Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Comparing Participant Experiences of at‐Home and Hospital‐Based Biological Sampling: Cross‐Sectional Insights From the SIREN Study
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Comparing Participant Experiences of at‐Home and Hospital‐Based Biological Sampling: Cross‐Sectional Insights From the SIREN Study
Do you wish to request the book?
Comparing Participant Experiences of at‐Home and Hospital‐Based Biological Sampling: Cross‐Sectional Insights From the SIREN Study
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Comparing Participant Experiences of at‐Home and Hospital‐Based Biological Sampling: Cross‐Sectional Insights From the SIREN Study
2025
Overview
Engaging and retaining research participants in studies that require sampling (e.g., blood, sputum) can be challenging. Regularly contributing biological sampling can be demanding for healthcare workers (HCW) in particular. SIREN is a prospective cohort of HCW in the UK who have been carrying out COVID‐19 testing since 2020. We aimed to evaluate satisfaction with at‐home PCR and blood sampling by collecting SIREN participants' feedback regarding sampling processes for COVID‐19 testing. We explored the acceptability of at‐home (PCR swab and finger‐prick blood sampling) compared to at‐hospital (PCR swab and phlebotomy) sampling. Thematic analysis was used to code free‐text responses. Out of 2,816 respondents, 74% preferred PCR testing at home compared to on site. Half of 1,279 participants who returned blood samples using a postal kit preferred to complete serological sampling at home instead of in hospital (52%). One in five reported no preference. Participants valued the ease and convenience of home‐sampling and clear communication about instructions and test results. Some participants reported difficulties with blood collection or logistic issues related to kits, but this did not prevent them from returning samples nor deter them from undergoing sampling in future research. Home‐sampling for PCR and serological testing was acceptable and feasible in this HCW cohort. Self‐sampling can be a cost‐effective and efficient way of collecting participant data. Clear communications about instructions for sample collection and the purpose of capturing the sample, easy‐to‐use devices and ensuring participants feel valued are strong facilitators to high uptake, and on‐going study retention.
Publisher
John Wiley & Sons, Inc,Wiley
Subject
