New studies suggest that when the COVID-19 pandemic slows down, recurrent and affordable detection of other asymptomatic people, with a charge of about $3 or less consistent with control every two weeks, it can simply decrease infections and deaths in COVID-19 and when the pandemic increases, screening can be cost-effective when done more frequently , even if check prices are higher. Infectious diseases.
COVID-19 control regularly refers to the control of others with symptoms of the disease, while the test refers to the control of others who have no symptoms of infection. In the United States, limited control capacity at the onset of the pandemic has led states like Massachusetts to check only those with severe symptoms and those known to have COVID-19; However, having COVID-19 control for all other people with symptoms of the disease, also since the expansion of screening systems for the entire population, adding up those without symptoms, can simply reduce hospitalizations and deaths, allowing the resumption of social activity.
Massachusetts experienced a primary coVID-19 outbreak as of March 2020, and the epidemic is now under pretty smart control, questions remain about how to optimally implement COVID testing, whether in our current scenario and in other contexts, and communities, where new infections continue. While some have argued that testing will have to be very delicate to have value, others recommend that sensitivity can be sacrificed if testing is fast, economical, common, and widely available.
The study used a dynamic transmission style developed through members of the study team (the “CEACOV style”) to analyze the expected effects of various other COVID-19 control and detection methods for the entire Massachusetts population, the polymerasia chain in the laboratory. Checks (PCR). The PCR test uses a pattern taken from the nose or mouth (usually a nasal swab or saliva pattern), which is then sent to a lab that verifies the virus guilty of COVID-19. Model-based studies found that repeated population detection would lead to maximum favorable clinical outcomes, avoiding the highest number of infections, hospitalizations and ultimately death, this was the case in a wide variety of scenarios, ranging from minimization to immediate accumulation in the number of new consistent instances This detection strategy can also be cost-effective , depending on the check load and the frequency of detection.
“Based on the costs that peak labs currently qualify for PCR verification, with our existing grades of new COVID-19 instances in Massachusetts, the ultimate cost-effective strategy remains to verify only others with COVID-19 symptoms. , for Massachusetts from now on, this includes reviewing everyone else with symptoms, not just others with severe symptoms,” said lead co-author Andrea Ciaranello, MD, MPH, a researcher in the Division of Infectious Diseases at MGH. “However, in regions where cases are increasing, normal detection of the entire population, while costly, will be of great value.
This is true even with existing check prices of around $50 and will be more true if check prices can be particularly low. There are artistic tactics to reduce check prices; for example, through emerging techniques such as less expensive reagents, grouping samples in the lab, or conscientiously allocating unused control capacity between cities or regions. “
“When the pandemic slows down, if test prices can drop to $ five or less, repeated testing of other people without COVID symptoms would minimize infections and deaths, and would be effective,” Neilan adds. “Our knowledge suggests that even now, expanding detection and detection capacity will have to remain the focus of national efforts. ” Because the study modeled the use of laboratory PCR tests, the researchers did not evaluate the conceivable use of even less delicate and less expensive tests, such as immediate tests used on site in healthcare facilities. (such as emergency care centers), schools, or workplaces. Several of those tests have been introduced to the market, but are not yet available for use in those environments.
Ciaranello adds: “It is vital to note that these methods involve repeated testing. Examining an organization of others only once, even if it’s an engaging snapshot, is a technique that many other people will overlook that will infect others in the future. Because of this, we also found that detection only once was a less effective use of fitness resources in most cases than methods that employ repeated testing. “
“It’s also worth not being able to deploy the tests quickly,” Says Nielan. “At the beginning of the pandemic, we had difficulty providing tests even for others with COVID-19 symptoms. If extended PCR testing had been widely available in Massachusetts from April to May 2020, our style suggests that only one hundred,000 infections and about one hundred deaths would have been prevented this month alone. “
“Expanding detection and detection capability will require careful logistical planning as well as responsiveness to adjustments to the number of new infections we are seeing. This will be a priority for decision-makers looking to use available resources in the most effective way,” ciaranello says.
Hospital General de Massachusetts
Neilan, A. M. et coll. (2020) Clinical impact, pricing and profitability of SARS-CoV-2 expanded in Massachusetts Infectious diseases cliniques. doi. org/10. 1093/cid/ciaa1418.
News-Medical. net – An AZoNetwork site
Ownership and operation through AZoNetwork, © 2000-2020