TY  - JOUR
AU  - Würstle, Silvia
AU  - Erber, Johanna
AU  - Hanselmann, Michael
AU  - Hoffmann, Dieter
AU  - Werfel, Stanislas
AU  - Hering, Svenja
AU  - Weidlich, Simon
AU  - Schneider, Jochen
AU  - Franke, Ralf
AU  - Maier, Michael
AU  - Henkel, Andreas G
AU  - Schmid, Roland M
AU  - Protzer, Ulrike
AU  - Laxy, Michael
AU  - Spinner, Christoph D
PY  - 2022
DA  - 2022/1/4
TI  - A Telemedicine-Guided Self-Collection Approach for PCR-Based SARS-CoV-2 Testing: Comparative Study
JO  - JMIR Form Res
SP  - e32564
VL  - 6
IS  - 1
KW  - self-sampling
KW  - telemedicine
KW  - test strategy effectiveness
KW  - simulation model
KW  - SARS-CoV-2
KW  - COVID-19
AB  - Background: Large-scale, polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based SARS-CoV-2 testing is expensive, resource intensive, and time consuming. A self-collection approach is a probable alternative; however, its feasibility, cost, and ability to prevent infections need to be evaluated. Objective: This study aims to compare an innovative self-collection approach with a regular SARS-CoV-2 testing strategy in a large European industrial manufacturing site. Methods: The feasibility of a telemedicine-guided PCR-based self-collection approach was assessed for 150 employees (intervention group) and compared with a regular SARS-CoV-2 testing approach used for 143 employees (control group). Acceptance, ergonomics, and efficacy were evaluated using a software application. A simulation model was implemented to evaluate the effectiveness. An interactive R shiny app was created to enable customized simulations. Results: The test results were successfully communicated to and interpreted without uncertainty by 76% (114/150) and 76.9% (110/143) of the participants in the intervention and control groups, respectively (P=.96). The ratings for acceptability, ergonomics, and efficacy among intervention group participants were noninferior when compared to those among control group participants (acceptability: 71.6% vs 37.6%; ergonomics: 88.1% vs 74.5%; efficacy: 86.4% vs 77.5%). The self-collection approach was found to be less time consuming (23 min vs 38 min; P<.001). The simulation model indicated that both testing approaches reduce the risk of infection, and the self-collection approach tends to be slightly less effective owing to its lower sensitivity. Conclusions: The self-collection approach for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis was found to be technically feasible and well rated in terms of acceptance, ergonomics, and efficacy. The simulation model facilitates the evaluation of test effectiveness; nonetheless, considering context specificity, appropriate adaptation by companies is required. 
SN  - 2561-326X
UR  - https://formative.jmir.org/2022/1/e32564
UR  - https://doi.org/10.2196/32564
UR  - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34803022
DO  - 10.2196/32564
ID  - info:doi/10.2196/32564
ER  -