Performance of the Swiss Digital Contact-Tracing App Over Various SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic Waves: Repeated Cross-sectional Analyses.
COVID-19
SARS-CoV-2
SwissCovid app
Switzerland
contact-tracing app
digital contact tracing
digital proximity
digital tool
exposure notification
mobile app
public health
surveillance
variant of concern
Journal
JMIR public health and surveillance
ISSN: 2369-2960
Titre abrégé: JMIR Public Health Surveill
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101669345
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 11 2022
11 11 2022
Historique:
received:
12
07
2022
accepted:
09
10
2022
revised:
28
09
2022
pubmed:
12
10
2022
medline:
16
11
2022
entrez:
11
10
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Digital proximity-tracing apps have been deployed in multiple countries to assist with SARS-CoV-2 pandemic mitigation efforts. However, it is unclear how their performance and effectiveness were affected by changing pandemic contexts and new viral variants of concern. The aim of this study is to bridge these knowledge gaps through a countrywide digital proximity-tracing app effectiveness assessment, as guided by the World Health Organization/European Center for Prevention and Disease Control (WHO/ECDC) indicator framework to evaluate the public health effectiveness of digital proximity-tracing solutions. We performed a descriptive analysis of the digital proximity-tracing app SwissCovid in Switzerland for 3 different periods where different SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (ie, Alpha, Delta, and Omicron, respectively) were most prevalent. In our study, we refer to the indicator framework for the evaluation of public health effectiveness of digital proximity-tracing apps of the WHO/ECDC. We applied this framework to compare the performance and effectiveness indicators of the SwissCovid app. Average daily registered SARS-CoV-2 case rates during our assessment period from January 25, 2021, to March 19, 2022, were 20 (Alpha), 54 (Delta), and 350 (Omicron) per 100,000 inhabitants. The percentages of overall entered authentication codes from positive tests into the SwissCovid app were 9.9% (20,273/204,741), 3.9% (14,372/365,846), and 4.6% (72,324/1,581,506) during the Alpha, Delta, and Omicron variant phases, respectively. Following receipt of an exposure notification from the SwissCovid app, 58% (37/64, Alpha), 44% (7/16, Delta), and 73% (27/37, Omicron) of app users sought testing or performed self-tests. Test positivity among these exposure-notified individuals was 19% (7/37) in the Alpha variant phase, 29% (2/7) in the Delta variant phase, and 41% (11/27) in the Omicron variant phase compared to 6.1% (228,103/3,755,205), 12% (413,685/3,443,364), and 41.7% (1,784,951/4,285,549) in the general population, respectively. In addition, 31% (20/64, Alpha), 19% (3/16, Delta), and 30% (11/37, Omicron) of exposure-notified app users reported receiving mandatory quarantine orders by manual contact tracing or through a recommendation by a health care professional. In constantly evolving pandemic contexts, the effectiveness of digital proximity-tracing apps in contributing to mitigating pandemic spread should be reviewed regularly and adapted based on changing requirements. The WHO/ECDC framework allowed us to assess relevant domains of digital proximity tracing in a holistic and systematic approach. Although the Swisscovid app mostly worked, as reasonably expected, our analysis revealed room for optimizations and further performance improvements. Future implementation of digital proximity-tracing apps should place more emphasis on social, psychological, and organizational aspects to reduce bottlenecks and facilitate their use in pandemic contexts.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Digital proximity-tracing apps have been deployed in multiple countries to assist with SARS-CoV-2 pandemic mitigation efforts. However, it is unclear how their performance and effectiveness were affected by changing pandemic contexts and new viral variants of concern.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study is to bridge these knowledge gaps through a countrywide digital proximity-tracing app effectiveness assessment, as guided by the World Health Organization/European Center for Prevention and Disease Control (WHO/ECDC) indicator framework to evaluate the public health effectiveness of digital proximity-tracing solutions.
METHODS
We performed a descriptive analysis of the digital proximity-tracing app SwissCovid in Switzerland for 3 different periods where different SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (ie, Alpha, Delta, and Omicron, respectively) were most prevalent. In our study, we refer to the indicator framework for the evaluation of public health effectiveness of digital proximity-tracing apps of the WHO/ECDC. We applied this framework to compare the performance and effectiveness indicators of the SwissCovid app.
RESULTS
Average daily registered SARS-CoV-2 case rates during our assessment period from January 25, 2021, to March 19, 2022, were 20 (Alpha), 54 (Delta), and 350 (Omicron) per 100,000 inhabitants. The percentages of overall entered authentication codes from positive tests into the SwissCovid app were 9.9% (20,273/204,741), 3.9% (14,372/365,846), and 4.6% (72,324/1,581,506) during the Alpha, Delta, and Omicron variant phases, respectively. Following receipt of an exposure notification from the SwissCovid app, 58% (37/64, Alpha), 44% (7/16, Delta), and 73% (27/37, Omicron) of app users sought testing or performed self-tests. Test positivity among these exposure-notified individuals was 19% (7/37) in the Alpha variant phase, 29% (2/7) in the Delta variant phase, and 41% (11/27) in the Omicron variant phase compared to 6.1% (228,103/3,755,205), 12% (413,685/3,443,364), and 41.7% (1,784,951/4,285,549) in the general population, respectively. In addition, 31% (20/64, Alpha), 19% (3/16, Delta), and 30% (11/37, Omicron) of exposure-notified app users reported receiving mandatory quarantine orders by manual contact tracing or through a recommendation by a health care professional.
CONCLUSIONS
In constantly evolving pandemic contexts, the effectiveness of digital proximity-tracing apps in contributing to mitigating pandemic spread should be reviewed regularly and adapted based on changing requirements. The WHO/ECDC framework allowed us to assess relevant domains of digital proximity tracing in a holistic and systematic approach. Although the Swisscovid app mostly worked, as reasonably expected, our analysis revealed room for optimizations and further performance improvements. Future implementation of digital proximity-tracing apps should place more emphasis on social, psychological, and organizational aspects to reduce bottlenecks and facilitate their use in pandemic contexts.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36219833
pii: v8i11e41004
doi: 10.2196/41004
pmc: PMC9700234
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e41004Informations de copyright
©Paola Daniore, Vasileios Nittas, Tala Ballouz, Dominik Menges, André Moser, Marc Höglinger, Petra Villiger, Krisztina Schmitz-Grosz, Viktor Von Wyl. Originally published in JMIR Public Health and Surveillance (https://publichealth.jmir.org), 11.11.2022.
Références
Nature. 2021 Jun;594(7863):408-412
pubmed: 33979832
Science. 2020 May 8;368(6491):
pubmed: 32234805
Lancet Public Health. 2022 Mar;7(3):e250-e258
pubmed: 35131045
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2022 May 19;8(5):e35653
pubmed: 35476726
Lancet Public Health. 2022 Mar;7(3):e206-e207
pubmed: 35131044
Swiss Med Wkly. 2020 Jul 16;150:w20324
pubmed: 32672340
Lancet Digit Health. 2020 Dec;2(12):e658-e666
pubmed: 33078140
Front Digit Health. 2021 Aug 05;3:677929
pubmed: 34713149
Nat Med. 2021 Mar;27(3):361-362
pubmed: 33589822
PLoS One. 2020 Nov 11;15(11):e0242129
pubmed: 33175906
Swiss Med Wkly. 2020 Dec 16;150:w20457
pubmed: 33327003
Swiss Med Wkly. 2021 Sep 08;151(35-36):
pubmed: 34495624
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2021 Dec 6;7(12):e30004
pubmed: 34874890
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2021 Jan 6;7(1):e25701
pubmed: 33326411
Epidemiology. 2007 Nov;18(6):805-35
pubmed: 18049195
Lancet Glob Health. 2020 Apr;8(4):e488-e496
pubmed: 32119825
JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Apr 1;4(4):e218184
pubmed: 33929521
Int J Public Health. 2021 Aug 16;66:1603992
pubmed: 34471402
Int J Public Health. 2022 Feb 28;67:1604506
pubmed: 35295967