Optimizing the diagnostic capacity for COVID-19 PCR testing for low resource and high demand settings: The development of information-dependent pooling protocol.

AIM: To compare different pooling methods in an attempt to improve the COVID-19 PCR diagnostic capacities. METHOD: We developed a novel information-dependent pooling protocol (indept), based on transmission of less informative sequential pools on to the next pooling cycle to maximize savings. We then compared it to the halving, generalized halving, splitting and hypercube protocols in a simulation study, across variety of scenarios. RESULTS: All five methods yielded various amount of test savings, which mostly depended on the virus prevalence in the population. In situations of low prevalence (up to 5%), indept had the best performance, requiring on average 20% of tests needed for singular testing across scenarios that were analyzed. Nevertheless, this comes at the expense of speed, with the worst-case scenario of indept protocol requiring up to twice the time needed to test the same number of samples in comparison to the hypercube protocol. In order to offset this, we developed a faster version of the protocol (indeptSp), which minimizes the number of terminal pools and manages to retain savings compared to other protocols, despite marginally longer processing times. CONCLUSION: The increasing demand for more testing globally can benefit from application of pooling, especially in resource-restrained situations of the low- and middle-income countries or situations of high testing demand. Singular testing in situations of low prevalence should be systematically discouraged.

Simple Questionnaires to Improve Pooling Strategies for SARS-CoV-2 Laboratory Testing.

Background: Liberal PCR testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is key to contain the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Combined multi-sample testing in pools instead of single tests might enhance laboratory capacity and reduce costs, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Objective: The purpose of our study was to assess the value of a simple questionnaire to guide and further improve pooling strategies for SARS-CoV-2 laboratory testing. Methods: Pharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 testing were obtained from healthcare and police staff, hospital inpatients, and nursing home residents in the southwestern part of Germany. We designed a simple questionnaire, which included questions pertaining to a suggestive clinical symptomatology, recent travel history, and contact with confirmed cases to stratify an individual's pre-test probability of having contracted COVID-19. The questionnaire was adapted repeatedly in face of the unfolding pandemic in response to the evolving epidemiology and observed clinical symptomatology. Based on the response patterns, samples were either tested individually or in multi-sample pools. We compared the pool positivity rate and the number of total PCR tests required to obtain individual results between this questionnaire-based pooling strategy and randomly assembled pools. Findings: Between March 11 and July 5, 2020, we processed 25,978 samples using random pooling (n = 6,012; 23.1%) or questionnaire-based pooling (n = 19,966; 76.9%). The overall prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 was 0.9% (n = 238). Pool positivity (14.6% vs. 1.2%) and individual SARS-CoV-2 prevalence (3.4% vs. 0.1%) were higher in the random pooling group than in the questionnaire group. The average number of PCR tests needed to obtain the individual result for one participant was 0.27 tests in the random pooling group, as compared to 0.09 in the questionnaire-based pooling group, leading to a laboratory capacity increase of 73% and 91%, respectively, as compared to single PCR testing. Conclusions: Strategies that combine pool testing with a questionnaire-based risk stratification can increase laboratory testing capacities for COVID-19 and might be important tools, particularly in resource-constrained settings.

Pandemic planning: plotting a course through the coronawars.

The biological motor behind the current coronavirus pandemic has placed microbiology on a global stage, and given its practitioners a role among the architects of recovery. Planning for a return to normality or the new normal is a complex, multi-agency task for which healthcare scientists may not be prepared. This paper introduces a widely used military planning framework known as the Joint Military Appreciation Process, and outlines how it can be applied to deal with the next phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Recognition of SARS-CoV-2's critical attributes, targetable vulnerabilities, and its most likely and most dangerous effects is a necessary precursor to scoping, framing and mission analysis. From this flows course of action development, analysis, concept of operations development, and an eventual decision to act on the plan. The same planning technique is applicable to the larger scale task of setting a microbiology-centric plan in the broader context of social and economic recovery.