Regulation, Evaluation, and Governance Laboratory, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Department of Political Science, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
JAMA Health Forum. 2021 Aug 27;2(8):e212260. doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2021.2260. eCollection 2021 Aug.
Overcoming social barriers to COVID-19 testing is an important issue, especially given the demographic disparities in case incidence rates and testing. Delivering culturally appropriate testing resources using data-driven approaches in partnership with community-based health workers is promising, but little data are available on the design and effect of such interventions.
To assess and evaluate a door-to-door COVID-19 testing initiative that allocates visits by community health workers by selecting households in areas with a high number of index cases, by using uncertainty sampling for areas where the positivity rate may be highest, and by relying on local knowledge of the health workers.
This cohort study was performed from December 18, 2020, to February 18, 2021. Community health workers visited households in neighborhoods in East San Jose, California, based on index cases or uncertainty sampling while retaining discretion to use local knowledge to administer tests. The health workers, also known as (hereinafter referred to as ) spent a mean of 4 days a week conducting door-to-door COVID-19 testing during the 2-month study period. All residents of East San Jose were eligible for COVID-19 testing. The were selected from the META cooperative (Mujeres Empresarias Tomando Acción [Entrepreneurial Women Taking Action]).
The observed self-collection of anterior nasal swab samples for SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction tests.
A determination of whether door-to-door COVID-19 testing was associated with an increase in the overall number of tests conducted, the demographic distribution of the door-to-door tests vs local testing sites, and the difference in positivity rates among the 3 door-to-door allocation strategies.
A total of 785 residents underwent door-to-door testing, and 756 were included in the analysis. Among the 756 individuals undergoing testing (61.1% female; 28.2% aged 45-64 years), door-to-door COVID-19 testing reached different populations than standard public health surveillance, with 87.6% (95% CI, 85.0%-89.8%) being Latinx individuals. The closest available testing site only reached 49.0% (95% CI, 48.3%-49.8%) Latinx individuals. Uncertainty sampling provided the most effective allocation, with a 10.8% (95% CI, 6.8%-16.0%) positivity rate, followed by 6.4% (95% CI, 4.1%-9.4%) for local knowledge, and 2.6% (95% CI, 0.7%-6.6%) for index area selection. The intervention was also associated with increased overall testing capacity by 60% to 90%, depending on the testing protocol.
In this cohort study of 785 participants, uncertainty sampling, which has not been used conventionally in public health, showed promising results for allocating testing resources. Community-based door-to-door interventions and leveraging of community knowledge were associated with reduced demographic disparities in testing.
克服 COVID-19 检测的社会障碍是一个重要问题,特别是考虑到病例发病率和检测方面的人口统计学差异。在与社区卫生工作者合作的基础上,使用数据驱动的方法提供文化上适宜的检测资源是有希望的,但关于此类干预措施的设计和效果的数据很少。
评估和评估一项挨家挨户的 COVID-19 检测计划,该计划通过选择高病例指数地区的家庭,使用不确定性抽样选择阳性率可能最高的地区,以及依靠社区卫生工作者的当地知识,由社区卫生工作者按地区分配访问。
设计、地点和参与者:这项队列研究于 2020 年 12 月 18 日至 2021 年 2 月 18 日进行。社区卫生工作者根据索引病例或不确定性抽样在东圣何塞的社区中访问家庭,同时保留根据当地知识进行测试的酌处权。这些卫生工作者,也称为 (以下简称),在为期两个月的研究期间,每周平均有 4 天进行上门 COVID-19 检测。东圣何塞的所有居民都有资格接受 COVID-19 检测。 从 META 合作社(Mujeres Empresarias Tomando Acción [Entrepreneurial Women Taking Action])中选出。
观察到对 SARS-CoV-2 逆转录-聚合酶链反应检测进行自我采集前鼻拭子样本。
确定上门 COVID-19 检测是否与检测总数的增加有关,上门检测与当地检测点的人口分布差异,以及 3 种上门分配策略之间的阳性率差异。
共有 785 名居民接受了上门检测,756 名居民纳入了分析。在接受检测的 756 名患者中(61.1%为女性;28.2%年龄在 45-64 岁之间),上门 COVID-19 检测覆盖了标准公共卫生监测未覆盖的人群,其中 87.6%(95%置信区间,85.0%-89.8%)为拉丁裔。最近的可用检测点仅覆盖了 49.0%(95%置信区间,48.3%-49.8%)的拉丁裔人群。不确定性抽样提供了最有效的分配,阳性率为 10.8%(95%置信区间,6.8%-16.0%),其次是 6.4%(95%置信区间,4.1%-9.4%)的本地知识和 2.6%(95%置信区间,0.7%-6.6%)的索引区域选择。该干预措施还与整体检测能力增加 60%至 90%有关,具体取决于检测方案。
在这项针对 785 名参与者的队列研究中,不确定性抽样在公共卫生中尚未常规使用,但在分配检测资源方面显示出了有希望的结果。基于社区的上门干预措施和利用社区知识与检测中的人口统计学差异减少有关。