ABSTRACT
Background Over the course of the pandemic, many countries have repeatedly closed schools and shifted students to remote learning. However, evidence for negative mental and physiological health consequences of such measures for students is increasing, highlighting the need for evidence-based recommendations on how to safely reopen schools. This study presents experiences when implementing opt-in, at-home SARS-CoV-2 screening using rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) to facilitate safe face-to-face-teaching during a pandemic.
Methods We present data form a prospective study implementing an RDT-based screening program at a primary school in southwest Germany. We conducted qualitative in-depth interviews with participating children, parents, and school stakeholders to elicit implementation experiences and screening perception.
Results The screening intervention was highly accepted and appreciated among participants; no positive RDT was reported over the duration of the study. Self-testing at home before coming to school was feasible, but more positive consequences of screening participation (e.g., easing of mask mandates) besides a personal feeling of safety would be appreciated. Participants preferred home-based RDTs over some other measures, particularly mask mandates. Despite the RDTs being licensed as self-tests in Germany, additional training can help avoid mistakes, and ensuring intervention ownership and improving pre-implementation communication can facilitate buy-in.
Conclusions Ag-RDT-based SARS-CoV-2 screening programs relying on self-testing at home proved feasible and accepted among primary school students, parents, and school staff who participated in this study.
Trial Registration DRKS00024845
What is known about the subject
What is known about the subject
Efforts to reduce COVID-19-associated school disruption are currently being debated globally as a means to reduce the impact of extended school closures on children’s mental and physiological wellbeing.
Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for SARS-CoV-2 are reliable and can be performed as self-tests at home.
Although countries have already introduced RDT-based screening programs to facilitate safe face-to-face teaching, little is known about screening acceptance and experiences.
What this study adds
What this study adds
Students, parents, and school staff perceive home-based RDT screening as feasible and less disrupting than other protective measures (e.g., mask mandates)
Implementers should communicate early and clearly, and provide a support system for training, troubleshooting, and in case of positive results
Concerns remain regarding the fidelity of home-based test performance in cases where students or parents are hesitant, even when testing is compulsory
Competing Interest Statement
All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf. CMD reports grants from Ministry of Science, Research and the Arts of Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany, grants from University Hospital Heidelberg Internal funds, non-financial support from Roche Diagnostics (Grant numbers: Not applicable) during the conduct of the study; NT reports her children receiving RDTs as part of their participation in the screening program; JW, MS, and SAM report no competing interests.
Clinical Trial
DRKS00024845
Funding Statement
This study was supported by a grant of the Ministry of Science, Research and the Arts of Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany, as well as hospital-internal funds (Grant numbers: Not applicable). RDTs were provided free of cost by the manufacturer (Roche diagnostics). Funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The ethical review board at the Medical Faculty, Heidelberg University, Germany approved this study (S-141/2021).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵* Shared Senior Authors
Data Availability
Considering the high public interest in research on COVID-19, qualitative data of participants who have indicated their agreement to this as part of the informed consent procedure can be shared with other researchers. However, to preserve the anonymity of respondents and considering the personal nature of qualitative data, requests will be considered on a case-by-case basis. Please contact the corresponding author.
