Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore
Medical Board, Sengkang General Hospital, Singapore.
BMJ Open. 2022 Oct 3;12(10):e057522. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057522.
We aim to assess the effectiveness of contact tracing using real-time location system (RTLS) compared with the conventional (electronic medical records (EMRs)) method via an emerging infectious disease (EID) outbreak simulation exercise. The aims of the study are: (1) to compare the time taken to perform contact tracing and list of contacts identified for RTLS versus EMR; (2) to compare manpower and manpower-hours required to perform contact tracing for RTLS versus EMR; and (3) to extrapolate the cost incurred by RTLS versus EMR.
Prospective case study.
Sengkang General Hospital, a 1000-bedded public tertiary hospital in Singapore.
1000 out of 4000 staff wore staff tags in this study.
A simulation exercise to determine and compare the list of contacts, time taken, manpower and manpower-hours required between RTLS and conventional methods of contact tracing. Cost of both methods were compared.
List of contacts, time taken, manpower required, manpower-hours required and cost incurred.
RTLS identified almost three times the number of contacts compared with conventional methods, while achieving that with a 96.2% reduction in time taken, 97.6% reduction in manpower required and 97.5% reduction in manpower-hours required. However, RTLS incurred significant equipment cost and might take many contact tracing episodes before providing economic benefit.
Although costly, RTLS is effective in contact tracing. RLTS might not be ready at present time to replace conventional methods, but with further refinement, RTLS has the potential to be the gold standard in contact tracing methods of the future, particularly in the current pandemic.
通过新发传染病(EID)爆发模拟演练,评估实时定位系统(RTLS)相较于传统(电子病历(EMR))方法的接触者追踪效果。本研究的目的是:(1)比较 RTLS 和 EMR 进行接触者追踪所花费的时间和确定的接触者列表;(2)比较 RTLS 和 EMR 进行接触者追踪所需的人力和人力工时;(3)推断 RTLS 和 EMR 的成本。
前瞻性病例研究。
新加坡盛港综合医院,一家拥有 1000 张床位的公立三级医院。
在这项研究中,有 1000 名员工佩戴了员工标签,这部分员工来自 4000 名员工。
进行模拟演练,以确定和比较 RTLS 和传统接触者追踪方法的接触者列表、所花费的时间、所需的人力和人力工时。比较两种方法的成本。
接触者列表、所花费的时间、所需的人力、所需的人力工时和所产生的成本。
RTLS 确定的接触者数量几乎是传统方法的三倍,同时将时间缩短了 96.2%、所需人力减少了 97.6%、所需人力工时减少了 97.5%。然而,RTLS 产生了大量的设备成本,并且可能需要许多接触追踪事件才能产生经济效益。
尽管成本高昂,但 RTLS 在接触者追踪方面非常有效。RTLS 目前可能还无法替代传统方法,但随着进一步改进,RTLS 有可能成为未来接触者追踪方法的黄金标准,尤其是在当前大流行期间。