07-07-2020, 12:04 PM
One of the tenets of contact tracing is that the system is trying to reduce both the number of infectious persons and the number of days they are infectious and out in the public.
Part of that is how quickly tests get back to the patient, and then to the contact tracing organization (usually the county).
I wonder if the US is imbalanced by emphasizing testing large numbers of people at the expense of taking longer on getting those tests back quickly.
This past weekend, we saw that testing companies weren't getting results back over the holiday. I guess the expense of paying staff to work holiday hours is more important than 1 more day of infectiousness for those who didn't have tests back. (I am not talking about the LA County issue of switching to a new system, so they delayed posting numbers for 3 days.)
I was distressed by this: https://youtu.be/sxvu83d2Eg4?t=329 (the speaker is one of the regulars on This Week In Virology)
In NY, tests were coming back in 48 hours, but then started taking longer, up to 5 days. (The tests were being sent out of state because it was cheaper.)
I know anecdotal cases in Texas. A healthcare worker a month ago had symptoms, and it took most of a week to get results back.
Last week, a healthcare worker (that I know) took a precautionary (no symptoms, no known exposure) test on Wednesday. Antibodies came back negative, but as of 5 days later (Monday night), he didn't have PCR results when he found out someone he last worked with on Monday (7 days back), had a positive test. The testing agency told him that his test was being sent to NJ ("because it was faster"). Not only is he potentially at risk, but so are the other people he saw over the 4th.
In SCC, a PHO order of SCC testing facilities requires results to be sent to the county within an hour. I notice that doesn't require, say, Sacramento or NJ facilities to send the results to SCC in a timely manner, nor does it require the tests to be finished within 24 or 48 or even 96 hours of the sample.
SCC reports a "turnaround time" of under 2 days, but I don't know how they define that. I would hope it is time of sample to the later of when the patient or county is notified. As I understand it, Stanford had been doing a lot of SCC testing. The turnaround time bumped upward recently from 1.6 or so to 1.92, but potentially that is a one time blip due to the holiday.
Despite SCC's claim of <2 days, I see patterns in their data suggesting that receipt of results is about 4 days (and, previously, 5 days) after the day the sample is taken. I do not feel confident enough to claim that is the case, but I'm hoping I'm wrong.
Of those that have had PCR tests, what are people's experiences in terms of time from sample to time of notification?
And, by the way, SCC's "Unknown cause" percentage is increasing while the "Contact to a known case" is decreasing (through July 7 update).
Part of that is how quickly tests get back to the patient, and then to the contact tracing organization (usually the county).
I wonder if the US is imbalanced by emphasizing testing large numbers of people at the expense of taking longer on getting those tests back quickly.
This past weekend, we saw that testing companies weren't getting results back over the holiday. I guess the expense of paying staff to work holiday hours is more important than 1 more day of infectiousness for those who didn't have tests back. (I am not talking about the LA County issue of switching to a new system, so they delayed posting numbers for 3 days.)
I was distressed by this: https://youtu.be/sxvu83d2Eg4?t=329 (the speaker is one of the regulars on This Week In Virology)
In NY, tests were coming back in 48 hours, but then started taking longer, up to 5 days. (The tests were being sent out of state because it was cheaper.)
I know anecdotal cases in Texas. A healthcare worker a month ago had symptoms, and it took most of a week to get results back.
Last week, a healthcare worker (that I know) took a precautionary (no symptoms, no known exposure) test on Wednesday. Antibodies came back negative, but as of 5 days later (Monday night), he didn't have PCR results when he found out someone he last worked with on Monday (7 days back), had a positive test. The testing agency told him that his test was being sent to NJ ("because it was faster"). Not only is he potentially at risk, but so are the other people he saw over the 4th.
In SCC, a PHO order of SCC testing facilities requires results to be sent to the county within an hour. I notice that doesn't require, say, Sacramento or NJ facilities to send the results to SCC in a timely manner, nor does it require the tests to be finished within 24 or 48 or even 96 hours of the sample.
SCC reports a "turnaround time" of under 2 days, but I don't know how they define that. I would hope it is time of sample to the later of when the patient or county is notified. As I understand it, Stanford had been doing a lot of SCC testing. The turnaround time bumped upward recently from 1.6 or so to 1.92, but potentially that is a one time blip due to the holiday.
Despite SCC's claim of <2 days, I see patterns in their data suggesting that receipt of results is about 4 days (and, previously, 5 days) after the day the sample is taken. I do not feel confident enough to claim that is the case, but I'm hoping I'm wrong.
Of those that have had PCR tests, what are people's experiences in terms of time from sample to time of notification?
And, by the way, SCC's "Unknown cause" percentage is increasing while the "Contact to a known case" is decreasing (through July 7 update).