TY -非盟的黄Zhilian盟——郭Huiling AU -李,Yee-Mun AU - Ho,欧盟下巴AU - Ang,侯盟——食物,安吉拉PY - 2020 DA - 2020/10/29 TI -性能的数字接触者追踪工具COVID-19响应在新加坡:横断面研究乔- JMIR Mhealth Uhealth SP - e23148六世- 8 - 10 KW -传染病KW -实时定位系统KW -电子医疗记录千瓦COVID-19 KW -接触者追踪KW -公共卫生AB -背景:在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间，有效追踪接触者是一项劳动密集型工作，对时间很敏感，但在缺乏有效治疗和疫苗的情况下也至关重要。2020年3月，新加坡推出了首个基于蓝牙的接触者追踪应用程序tracetogether，以增强新加坡的接触者追踪能力。目的:本研究旨在比较tracetogether接触者追踪应用程序与基于可穿戴标签的实时定位系统(RTLS)的性能，并与国家传染病中心(NCID)的电子病历进行验证。方法:对NCID筛查中心的所有患者和医生发放RTLS标签(CADI Scientific)进行接触者追踪。2020年5月10日至5月20日，共有18名医生被部署到NCID筛查中心。医生们激活了TraceTogether应用程序(1.6版;我们比较了医生在10天的工作期间，在NCID附近通过TraceTogether识别的患者接触者和通过RTLS标签识别的患者接触者。我们还通过在研究期间24小时内到NCID筛查中心就诊的156名患者的电子病历验证了这两种数字接触追踪工具的医患接触情况。结果:RTLS标签对系统或TraceTogether识别的患者接触者的检测灵敏度为95.3%，而TraceTogether的总灵敏度为6.5%，在Android手机上的表现明显优于iPhone (Android: 9.7%， iPhone: 2.7%; P<.001). When validated against the electronic medical records, RTLS tags had a sensitivity of 96.9% and specificity of 83.1%, while TraceTogether only detected 2 patient contacts with physicians who did not attend to them. Conclusions: TraceTogether had a much lower sensitivity than RTLS tags for identifying patient contacts in a clinical setting. Although the tag-based RTLS performed well for contact tracing in a clinical setting, its implementation in the community would be more challenging than TraceTogether. Given the uncertainty of the adoption and capabilities of contact tracing apps, policy makers should be cautioned against overreliance on such apps for contact tracing. Nonetheless, leveraging technology to augment conventional manual contact tracing is a necessary move for returning some normalcy to life during the long haul of the COVID-19 pandemic. SN - 2291-5222 UR - http://mhealth.www.mybigtv.com/2020/10/e23148/ UR - https://doi.org/10.2196/23148 UR - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33006944 DO - 10.2196/23148 ID - info:doi/10.2196/23148 ER -