🤑 It doesn’t get more affordable. Grab this 60% OFF Black Friday offer before it disappears…CLAIM SALE

Hot-Spot States’ Test Plans Highlight Continued Supply Problems

Published 07/10/2020, 01:23 PM
Updated 07/10/2020, 02:18 PM
© Bloomberg. A public health nurse with Contra Costa Health Services wearing personal protective equipment receives a Covid-19 test swab from a patient at a testing site in Concord, California, U.S., on Thursday, July 9, 2020. California, once lauded for its success in tamping down the virus, is dealing with a record surge of cases and hospitalizations.

(Bloomberg) -- States told the Department of Health and Human Services that they need new machinery, more personnel and more testing supplies in submissions Friday detailing how they plan to build out screening for Covid-19.

The plans highlight the ongoing supply-chain challenges that labs in states with surging case counts face in procuring key supplies like chemicals, rapid diagnostics and protective equipment for personnel, showing how an influx of about $11 billion in funds distributed to states in May may not be enough to solve these persistent problems.

Covid cases are surging across the U.S. and testing capacity has again been a key bottleneck, with test-takers complaining about long lines and waits of a week or more for results, while labs warn of shortages of key supplies. Mass testing is essential to identify positive patients so they can be isolated and their contacts notified of their exposure risk. Delayed results set back those efforts, allowing the virus to continue on a path of explosive spread.

In three states shouldering some of the heaviest caseloads, their testing woes demonstrate that while testing has improved since the virus’s early days, U.S. capacity remains severely strained.

In Florida, which is witnessing record deaths and hospitalizations, the health department planned to invest in more diagnostic testing equipment, but at the time of the filing was still awaiting delivery of many items. Filings were due May 30 and underwent federal review in June.

Texas, Arizona

Texas’s submission describes how such machinery can make a major difference for a lab. One new platform in Laredo, for instance, “will increase testing capacity there by 50%,” while new equipment for Lubbock and Tyler labs “will increase testing throughput from 100 per day to 650 per day and from 50 per day to 500 per day, respectively.”

Key testing chemicals called reagents had become easier to access, but what’s available doesn’t always work on the equipment that labs have, the state said.

In Arizona, where a surge has filled hospital intensive-care units with Covid patients, facilities don’t have enough rapid tests for patients, which they say is “hampering their ability to most effectively triage patients” and maximize protective equipment for providers, according to its plan. Arizona is working with the federal government to use machinery already in state labs more effectively, including by getting “test kits which are in short supply and backordered.”

“At this time, the supply of collection materials and testing supplies are adequate to meet current response efforts in Arizona,” Arizona’s HHS submission said. But “the current supply of materials, particularly swabs, is anticipated to be insufficient for the fall and winter season, due to the need for concurrent influenza and Covid-19 testing.” The state health department is looking at ways to manufacture swabs and evaluate other types of swabs and preservatives.

States set their own testing targets in partnership with the federal government, and in the submissions were required to detail the number of tests needed, estimates of laboratory and testing capacity and how they’ll use the resources.

Shifting Needs

The $11 billion was distributed according to a formula that reflected the burden of Covid-19 as well as population-based estimates, officials said in May. But the brunt of the pandemic has shifted significantly since then, from the northeast to Sun Belt states, raising questions about whether additional funding may be required.

New York received about $750 million, more than any other state, and New York City got roughly $850 million. New Jersey got $650 million, California about $600 million, Los Angeles County nearly $337 million, Massachusetts about $400 million and Texas nearly $568 million.

The shortfalls in U.S. testing highlight the Trump administration’s failure to execute a cohesive national strategy, even as the country reopened and Americans increasingly going back to work, eating out and gathering socially clamored for the screenings.

The burden instead shifted to states, which were provided over 36 million swabs and 27 million tubes of transport media in the last two months, according to Assistant Secretary for Health Brett Giroir’s office, but have continued to face supply limitations. The Trump administration is now ramping up screenings in Louisiana, Texas and Florida through temporary sites offering free tests as part of an effort to “assist local leadership to reduce community spread,” Giroir said in a statement.

©2020 Bloomberg L.P.

© Bloomberg. A public health nurse with Contra Costa Health Services wearing personal protective equipment receives a Covid-19 test swab from a patient at a testing site in Concord, California, U.S., on Thursday, July 9, 2020. California, once lauded for its success in tamping down the virus, is dealing with a record surge of cases and hospitalizations.

Latest comments

Risk Disclosure: Trading in financial instruments and/or cryptocurrencies involves high risks including the risk of losing some, or all, of your investment amount, and may not be suitable for all investors. Prices of cryptocurrencies are extremely volatile and may be affected by external factors such as financial, regulatory or political events. Trading on margin increases the financial risks.
Before deciding to trade in financial instrument or cryptocurrencies you should be fully informed of the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, carefully consider your investment objectives, level of experience, and risk appetite, and seek professional advice where needed.
Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. The data and prices on the website are not necessarily provided by any market or exchange, but may be provided by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual price at any given market, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Fusion Media and any provider of the data contained in this website will not accept liability for any loss or damage as a result of your trading, or your reliance on the information contained within this website.
It is prohibited to use, store, reproduce, display, modify, transmit or distribute the data contained in this website without the explicit prior written permission of Fusion Media and/or the data provider. All intellectual property rights are reserved by the providers and/or the exchange providing the data contained in this website.
Fusion Media may be compensated by the advertisers that appear on the website, based on your interaction with the advertisements or advertisers.
© 2007-2024 - Fusion Media Limited. All Rights Reserved.