Summary
The rapid spread and high transmissibility of the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 is likely to lead to a significant number of key workers testing positive simultaneously.
Under a policy of self-isolation after testing positive, this may lead to extreme staffing shortfalls at the same time as e.g. hospital admissions are peaking.
Using a model of individual infectiousness and testing with lateral flow tests (LFT), we evaluate test-to-release policies against conventional fixed-duration isolation policies in terms of excess days of infectiousness, days saved, and tests used.
We find that the number of infectious days in the community can be reduced to almost zero by requiring at least 2 consecutive days of negative tests, regardless of the number of days’ wait until testing again after initially testing positive.
On average, a policy of fewer days’ wait until initiating testing (e.g 3 or 5 days) results in more days saved vs. a 10-day isolation period, but also requires a greater number of tests.
Due to a lack of specific data on viral load progression, infectivity, and likelihood of testing positive by LFT over the course of an Omicron infection, we assume the same parameters as for pre-Omicron variants and explore the impact of a possible shorter proliferation phase.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
BJQ is supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP1139859). CABP is supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP1184344) and the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO)/Wellcome Trust Epidemic Preparedness Coronavirus research programme (ref. 221303/Z/20/Z). JRCP is supported by the South African Department of Science and Innovation and the National Research Foundation. Any opinion, finding, and conclusion or recommendation expressed in this material is that of the authors and the NRF does not accept any liability in this regard
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:
The Ethics committee of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine gave ethical approval for this work (LSHTM Ethics Ref: 25897).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
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
The code and data to reproduce the analysis can be found at https://www.github.com/bquilty25/daily_testing
