Cargando…
A Case Study of Bluetooth Technology as a Supplemental Tool in Contact Tracing
We present results from a 7-day trial of a Bluetooth-enabled card by the New Zealand Ministry of Health to investigate its usefulness in contact tracing. A comparison of the card with traditional contact tracing, which relies on self-reports of contacts to case investigators, demonstrated significan...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8773400/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35079686 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41666-021-00112-9 |
_version_ | 1784636075581374464 |
---|---|
author | Admiraal, Ryan Millen, Jules Patel, Ankit Chambers, Tim |
author_facet | Admiraal, Ryan Millen, Jules Patel, Ankit Chambers, Tim |
author_sort | Admiraal, Ryan |
collection | PubMed |
description | We present results from a 7-day trial of a Bluetooth-enabled card by the New Zealand Ministry of Health to investigate its usefulness in contact tracing. A comparison of the card with traditional contact tracing, which relies on self-reports of contacts to case investigators, demonstrated significantly higher levels of internal consistency in detected contact events by Bluetooth-enabled cards with 88% of contact events being detected by both cards involved in an interaction as compared to 64% for self-reports of contacts to case investigators. We found no clear evidence of memory recall worsening in reporting contact events that were further removed in time from the date of a case investigation. Roughly 66% of contact events between trial participants that were indicated by cards went unreported to case investigators, simultaneously highlighting the shortcomings of traditional contact tracing and the value of Bluetooth technology in detecting contact events that may otherwise go unreported. At the same time, cards detected only 65% of self-reported contact events, in part due to increasing non-compliance as the study progressed. This would suggest that Bluetooth technology can only be considered as a supplemental tool in contact tracing and not a viable replacement to traditional contact tracing unless measures are introduced to ensure greater compliance. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8773400 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87734002022-01-21 A Case Study of Bluetooth Technology as a Supplemental Tool in Contact Tracing Admiraal, Ryan Millen, Jules Patel, Ankit Chambers, Tim J Healthc Inform Res Research Article We present results from a 7-day trial of a Bluetooth-enabled card by the New Zealand Ministry of Health to investigate its usefulness in contact tracing. A comparison of the card with traditional contact tracing, which relies on self-reports of contacts to case investigators, demonstrated significantly higher levels of internal consistency in detected contact events by Bluetooth-enabled cards with 88% of contact events being detected by both cards involved in an interaction as compared to 64% for self-reports of contacts to case investigators. We found no clear evidence of memory recall worsening in reporting contact events that were further removed in time from the date of a case investigation. Roughly 66% of contact events between trial participants that were indicated by cards went unreported to case investigators, simultaneously highlighting the shortcomings of traditional contact tracing and the value of Bluetooth technology in detecting contact events that may otherwise go unreported. At the same time, cards detected only 65% of self-reported contact events, in part due to increasing non-compliance as the study progressed. This would suggest that Bluetooth technology can only be considered as a supplemental tool in contact tracing and not a viable replacement to traditional contact tracing unless measures are introduced to ensure greater compliance. Springer International Publishing 2022-01-19 /pmc/articles/PMC8773400/ /pubmed/35079686 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41666-021-00112-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Research Article Admiraal, Ryan Millen, Jules Patel, Ankit Chambers, Tim A Case Study of Bluetooth Technology as a Supplemental Tool in Contact Tracing |
title | A Case Study of Bluetooth Technology as a Supplemental Tool in Contact Tracing |
title_full | A Case Study of Bluetooth Technology as a Supplemental Tool in Contact Tracing |
title_fullStr | A Case Study of Bluetooth Technology as a Supplemental Tool in Contact Tracing |
title_full_unstemmed | A Case Study of Bluetooth Technology as a Supplemental Tool in Contact Tracing |
title_short | A Case Study of Bluetooth Technology as a Supplemental Tool in Contact Tracing |
title_sort | case study of bluetooth technology as a supplemental tool in contact tracing |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8773400/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35079686 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41666-021-00112-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT admiraalryan acasestudyofbluetoothtechnologyasasupplementaltoolincontacttracing AT millenjules acasestudyofbluetoothtechnologyasasupplementaltoolincontacttracing AT patelankit acasestudyofbluetoothtechnologyasasupplementaltoolincontacttracing AT chamberstim acasestudyofbluetoothtechnologyasasupplementaltoolincontacttracing AT admiraalryan casestudyofbluetoothtechnologyasasupplementaltoolincontacttracing AT millenjules casestudyofbluetoothtechnologyasasupplementaltoolincontacttracing AT patelankit casestudyofbluetoothtechnologyasasupplementaltoolincontacttracing AT chamberstim casestudyofbluetoothtechnologyasasupplementaltoolincontacttracing |