Cargando…

Low uptake of COVID-19 lateral flow testing among university students: a mixed methods evaluation

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate COVID-19 lateral flow testing (LFT) among asymptomatic university students. STUDY DESIGN: This study was a mixed methods evaluation of LFT among University of Bristol students. METHODS: We conducted (1) an analysis of testing uptake and exploration of demograp...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: French, C.E., Denford, S., Brooks-Pollock, E., Wehling, H., Hickman, M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Royal Society for Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8755476/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35176622
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2022.01.002
_version_ 1784632390687129600
author French, C.E.
Denford, S.
Brooks-Pollock, E.
Wehling, H.
Hickman, M.
author_facet French, C.E.
Denford, S.
Brooks-Pollock, E.
Wehling, H.
Hickman, M.
author_sort French, C.E.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate COVID-19 lateral flow testing (LFT) among asymptomatic university students. STUDY DESIGN: This study was a mixed methods evaluation of LFT among University of Bristol students. METHODS: We conducted (1) an analysis of testing uptake and exploration of demographic variations in uptake using logistic regression; (2) an online student survey about views on university testing; and (3) qualitative interviews to explore participants’ experiences of testing and subsequent behaviour, analysed using a thematic approach. RESULTS: A total of 12,391 LFTs were conducted on 8025 of 36,054 (22.3%) students. Only one in 10 students had the recommended two tests. There were striking demographic disparities in uptake with those from ethnic minority groups having lower uptake (e.g. 3% of Chinese students were tested vs 30.7% of White students) and variations by level and year of study (ranging from 5.3% to 33.7%), place of residence (29.0%–35.6%) and faculty (15.2%–32.8%). Differences persisted in multivariable analyses. A total of 436 students completed the online survey, and 20 in-depth interviews were conducted. Barriers to engagement with testing included a lack of awareness, knowledge and understanding, and concerns about the accuracy and safety. Students understood the limitations of LFTs but requested further information about test accuracy. Tests were used to inform behavioural decisions, often in combination with other information, such as the potential for exposure to the virus and perceptions of vulnerability. CONCLUSIONS: The low uptake of testing brings into question the role of mass LFT in university settings. Innovative strategies may be needed to increase LFT uptake among students.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8755476
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher The Royal Society for Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87554762022-01-13 Low uptake of COVID-19 lateral flow testing among university students: a mixed methods evaluation French, C.E. Denford, S. Brooks-Pollock, E. Wehling, H. Hickman, M. Public Health Original Research OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate COVID-19 lateral flow testing (LFT) among asymptomatic university students. STUDY DESIGN: This study was a mixed methods evaluation of LFT among University of Bristol students. METHODS: We conducted (1) an analysis of testing uptake and exploration of demographic variations in uptake using logistic regression; (2) an online student survey about views on university testing; and (3) qualitative interviews to explore participants’ experiences of testing and subsequent behaviour, analysed using a thematic approach. RESULTS: A total of 12,391 LFTs were conducted on 8025 of 36,054 (22.3%) students. Only one in 10 students had the recommended two tests. There were striking demographic disparities in uptake with those from ethnic minority groups having lower uptake (e.g. 3% of Chinese students were tested vs 30.7% of White students) and variations by level and year of study (ranging from 5.3% to 33.7%), place of residence (29.0%–35.6%) and faculty (15.2%–32.8%). Differences persisted in multivariable analyses. A total of 436 students completed the online survey, and 20 in-depth interviews were conducted. Barriers to engagement with testing included a lack of awareness, knowledge and understanding, and concerns about the accuracy and safety. Students understood the limitations of LFTs but requested further information about test accuracy. Tests were used to inform behavioural decisions, often in combination with other information, such as the potential for exposure to the virus and perceptions of vulnerability. CONCLUSIONS: The low uptake of testing brings into question the role of mass LFT in university settings. Innovative strategies may be needed to increase LFT uptake among students. The Royal Society for Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd. 2022-03 2022-01-13 /pmc/articles/PMC8755476/ /pubmed/35176622 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2022.01.002 Text en © 2022 The Royal Society for Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.
spellingShingle Original Research
French, C.E.
Denford, S.
Brooks-Pollock, E.
Wehling, H.
Hickman, M.
Low uptake of COVID-19 lateral flow testing among university students: a mixed methods evaluation
title Low uptake of COVID-19 lateral flow testing among university students: a mixed methods evaluation
title_full Low uptake of COVID-19 lateral flow testing among university students: a mixed methods evaluation
title_fullStr Low uptake of COVID-19 lateral flow testing among university students: a mixed methods evaluation
title_full_unstemmed Low uptake of COVID-19 lateral flow testing among university students: a mixed methods evaluation
title_short Low uptake of COVID-19 lateral flow testing among university students: a mixed methods evaluation
title_sort low uptake of covid-19 lateral flow testing among university students: a mixed methods evaluation
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8755476/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35176622
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2022.01.002
work_keys_str_mv AT frenchce lowuptakeofcovid19lateralflowtestingamonguniversitystudentsamixedmethodsevaluation
AT denfords lowuptakeofcovid19lateralflowtestingamonguniversitystudentsamixedmethodsevaluation
AT brookspollocke lowuptakeofcovid19lateralflowtestingamonguniversitystudentsamixedmethodsevaluation
AT wehlingh lowuptakeofcovid19lateralflowtestingamonguniversitystudentsamixedmethodsevaluation
AT hickmanm lowuptakeofcovid19lateralflowtestingamonguniversitystudentsamixedmethodsevaluation