Skip to main content

Rational use of lateral flow tests for Covid-19

In recent days, it has become very clear that there are nowhere nearly enough lateral flow tests for Covid-19 in England to allow the government’s policy of their indiscriminate use. Even if funding could be found to buy more tests, it is unlikely to government could source enough tests to meet current and future demand because of the many other countries that are also trying to obtain the tests as they struggle to control the wave of infections from the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2.

The government is in part to blame for the current problems with the increased demand tests. It has encouraged members of the public to test regularly; for example before social events such as parties; and before meeting friends and family from outside their immediate household. The very high level of Covid-19 cases in the UK (with around 183,00 cases reported on 29 December) also means that many more people will have been advised to test regularly in line with guidance from Test and Trace. This will include guidance for close contacts of cases who are asked to carry out daily tests for 10 days if they are fully vaccinated to avoid isolating. People with a Covid-19 infection can also test themselves on day 6 and day 7 of their illness, and end their period of isolation if they are asymptomatic and the two tests are both negative.

What can we do to improve how well lateral flow tests are used? The first step is for the government to publish data on the daily supply of tests. We then need clear guidance from the government on what groups should be prioritised for testing and how frequently they should test. Carrying out several tests in one day is not a good use of these tests. And nor is carrying out daily lateral flow tests after a positive PCR test (other than on day 6 & 7 as discussed above). Even daily tests are inappropriate in asymptomatic people when there is currently such a large gap between the supply and demand for tests. NHS guidance is for staff to test twice per week with a lateral flow test but many asymptomatic people are testing more frequently than this. NHS Trusts and general practices need to review their testing polices and give clear guidance to staff to protect the supply of tests.

Once we have information on the daily supply of tests, we can then prioritise who will have access to the tests. This kind of prioritisation is quite normal in healthcare and was done, for example, with Covid-19 vaccination to ensure access was given based on clinical and occupational priority. Groups for priority access to tests should include:

- NHS staff in patient-facing roles

- People working in social care

- Teachers and other people working in schools

- Workers in essential parts of the economy such as public transport

- Groups such as HGV drivers to ensure that deliveries of essential items continues

- Patients who are clinically vulnerable

- People following guidance from Test & Trace

There is also now a lack of PCR for tests to diagnose Covid-19. An important question for the government is should we use lateral flow tests to give better access to testing for people with symptoms and reduce testing for people who are asymptomatic? If this does happen, we will still need to decide and which groups would have access to lateral flow tests in place of PCR tests. Successful implementation of this policy could allow many more people to receive a test. Although lateral flow tests are not as sensitive as PCR tests, they will still identify many people with Covid-19.

We also need to look at the costs of supplying these tests and determine what we can afford to spend. Although the tests are supplied at no cost to the public, they are not free and will come at a considerable cost to the taxpayer. Access to diagnostic services and other health services always has to be limited; and based on factors such as clinical need, health outcomes, and cost-effectiveness.

With the UK facing record numbers of people with Covid-19, we need the government to act quickly, decisively and rationally to ensure we maximise the benefits of England’s Covid-19 testing capacity.

A version of this article was first published in the Guardian Newspaper.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is the difference between primordial prevention and primary prevention?

Primordial prevention and primary prevention are both crucial strategies for promoting health, but they operate at different levels. Primordial prevention aims to address the root causes of health problems and improve the wider determinants of health. It focuses on preventing the emergence of risk factors in the first place by tackling the underlying social, economic, and environmental determinants of health. This involves broad, population-wide interventions such as: Policies that promote healthy food choices: Think about initiatives like taxing sugary drinks to discourage unhealthy consumption, or providing subsidies for fruits and vegetables to make them more accessible. Urban planning that prioritises well-being: This could include creating walkable neighborhoods with safe cycling routes, ensuring access to green spaces for recreation and relaxation, and designing communities that foster social connections. Social programs that address inequality: Initiatives aimed at reducing pov...
Post a Comment
Read more

UK Covid-19 Inquiry - The Importance of a Strong Primary Healthcare System

In my witness statement for Module 10 of the UK Covid-19 Inquiry, I discuss the pandemic's impact through from the perspectives of  primary care and public health, drawing on my extensive experience as a senior academic at Imperial College London and as a practising GP and NHS Public Health Specialist.  I emphasise that the pandemic disproportionately affected people who were clinically vulnerable, the disabled, ethnic minority communities and those living in deprived areas. The pandemic highlighted how structural inequalities, multigenerational housing, and employment in high-risk frontline roles exacerbated health disparities.  My statement also critiques the weakening of public health infrastructure - particularly for the control of infectious diseases - and the lack of integrated health data systems to identify at-risk groups such as the clinically vulnerable. I also advocated for a more robust preventive healthcare model that prioritises community-based primary care ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Protecting Young People from Meningococcal B Disease: The NHS Targeted Vaccination Programme

Meningococcal group B (MenB) infections are rare but can have devastating consequences. The decision to offer a targeted two-dose vaccination programme to Year 13 students and young people entering university or residential further education reflects concerns about recent outbreaks of meningococcal disease and the higher risk of transmission when large numbers of young adults mix closely for the first time in shared accommodation. The MenB vaccine has a well-established safety record, and evidence from the UK infant immunisation programme has shown substantial reductions in disease among vaccinated children. A targeted programme for those entering higher-risk settings is therefore a reasonable precautionary measure while further evidence is gathered on whether the recent increase in clusters represents a temporary fluctuation in disease patterns or a more sustained change in the epidemiology of MenB infection. The success of the programme will depend on achieving high uptake and ensuri...
Post a Comment
Read more