Author:
Lafort Yves,Cornelissen Laura,Van Cauteren Dieter,Verboven Barbara,Drieskens Sabine,Couvreur Simon,Hermans Lize,Straetmans Koen,Lernout Tinne
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Self-testing has been promoted as a means of increasing COVID-19 test coverage. In Belgium, self-testing was recommended as a complement to the formal, provider-administered indications, such as out of courtesy before meeting others and when feared to be infected. More than a year after the introduction of self-testing their place in the test strategy was evaluated.
Methods
We assessed trends in the number of self-tests sold, the number of positive self-tests reported, the proportion sold self-tests/total tests, and the proportion of all positive tests that were confirmed self-tests. To evaluate the reason why people use self-tests, we used the results of two online surveys among members of the general population: one among 27,397 people, held in April 2021, and one among 22,354 people, held in December 2021.
Results
The use of self-tests became substantial from end 2021 onwards. In the period mid-November 2021 – end-of-June 2022, the average proportion of reported sold self-tests to all COVID-19 tests was 37% and 14% of all positive tests were positive self-tests. In both surveys, the main reported reasons for using a self-test were having symptoms (34% of users in April 2021 and 31% in December 2021) and after a risk contact (27% in both April and December). Moreover, the number of self-tests sold, and the number of positive self-tests reported closely followed the same trend as the provider-administered tests in symptomatic people and high risk-contacts, which reinforces the hypothesis that they were mainly used for these two indications.
Conclusions
From end 2021 onwards, self-testing covered a significant part of COVID-19 testing in Belgium, which increased without doubt the testing coverage. However, the available data seem to indicate that self-testing was mostly used for indications outside of official recommendations. If and how this affected the control of the epidemic remains unknown.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference34 articles.
1. WHO Coronavirus (COVID-19) Dashboard. Available from: https://covid19.who.int. Accessed 24 June 2022.
2. Recommendations for national SARS-CoV-2 testing strategies and diagnostic capacities. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications-detail-redirect/WHO-2019-nCoV-lab-testing-2021.1-eng. Accessed 24 June 2022.
3. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Testing strategies for SARS-CoV-2. Available from: https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/covid-19/surveillance/testing-strategies. Accessed 24 June 2022.
4. Meurisse M, Lajot A, Dupont Y, Lesenfants M, Klamer S, Rebolledo J, Lernout T, et al. One year of laboratory-based COVID-19 surveillance system in Belgium: main indicators and performance of the laboratories (March 2020–21). Arch Public Health. 2021;79:188.
5. La Marca A, Capuzzo M, Paglia T, Roli L, Trenti T, Nelson SM. Testing for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19): a systematic review and clinical guide to molecular and serological in-vitro diagnostic assays. Reprod Biomed Online. 2020;41(3):483–99.