There is generally a similar trend in the comparison of the total attack rates, the peak attack rates and the amount of testkits being used across the different intervention policies, regardless of the diagnostic approach. An increase in the total attack rate corresponds to an increase in the peak attack rate and amount of diagnostic testkits being used. At the same time, to mitigate pandemic influenza, i.e. reduce the total attack rate, How necessary is a fast testkit? J. Chin et al. 1039 more antiviral drugs need to be consumed, a policy that may not be always feasible due to limited supplies. When treating only the index cases (figure 4a, policies P2a and P2b), the total attack rate shows a moderate decrease, from an average of 4463.9 cases (base line) to the lowest rate of 4016.2 cases (figure 4a, policy P2b, diagnosis approach D1). We start to observe a more significant decrease only when contact tracing comes into effect. Even so, this decrease is only significant when prophylaxis of the contacts is included in the policies. The work hours lost from the various diagnostic approaches and intervention policies, interestingly, does not follow the same general patterns observed in the other indicators. In particular, increasing the coverage of contact tracing and assuming all cases to be pandemic does not necessarily equate to more work hours being lost (figure 5d, policies P4a and P4c, diagnosis D1). This is due to the decrease in total attack rate, which offsets the work hours lost by the contacts.