RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Increased travel times to United States SARS-CoV-2 testing sites: a spatial modeling study
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.04.25.20074419
DO 10.1101/2020.04.25.20074419
A1 Rader, Benjamin
A1 Astley, Christina M.
A1 Sy, Karla Therese L.
A1 Sewalk, Kara
A1 Hswen, Yulin
A1 Brownstein, John S.
A1 Kraemer, Moritz U.G.
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/04/30/2020.04.25.20074419.abstract
AB Importance Access to testing is key to a successful response to the COVID-19 pandemic.Objective To determine the geographic accessibility to SARS-CoV-2 testing sites in the United States, as quantified by travel time.Design Cross-sectional analysis of SARS-CoV-2 testing sites as of April 7, 2020 in relation to travel time.Setting United States COVID-19 pandemic.Participants The United States, including the 48 contiguous states and the District of Columbia.Exposures Population density, percent minority, percent uninsured, and median income by county from the 2018 American Community Survey demographic data.Main Outcome SARS-CoV-2 testing sites identified in two national databases (Carbon Health and CodersAgainstCovid), geocoded by address. Median county 1 km2 gridded friction surface of travel times, as a measure of geographic accessibility to SARS-CoV-2 testing sites.Results 6,236 unique SARS-CoV-2 testing sites in 3,108 United States counties were identified. Thirty percent of the U.S. population live in a county (N = 1,920) with a median travel time over 20 minutes. This was geographically heterogeneous; 86% of the Mountain division population versus 5% of the Middle Atlantic population lived in counties with median travel times over 20 min. Generalized Linear Models showed population density, percent minority, percent uninsured and median income were predictors of median travel time to testing sites. For example, higher percent uninsured was associated with longer travel time (β = 0.41 min/percent, 95% confidence interval 0.3-0.53, p = 1.2×10−12), adjusting for population density.Conclusions and Relevance Geographic accessibility to SARS-Cov-2 testing sites is reduced in counties with lower population density and higher percent of minority and uninsured, which are also risk factors for worse healthcare access and outcomes. Geographic barriers to SARS-Cov-2 testing may exacerbate health inequalities and bias county-specific transmission estimates. Geographic accessibility should be considered when planning the location of future testing sites and interpreting epidemiological data.Key PointsSARS-CoV-2 testing sites are distributed unevenly in the US geography and population.Median county-level travel time to SARS-CoV-2 testing sites is longer in less densely populated areas, and in areas with a higher percentage of minority or uninsured populations.Improved geographic accessibility to testing sites is imperative to manage the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical Protocols https://www.equator-network.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/STROBE_checklist_v4_cross-sectional.pdf Funding StatementBR and JSB acknowledge funding from Google.org for COVID-19 research (Tides Foundation, TF2003-089662). CMA was supported by NIDDK (K23 DK120899) and Boston Children*s Hospital (OFD CDA). MUGK acknowledges funding from the MOOD project and a Branco Weiss Fellowship. The funding bodies had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, preparation of the manuscript, or the decision to publish. All authors have seen and approved the manuscript.Author DeclarationsAll relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.YesAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesFor access to the Carbon Health dataset, please email: coviddata@carbonhealth.com. For access to the CodersAgainstCOVID dataset, visit: github.com/codersagainstcovidorg.