Cargando…

Exploration of the uptake of asymptomatic COVID-19 lateral flow testing in Birmingham, UK: survey and qualitative research

AIM: To examine public perspectives on lateral flow testing (LFT) for COVID-19. DESIGN: Online survey with nested semi-structured interviews. SETTING: Birmingham, UK. PARTICIPANTS: 220 Birmingham residents, 21 of whom took part in an interview. RESULTS: Fifty-six per cent of respondents had taken an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mathers, Jonathan, Poyner, Christopher, Thompson, Dean, Rudge, Gavin, Pritchett, Ruth V
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9021457/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35443954
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-056606
_version_ 1784689827324624896
author Mathers, Jonathan
Poyner, Christopher
Thompson, Dean
Rudge, Gavin
Pritchett, Ruth V
author_facet Mathers, Jonathan
Poyner, Christopher
Thompson, Dean
Rudge, Gavin
Pritchett, Ruth V
author_sort Mathers, Jonathan
collection PubMed
description AIM: To examine public perspectives on lateral flow testing (LFT) for COVID-19. DESIGN: Online survey with nested semi-structured interviews. SETTING: Birmingham, UK. PARTICIPANTS: 220 Birmingham residents, 21 of whom took part in an interview. RESULTS: Fifty-six per cent of respondents had taken an LFT. Reasons for not testing included adherence to other government COVID-19 guidance, having had a vaccination and not thinking LFTs were accurate. In 16% of households with children nobody, including children, was testing. In households where children were testing, their parents or other adults were often not. Those who were testing and eligible for workplace and school testing were more likely to be testing twice weekly. In other settings, respondents were more likely to be testing on a one-off or ad hoc basis. Approximately half of respondents said that they were likely to visit friends and family after a negative test result and 10% that they were unlikely to self-isolate following a positive test result. In interviews, participants who were testing described the peace of mind that testing afforded them prior to activities or interactions with family and friends, including those they considered to be vulnerable. Interviewees who were not testing described concerns about test accuracy and also cited a lack of face-to-face interaction with others precluding the need to test. Participants were often testing flexibly according to circumstances and perceived risk of COVID-19 transmission. CONCLUSIONS: While some choose not to test, others are doing so in order to provide peace of mind to engage in personal interactions they might otherwise have avoided. This peace of mind may be a necessary pre-requisite for some to more fully re-engage in pre-pandemic activities. Despite clear concerns about test accuracy among those not testing, those who are testing held generally positive attitudes towards the continued use of LFTs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9021457
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90214572022-04-22 Exploration of the uptake of asymptomatic COVID-19 lateral flow testing in Birmingham, UK: survey and qualitative research Mathers, Jonathan Poyner, Christopher Thompson, Dean Rudge, Gavin Pritchett, Ruth V BMJ Open Public Health AIM: To examine public perspectives on lateral flow testing (LFT) for COVID-19. DESIGN: Online survey with nested semi-structured interviews. SETTING: Birmingham, UK. PARTICIPANTS: 220 Birmingham residents, 21 of whom took part in an interview. RESULTS: Fifty-six per cent of respondents had taken an LFT. Reasons for not testing included adherence to other government COVID-19 guidance, having had a vaccination and not thinking LFTs were accurate. In 16% of households with children nobody, including children, was testing. In households where children were testing, their parents or other adults were often not. Those who were testing and eligible for workplace and school testing were more likely to be testing twice weekly. In other settings, respondents were more likely to be testing on a one-off or ad hoc basis. Approximately half of respondents said that they were likely to visit friends and family after a negative test result and 10% that they were unlikely to self-isolate following a positive test result. In interviews, participants who were testing described the peace of mind that testing afforded them prior to activities or interactions with family and friends, including those they considered to be vulnerable. Interviewees who were not testing described concerns about test accuracy and also cited a lack of face-to-face interaction with others precluding the need to test. Participants were often testing flexibly according to circumstances and perceived risk of COVID-19 transmission. CONCLUSIONS: While some choose not to test, others are doing so in order to provide peace of mind to engage in personal interactions they might otherwise have avoided. This peace of mind may be a necessary pre-requisite for some to more fully re-engage in pre-pandemic activities. Despite clear concerns about test accuracy among those not testing, those who are testing held generally positive attitudes towards the continued use of LFTs. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-04-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9021457/ /pubmed/35443954 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-056606 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Public Health
Mathers, Jonathan
Poyner, Christopher
Thompson, Dean
Rudge, Gavin
Pritchett, Ruth V
Exploration of the uptake of asymptomatic COVID-19 lateral flow testing in Birmingham, UK: survey and qualitative research
title Exploration of the uptake of asymptomatic COVID-19 lateral flow testing in Birmingham, UK: survey and qualitative research
title_full Exploration of the uptake of asymptomatic COVID-19 lateral flow testing in Birmingham, UK: survey and qualitative research
title_fullStr Exploration of the uptake of asymptomatic COVID-19 lateral flow testing in Birmingham, UK: survey and qualitative research
title_full_unstemmed Exploration of the uptake of asymptomatic COVID-19 lateral flow testing in Birmingham, UK: survey and qualitative research
title_short Exploration of the uptake of asymptomatic COVID-19 lateral flow testing in Birmingham, UK: survey and qualitative research
title_sort exploration of the uptake of asymptomatic covid-19 lateral flow testing in birmingham, uk: survey and qualitative research
topic Public Health
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9021457/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35443954
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-056606
work_keys_str_mv AT mathersjonathan explorationoftheuptakeofasymptomaticcovid19lateralflowtestinginbirminghamuksurveyandqualitativeresearch
AT poynerchristopher explorationoftheuptakeofasymptomaticcovid19lateralflowtestinginbirminghamuksurveyandqualitativeresearch
AT thompsondean explorationoftheuptakeofasymptomaticcovid19lateralflowtestinginbirminghamuksurveyandqualitativeresearch
AT rudgegavin explorationoftheuptakeofasymptomaticcovid19lateralflowtestinginbirminghamuksurveyandqualitativeresearch
AT pritchettruthv explorationoftheuptakeofasymptomaticcovid19lateralflowtestinginbirminghamuksurveyandqualitativeresearch