» Articles » PMID: 37033055

Comparison of COVID-19 Home-testers Vs. Laboratory-testers in New York State (excluding New York City), November 2021 to April 2022

Overview
Specialty Public Health
Date 2023 Apr 10
PMID 37033055
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Though the use of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) home testing kits is increasing, individuals who use home tests are not accounted for in publicly reported COVID-19 metrics. As the pandemic and the methods for tracking cases evolve, it is critical to understand who the individuals excluded are, due to their use of home testing kits, relative to those included in the reported metrics.

Methods: Five New York State databases were linked to investigate trends in home-tested COVID-19 cases vs. laboratory-confirmed cases from November 2021 to April 2022. Frequency distributions, multivariate logistic regression adjusted odds ratios (aOR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to compare the characteristics of the home-tested and laboratory-tested people.

Results: Of the 591,227 confirmed COVID-19 cases interviewed, 71,531 (12%) of them underwent home tests, 515,001 (87%) underwent laboratory tests, and 5,695 (1%) underwent both home tests and laboratory tests during this period. Home-tested COVID-19 cases increased from only 1% in November 2021 to 22% in April 2022. Children aged 5-11 years with an aOR of 3.74 (95% CI: 3.53, 3.96) and adolescents aged 12-17 years with an aOR of 3.24 (95% CI: 3.07, 3.43) were more likely to undergo only home tests compared to adults aged 65 years and above. On the one hand, those who were "boosted" (aOR 1.87, 95% CI: 1.82, 1.93), those in K-12 school settings (aOR 2.33, 95% CI: 2.27, 2.40), or those who were possibly infected by a household member (aOR 1.17, 95% CI: 1.13, 1.22) were more likely to report home testing instead of laboratory testing. On the other hand, individuals who were hospitalized (aOR 0.04, 95% CI: 0.03, 0.06), who had underlying conditions (aOR 0.85, 95% CI: 0.83, 0.87), who were pregnant (aOR 0.76, 95% CI: 0.66, 0.86), and who were Hispanic (aOR 0.50: 95% CI: 0.48, 0.53), Asian (aOR 0.31, 95% CI: 0.28, 0.34), or Black (aOR 0.45, 95% CI: 0.42, 047) were less likely to choose home testing over laboratory testing.

Conclusion: The percentage of individuals with confirmed COVID-19 who used only home testing kits continues to rise. People who used only home testing were less likely to be hospitalized and were those with a lower likelihood of developing a severe disease given factors such as age, vaccination status, and underlying conditions. Thus, the official COVID-19 metrics primarily reflected individuals with severe illness or the potential for severe illness. There may be racial and ethnic differences in the use of home testing vs. laboratory testing.

Citing Articles

Magnitude of Potential Biases in COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Studies due to Differential Healthcare seeking following Home Testing: Implications for Test Negative Design Studies.

Qasmieh S, Ferdinands J, Chung J, Wiegand R, Flannery B, Rane M medRxiv. 2025; .

PMID: 39802800 PMC: 11722453. DOI: 10.1101/2024.12.30.24319700.


Real Clinical Effectiveness of Molnupiravir Against 30-day Mortality Among 74 541 SARS-CoV-2-Positive Patients: A Nationwide Cohort Study From the Czech Republic.

Pavlik T, Jarkovsky J, Sanca O, Koziar Vasakova M, Dlouhy P, Cerny V Open Forum Infect Dis. 2024; 11(12):ofae685.

PMID: 39660016 PMC: 11630851. DOI: 10.1093/ofid/ofae685.


Leveraging Multiple Administrative Data Sources to Reduce Missing Race and Ethnicity Data: A Descriptive Epidemiology Cross-Sectional Study of COVID-19 Case Relative Rates.

Dorabawila V, Hoen R, Hoefer D J Racial Ethn Health Disparities. 2024; .

PMID: 39436568 DOI: 10.1007/s40615-024-02211-w.


Contact tracing: Characteristics of COVID-19 cases that provided contacts.

Dorabawila V, Maduka D, Barnes V, Ramesh N, Hoefer D PLoS One. 2023; 18(11):e0293208.

PMID: 37917769 PMC: 10621982. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0293208.


Trends in Laboratory-Confirmed SARS-CoV-2 Reinfections and Associated Hospitalizations and Deaths Among Adults Aged ≥18 Years - 18 U.S. Jurisdictions, September 2021-December 2022.

Ma K, Dorabawila V, Leon T, Henry H, Johnson A, Rosenberg E MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2023; 72(25):683-689.

PMID: 37347715 PMC: 10328471. DOI: 10.15585/mmwr.mm7225a3.

References
1.
Shircliff E, Rosenberg E, Collens L, Hoefer D, Lutterloh E, Silk B . Notes from the Field: School-Based and Laboratory-Based Reporting of Positive COVID-19 Test Results Among School-Aged Children - New York, September 11, 2021-April 29, 2022. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2022; 71(32):1029-1031. PMC: 9400535. DOI: 10.15585/mmwr.mm7132a2. View

2.
Mercer T, Salit M . Testing at scale during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nat Rev Genet. 2021; 22(7):415-426. PMC: 8094986. DOI: 10.1038/s41576-021-00360-w. View

3.
Grigsby-Toussaint D, Shin J, Jones A . Disparities in the distribution of COVID-19 testing sites in black and Latino areas in new York City. Prev Med. 2021; 147:106463. PMC: 9753026. DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2021.106463. View

4.
Antonelli M, Penfold R, Merino J, Sudre C, Molteni E, Berry S . Risk factors and disease profile of post-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection in UK users of the COVID Symptom Study app: a prospective, community-based, nested, case-control study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2021; 22(1):43-55. PMC: 8409907. DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(21)00460-6. View

5.
Ritchey M, Rosenblum H, Del Guercio K, Humbard M, Santos S, Hall J . COVID-19 Self-Test Data: Challenges and Opportunities - United States, October 31, 2021-June 11, 2022. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2022; 71(32):1005-1010. PMC: 9400539. DOI: 10.15585/mmwr.mm7132a1. View