TY - JOUR
T1 - Adapting COVID-19 research infrastructure to capture influenza and RSV alongside SARSCoV-2 in UK healthcare workers winter 2022/23
T2 - Evaluation of the SIREN Winter Pressures pilot study
AU - SIREN Study Group
AU - Russell, Sophie
AU - Munro, Katie
AU - Foulkes, Sarah
AU - Broad, Jonathan
AU - Sparkes, Dominic
AU - Atti, Ana
AU - Islam, Jasmin
AU - Hopkins, Susan
AU - Hall, Victoria
AU - Northfield, John
AU - Cutler, Sean
AU - Roynon, Anna
AU - Nash, Maxine
AU - Dell, Amanda
AU - Parfitt, Louise
AU - Richards, Andrea
AU - Price, Andrea
AU - Subbe, Christian
AU - Jones, Caroline Mulvaney
AU - Roberts, Julia
AU - Bagary, Manny
AU - Starkova, Nadezda
AU - Thompson, Catherine
AU - Hopkins, Susan
AU - Atti, Ana
AU - Andrews, Nick
AU - Emmett, Hannah
AU - Russell, Sophie
AU - Brown, Colin
AU - Conneely, Joanna
AU - Hettiarachchi, Nipunadi
AU - Khawam, Jameel
AU - Adaji, Enemona
AU - Akinbami, Omolola
AU - Chand, Meera
AU - Charlett, Andre
AU - Brooks, Tim
AU - Zambon, Maria
AU - Ramsay, Mary
AU - Saei, Ayoub
AU - Linley, Ezra
AU - Tonge, Simon
AU - Otter, Ashley
AU - D'Arcangelo, Silvia
AU - Rowe, Cathy
AU - Semper, Amanda
AU - Gallagher, Eileen
AU - Howell, Kate
AU - Hewson, Jacqueline
AU - Sajedi, Noshin
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 Russell et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
PY - 2025/6
Y1 - 2025/6
N2 - Background In winter 2022, SIREN, a prospective healthcare worker cohort study monitoring SARS-CoV-2, ran a pilot sub-study introducing multiplex PCR testing for SARSCoV-2, influenza, and RSV to investigate winter pressures. Three pathways were trialled: (A) on-site (at hospital) swabbing for PCR testing, using the local laboratory for testing, (B) on-site swabbing using a UKHSA-commissioned laboratory for testing, and (C) postal swabbing using a UKHSA-commissioned laboratory for testing. Here, we compare pathways in relation to recruitment, testing coverage, participant acceptability, and UKHSA SIREN research team feedback. Methods A mixed methods evaluation using metrics of quality assurance and study fidelity (participant recruitment and retention; multiplex PCR testing timing and coverage), an adapted NIHR ‘participant in research’ feedback questionnaire, and thematic analysis of a UKHSA SIREN research team workshop. Results With 7,774 participants recruited, target recruitment (N = 7,500) was achieved. Thirty-nine sites took part in the sub-study (4,289 participants). Thirty-three used pathway A (3,713 participants), and six used pathway B (576 participants). 3,485 participants were enrolled into pathway C (27.8% of invitees). The median number of tests per participant was similar across pathways (6; 4; 5). However, sites using local laboratories showed a wide variation in the date they switched to multiplex testing (28th November 2022–16th March 2023). Consequently, influenza and RSV testing coverage was higher for pathways using UKHSA-commissioned laboratories (100.0% vs 45.6% at local laboratories). 1,204/7,774 (15.5%) participants completed the feedback survey. All pathways were acceptable to participants; 98.9% of postal and 97.5% of site-based participants ‘would consider taking part again’. Conclusion Transitioning SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing to include influenza and RSV was challenging to achieve rapidly across multiple sites. The postal testing pathway proved more agile, and UKHSA-commissioned laboratory testing provided more comprehensive data collection than local laboratory testing. This sub-study indicates that postal protocols are effective, adaptable at pace, and acceptable to participants.
AB - Background In winter 2022, SIREN, a prospective healthcare worker cohort study monitoring SARS-CoV-2, ran a pilot sub-study introducing multiplex PCR testing for SARSCoV-2, influenza, and RSV to investigate winter pressures. Three pathways were trialled: (A) on-site (at hospital) swabbing for PCR testing, using the local laboratory for testing, (B) on-site swabbing using a UKHSA-commissioned laboratory for testing, and (C) postal swabbing using a UKHSA-commissioned laboratory for testing. Here, we compare pathways in relation to recruitment, testing coverage, participant acceptability, and UKHSA SIREN research team feedback. Methods A mixed methods evaluation using metrics of quality assurance and study fidelity (participant recruitment and retention; multiplex PCR testing timing and coverage), an adapted NIHR ‘participant in research’ feedback questionnaire, and thematic analysis of a UKHSA SIREN research team workshop. Results With 7,774 participants recruited, target recruitment (N = 7,500) was achieved. Thirty-nine sites took part in the sub-study (4,289 participants). Thirty-three used pathway A (3,713 participants), and six used pathway B (576 participants). 3,485 participants were enrolled into pathway C (27.8% of invitees). The median number of tests per participant was similar across pathways (6; 4; 5). However, sites using local laboratories showed a wide variation in the date they switched to multiplex testing (28th November 2022–16th March 2023). Consequently, influenza and RSV testing coverage was higher for pathways using UKHSA-commissioned laboratories (100.0% vs 45.6% at local laboratories). 1,204/7,774 (15.5%) participants completed the feedback survey. All pathways were acceptable to participants; 98.9% of postal and 97.5% of site-based participants ‘would consider taking part again’. Conclusion Transitioning SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing to include influenza and RSV was challenging to achieve rapidly across multiple sites. The postal testing pathway proved more agile, and UKHSA-commissioned laboratory testing provided more comprehensive data collection than local laboratory testing. This sub-study indicates that postal protocols are effective, adaptable at pace, and acceptable to participants.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105009058534
UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/dba3c894-3756-36e2-911b-05c1ea482e60/
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0310758
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0310758
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:105009058534
SN - 1932-6203
VL - 20
JO - PLoS ONE
JF - PLoS ONE
IS - 6 June
M1 - e0310758
ER -