Acceptability of Serosurveys in Southern Zambia: Data Collector and Caregiver Perspectives

Background: Factors associated with whether individuals choose to participate in serosurveys are not well understood. Understanding perceptions from multiple perspectives, including the perspectives of both data collectors and participants, through a holistic model such as the socio-ecological model contextualizes individual, interpersonal, and structural level influences on survey research participation. We used a multiple methods approach to characterize reasons for serosurvey participation in communities in Southern Province, Zambia where a serosurvey was conducted in 2016.

Methods: The first phase conducted focus group discussions and in-depth interviews with 24 data collectors who participated in a measles-rubella serosurvey in 2016. The second phase surveyed 34 caregivers at health facilities to identify barriers and facilitators to serosurvey participation. Emergent themes were then classified into a socio-ecological model using individual, interpersonal, and structural level constructs.

Results: Common themes emerged from data collectors as well as caregivers surveyed. At the individual level, providing incentives was a facilitator, and some religious beliefs were described as a barrier to serosurvey participation. At the interpersonal level, family dynamics and community peer influences could help or hinder serosurvey participation. Community health workers were consistently named as facilitators of participation. At the structural level, concerns about specimen collection, who was selected for serosurveys, and not receiving test results arose as potential barriers. The most frequently reported facilitator was provision of information about the purpose of the serosurvey (85% of respondents). The most frequently reported barrier was lack of clarity regarding use of their blood specimen (53% of respondents). For specimen collection type, caregivers consistently preferred finger prick blood collection over both venous blood draw and oral swabs.

Conclusion: Serosurvey participation was deemed acceptable to most study participants. The socio-ecological model revealed barriers and facilitators for participation to guide strategies to improve participation which can be applied to ongoing serosurveys for SARS-CoV-2. Serosurveys should continue to develop engagement plans to provide information about blood collection ahead of the serosurvey and communicate the objectives of such studies through trusted sources such as community health workers and traditional leaders.