Psychological Implications of Mandatory Testing for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 During the Global COVID-19 Pandemic.

Abstract

During an admission for an elective neurosurgical procedure, a patient developed hypoxia, dry cough, high grade fever, and her chest computed tomography (CT) showed ground glass opacities. As coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was gaining prevalence in the community, her neurointensivist recommended testing for infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The possibility of becoming a patient under investigation and of having the disease caused the patient severe anxiety, and she refused the test. In an effort to better understand this sentiment and whether patients should have the option to refuse the test, the physician posted a description of the situation on a COVID-19 health care workers social media group, generating a lively discussion among a diverse group of people with various opinions all around the world. Posters supporting the right to refuse the test gave arguments rooted in the bioethical principles of autonomy and nonmaleficence. Meanwhile, posters opposing the right to refuse the test gave arguments rooted in societal beneficence and justice. This article aims to discuss the psychological and ethical impacts of forcing the patients to be tested for the COVID-19. The first documented case of COVID-19 in the USA was reported in a 35-year-old man from Snohomish County, Washington on January 20, 2020. Since then, more than 78 million Americans have been tested for COVID-19 with more than 6 million positive cases in the USA [1]. Widespread testing for the disease is considered essential for managing its spread, but there are ethical and psychosocial concerns for individuals being tested. Most patients feel that coerced COVID-19 testing violates patient autonomy. Autonomy is the value that grants patients the power to decide which diagnostic tests or treatments they receive. There is precedent for violating patient autonomy, especially in the decision to accept or refuse vaccinations when vaccination refusal poses a public health threat [2]. However, as Dr. Halpern emphasized, this is an era of growing regard for patient autonomy in which removing requirements for patient consent is not straightforward [3]. Furthermore, it is difficult to justify restricting a patient’s right to refuse a treatment or test that has a significant risk of harm (i.e., when nonmaleficence is not upheld). Besides the transient discomfort from swabbing, there is virtually no expected physical harm from the COVID-19 test. However, the test can have a negative impact financially. Even if there were no cost to the test itself, a positive test prevents a patient from working unless they have a job conducive to working from home. This results in loss of paid-time-off or loss of pay for people without paid-time-off. There may also be fear that a positive COVID-19 test increases a worker’s chance of being laid off or furloughed. Besides the financial impact, a positive COVID-19 test, like human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), has a negative social stigma [4].Previous literature supports the idea that people diagnosed or even suspected of having HIV face discrimination and psychosocial issues [3, 5]. Although some may find it difficult to imagine COVID-19 carrying the same stigma, it is conceivable that people with COVID-19 would fear blame for not practicing rigorous hygiene or not adhering to social distancing. It is also possible that elderly or dependent patients would fear losing access to their caregivers or being displaced from home if they were to test positive for COVID-19. With all of these negative psychosocial factors compounding the physical risk of COVID-19, there is valid concern that the current pandemic will lead to increased psychopathology, especially post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), as seen in previous pandemics and disasters [6, 7]. Coerced COVID-19 testing would limit patients’ control over the situation, which could amplify the psychological impact. Despite the potential negative psychosocial impact of COVID-19 testing, there are clear benefits to society that must be considered. Without a proven, targeted treatment for COVID-19, the individual benefit of being tested is small compared to the societal benefit. Except in the case of clinical trials, the treatments for COVID-19 are supportive and do not change with a positive test. However, a positive test does influence isolation and quarantine measures and encourages the use of personal protective equipment (PPE). By isolating a confirmed COVID-19 patient or patient under investigation, quarantining those who have already been in contact with the patient, and applying PPE to those who treat them, the rate of infection Manuscript submitted September 3, 2020, accepted September 9, 2020 Published online December 9, 2020