we need to identify and address the specific and wide-ranging concerns that individuals have. For some people, online symptom checkers could be a channel to provide tailored information, where users could be prompted for key concerns to link them to the most relevant information^21,22, as opposed to searching for this in long ‘Frequently Asked Questions’ pages on government health websites. However, symptom checkers are not always reliable²³, and may not be accessed by some groups such as culturally and linguistically diverse communities. Public health messaging could be better targeted to key motivation issues in different communities to address this. Our findings suggest a need to make it clear that self isolation means 14 days not just a few days while you have symptoms, so this is not seen as a good reason to avoid a painful test. We could also appeal to community benefits of testing, as this may be more motivating than individual risk in areas with low rates of COVID-19²⁴. To address gaps between testing intentions and actual behaviour, people could be supported to plan in advance for the inconvenience of testing and self isolation; for example, managers could have a plan worked out in advance with their employees for how they will notify work and change shifts or work from home. Setting goals in advance has been shown to change various health-related behaviours^25,26, and this strategy has been applied in Australia to help communities plan for bushfire management²⁷.

For capability barriers (e.g. not sure which symptoms need testing), we know that government information about COVID-19 in Australia and in many countries is difficult to understand for the average person based on readability analyses^28,29, and that communities with different language needs are not being adequately addressed³⁰. We have also identified that certain groups are more susceptible to misinformation, such as younger people and men¹⁹. Addressing different information needs in the community may require using less traditional communication channels³¹ and different spokespeople to reach these groups, such as social media influencers³².

Although the Australian testing system is free and widely accessible, there are still important opportunity barriers particularly around financial losses and work expectations that require system changes. The state of Victoria addressed this issue during an outbreak in 2020 by providing financial support for those who were self isolating following a COVID-19 test, to support casual workers and others without access to sick pay³³. There are also social opportunity issues where stigma and perceived judgment by others could prevent individuals from getting tested, which we have seen in other infectious disease conditions such as HIV³⁴.

The study occurred in a context where risk of COVID-19 has been relatively low compared to many other countries worldwide. Testing behaviour has been a key part of identifying and controlling emerging COVID-19 outbreaks. This will likely become more relevant in countries where vaccine rollout enables the current large number of new cases to be contained. Our findings from June 2020 are very similar to September results from national flu tracking data, which show 51% of people who experienced COVID-19 symptoms did not get tested³⁵. We found 51% of people did not “strongly agree” they would get tested, but most people agreed to some extent and addressing perceived barriers may improve this overall positive orientation to COVID-19 testing. Another survey conducted in Australia in August 2020 found much higher rates of testing avoidance, and reported 85% of respondents who had symptoms had not been tested³⁶. The effect of vaccine rollout on testing intentions in Australia remains to be seen, with only a small proportion of the population currently vaccinated and none at the time of data collection³⁷.

Conclusion

This paper uncovers a wide range of barriers to COVID-19 testing that had not previously been identified in the COVID-19 prevention literature. The prevalence estimates show that motivation and capability issues need to be addressed in Australia in order to increase testing behaviour, particularly for groups with lower health literacy. Interventions to improve testing uptake need to identify key barriers for target populations, and specifically address these using evidence-based behaviour change techniques. Our findings support broader advice from international experts in behaviour change, highlighting the importance of diagnosing behavioural barriers in order to increase adherence with COVID-19 prevention behaviours².