Optimal use of COVID-19 Ag-RDT screening at border crossings to prevent community transmission: A modeling analysis

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Abstract

Countries around the world have implemented restrictions on mobility, especially cross-border travel to reduce or prevent SARS-CoV-2 community transmission. Rapid antigen testing (Ag-RDT), with on-site administration and rapid turnaround time may provide a valuable screening measure to ease cross-border travel while minimizing risk of local transmission. To maximize impact, we developed an optimal Ag-RDT screening algorithm for cross-border entry. Using a previously developed mathematical model, we determined the daily number of imported COVID-19 cases that would generate no more than a relative 1% increase in cases over one month for different effective reproductive numbers (Rt) and COVID-19 prevalence within the recipient country. We then developed an algorithm—for differing levels of Rt, arrivals per day, mode of travel, and SARS-CoV-2 prevalence amongst travelers—to determine the minimum proportion of people that would need Ag-RDT testing at border crossings to ensure no greater than the relative 1% community spread increase. When daily international arrivals and/or COVID-19 prevalence amongst arrivals increases, the proportion of arrivals required to test using Ag-RDT increases. At very high numbers of international arrivals/COVID-19 prevalence, Ag-RDT testing is not sufficient to prevent increased community spread, especially when recipient country prevalence and Rt are low. In these cases, Ag-RDT screening would need to be supplemented with other measures to prevent an increase in community transmission. An efficient Ag-RDT algorithm for SARS-CoV-2 testing depends strongly on the epidemic status within the recipient country, volume of travel, proportion of land and air arrivals, test sensitivity, and COVID-19 prevalence among travelers.

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.04.26.21256154: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.


    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).


    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Our analysis comes with important assumptions and limitations. First, due to the nature of COVID-19 prevalence, serology studies, and differing testing algorithms by country, determining the true incidence of COVID-19 at any given instance is not feasible. To address this, we have assumed a maximum incidence of 2%, and provide an increasing range up to this point. Second, our model output directly relies on the 1% threshold calculated for each Rt in each individual country. However, the 1% margin of error threshold could theoretically be modified to re-define what a tolerable increase in community transmission from outside imports would be for a given country. Third, our algorithm evaluates the benefit of a single point/once-off Ag-RDT screening strategy on its own and was not analyzed in combination with follow-up testing or other mitigation measures that could enhance its effect, as this falls outside the scope of our analysis. The decentralized nature of Ag-RDT testing, while beneficial, may prove difficult to implement alongside additional strategies, such as contact tracing—particularly in limited resource settings. Finally, if the goal of a given country is to prevent any SARS-CoV-2 importation, Ag-RDT screening is likely to be insufficient and would need to be implemented in combination with quarantine-on-arrival measures. Optimal allocation of Ag-RDTs to border crossings depends strongly on Rt, volume of travel, proportion of land and air arrivals, test sensitivity, a...

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.


    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.


    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.