RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Universities returned to in-person learning in 2021 while SARS-CoV-2 spread remained high. At the time, it was not clear whether in-person learning would be a source of disease spread. METHODS: We combined surveillance testing, universal contact tracing, and viral genome sequencing to quantify introductions and identify likely on-campus spread. RESULTS: Ninety-one percent of viral genotypes occurred once, indicating no follow-on transmission. Less than 5% of introductions resulted in >3 cases, with 2 notable exceptions of 40 and 47 cases. Both partially overlapped with outbreaks defined by contact tracing. In both cases, viral genomics eliminated over half the epidemiologically linked cases but added an equivalent or greater number of individuals to the transmission cluster. CONCLUSIONS: Public health interventions prevented within-university transmission for most SARS-CoV-2 introductions, with only 2 major outbreaks being identified January to May 2021. The genetically linked cases overlap with outbreaks identified by contact tracing; however, they persisted in the university population for fewer days and rounds of transmission than estimated via contact tracing. This underscores the effectiveness of test-trace-isolate strategies in controlling undetected spread of emerging respiratory infectious diseases. These approaches limit follow-on transmission in both outside-in and internal transmission conditions.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Universidades , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Trazado de Contacto/métodos , Brotes de Enfermedades/prevención & controlRESUMEN
Contact tracing and genomic data, approaches often used separately, have both been important tools in understanding the nature of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Linked analysis of contact tracing and sequence relatedness of SARS-CoV-2 genomes from a regularly sampled university environment were used to build a multilevel transmission tracing and confirmation system to monitor and understand transmission on campus. Our investigation of an 18-person cluster stemming from an athletic team highlighted the importance of linking contact tracing and genomic analysis. Through these findings, it is suggestive that certain safety protocols in the athletic practice setting reduced transmission. The linking of traditional contact tracing with rapid-return genomic information is an effective approach for differentiating between multiple plausible transmission scenarios and informing subsequent public health protocols to limit disease spread in a university environment.
RESUMEN
Importance: SARS-CoV-2, the causative agent of COVID-19, has displayed person-to-person transmission in a variety of indoor situations. This potential for robust transmission has posed significant challenges and concerns for day-to-day activities of colleges and universities where indoor learning is a focus for students, faculty, and staff. Objective: To assess whether in-class instruction without any physical distancing, but with other public health mitigation strategies, is a risk for driving SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study examined the evidence for SARS-CoV-2 transmission on a large urban US university campus using contact tracing, class attendance, and whole genome sequencing during the 2021 fall semester. Eligible participants were on-campus and off-campus individuals involved in campus activities. Data were analyzed between September and December 2021. Exposures: Participation in class and work activities on a campus with mandated vaccination and indoor masking but that was otherwise fully open without physical distancing during a time of ongoing transmission of SARS-CoV-2, both at the university and in the surrounding counties. Main Outcomes and Measures: Likelihood of in-class infection was assessed by measuring the genetic distance between all potential in-class transmission pairings using polymerase chain reaction testing. Results: More than 600â¯000 polymerase chain reaction tests were conducted throughout the semester, with 896 tests (0.1%) showing detectable SARS-CoV-2; there were over 850 cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection identified through weekly surveillance testing of all students and faculty on campus during the fall 2021 semester. The rolling mean average of positive tests ranged between 4 and 27 daily cases. Of more than 140â¯000 in-person class events and a total student population of 33â¯000 between graduate and undergraduate students, only 9 instances of potential in-class transmission were identified, accounting for 0.0045% of all classroom meetings. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, the data suggested that under robust transmission abatement strategies, in-class instruction was not an appreciable source of disease transmission.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/epidemiología , Estudios de Cohortes , Genómica , Humanos , Salud Pública , SARS-CoV-2/genética , UniversidadesRESUMEN
SARS-CoV-2, the causative agent of COVID-19, has displayed person to person transmission in a variety of indoor situations. This potential for robust transmission has posed significant challenges to day-to-day activities of colleges and universities where indoor learning is a focus. Concerns about transmission in the classroom setting have been of concern for students, faculty and staff. With the simultaneous implementation of both non-pharmaceutical and pharmaceutical control measures meant to curb the spread of the disease, defining whether in-class instruction without any physical distancing is a risk for driving transmission is important. We examined the evidence for SARS-CoV-2 transmission on a large urban university campus that mandated vaccination and masking but was otherwise fully open without physical distancing during a time of ongoing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 both at the university and in the surrounding counties. Using weekly surveillance testing of all on-campus individuals and rapid contact tracing of individuals testing positive for the virus we found little evidence of in-class transmission. Of more than 140,000 in-person class events, only nine instances of potential in-class transmission were identified. When each of these events were further interrogated by whole-genome sequencing of all positive cases significant genetic distance was identified between all potential in-class transmission pairings, providing evidence that all individuals were infected outside of the classroom. These data suggest that under robust transmission abatement strategies, in-class instruction is not an appreciable source of disease transmission.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Women in sub-Saharan Africa face well-documented barriers to facility-based deliveries. An improved maternity waiting homes (MWH) model was implemented in rural Zambia to bring pregnant women closer to facilities for delivery. We qualitatively assessed whether MWHs changed perceived barriers to facility delivery among remote-living women. DESIGN: We administered in-depth interviews (IDIs) to a randomly selected subsample of women in intervention (n=78) and control (n=80) groups who participated in the primary quasi-experimental evaluation of an improved MWH model. The IDIs explored perceptions and preferences of delivery location. We conducted content analysis to understand perceived barriers and facilitators to facility delivery. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Participants lived in villages 10+ km from the health facility and had delivered a baby in the previous 12 months. INTERVENTION: The improved MWH model was implemented at 20 rural health facilities. RESULTS: Over 96% of participants in the intervention arm and 90% in the control arm delivered their last baby at a health facility. Key barriers to facility delivery were distance and transportation, and costs associated with delivery. Facilitators included no user fees, penalties for home delivery, desire for safe delivery and availability of MWHs. Most themes were similar between study arms. Both discussed the role MWHs have in improving access to facility-based delivery. Intervention arm participants expressed that the improved MWH model encourages use and helps overcome the distance barrier. Control arm participants either expressed a desire for an improved MWH model or did not consider it in their decision making. CONCLUSIONS: Even in areas with high facility-based delivery rates in rural Zambia, barriers to access persist. MWHs may be useful to address the distance challenge, but no single intervention is likely to address all barriers experienced by rural, low-resourced populations. MWHs should be considered in a broader systems approach to improving access in remote areas. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02620436.
Asunto(s)
Servicios de Salud Materna , Femenino , Instituciones de Salud , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud , Humanos , Embarazo , Población Rural , ZambiaRESUMEN
Asymptomatic surveillance testing together with COVID-19-related research can lead to positive SARS-CoV-2 tests resulting not from true infections, but non-infectious, non-hazardous by-products of research (amplicons). Amplicons can be widespread and persistent in lab environments and can be difficult to distinguish for true infections. We discuss prevention and mitigation strategies.