RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 If you build it, will they use it? Use of a Digital Assistant for Self-Reporting of COVID-19 Rapid Antigen Test Results during Large Nationwide Community Testing Initiative
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.03.31.22273242
DO 10.1101/2022.03.31.22273242
A1 Carly Herbert
A1 Qiming Shi
A1 Vik Kheterpal
A1 Chris Nowak
A1 Thejas Suvarna
A1 Basyl Durnam
A1 Summer Schrader
A1 Stephanie Behar
A1 Syed Naeem
A1 Seanan Tarrant
A1 Ben Kalibala
A1 Aditi Singh
A1 Ben Gerber
A1 Bruce Barton
A1 Honghuang Lin
A1 Michael Cohen-Wolkowiez
A1 Giselle Corbie-Smith
A1 Warren Kibbe
A1 Juan Marquez
A1 Jonggyu Baek
A1 Nathaniel Hafer
A1 Laura Gibson
A1 Laurel O’Connor
A1 John Broach
A1 William Heetderks
A1 David McManus
A1 Apurv Soni
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/04/01/2022.03.31.22273242.abstract
AB Importance Wide-spread distribution of rapid-antigen tests is integral to the United States’ strategy to address COVID-19; however, it is estimated that few rapid-antigen test results are reported to local departments of health.Objective To characterize how often individuals in six communities throughout the United States used a digital assistant to log rapid-antigen test results and report them to their local Department of Health.Design This prospective cohort study is based on anonymously collected data from the beneficiaries of The Say Yes! Covid Test program, which distributed 3,000,000 rapid antigen tests at no cost to residents of six communities between April and October 2021. We provide a descriptive evaluation of beneficiaries’ use of digital assistant for logging and reporting their rapid antigen test results.Main Outcome and Measures Number and proportion of tests logged and reported to the Department of Health through the digital assistantResults A total of 178,785 test kits were ordered by the digital assistant, and 14,398 households used the digital assistant to log 41,465 test results. Overall, a small proportion of beneficiaries used the digital assistant (8%), but over 75% of those who used it reported their rapid antigen test results to their state public health department. The reporting behavior varied between communities and was significantly different for communities that were incentivized for reporting test results (p < 0.001). In all communities, positive tests were less reported than negative tests (60.4% vs 75.5%; p<0.001).Conclusions and Relevance These results indicate that app-based reporting with incentives may be an effective way to increase reporting of rapid tests for COVID-19; however, increasing the adoption of the digital assistant is a critical first step.Competing Interest StatementVK is principal, and TS, SS, CN, and EH are employees of health care technology company CareEvolution. DDM reports consulting and research grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer, consulting and research support from Fitbit, consulting, and research support from Flexcon, research grant from Boehringer Ingelheim, consulting from Avania, non-financial research support from Apple Computer, consulting/other support from Heart Rhythm Society. LG is on a scientific advisory board for Moderna on projects unrelated to SARS-CoV-2Funding StatementThis study was funded by the NIH RADx-Tech program under 3U54HL143541-02S2.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:IRB of University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School waived ethical approval for this work.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.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.