RESUMO
BACKGROUND: South Africa's first SARS-CoV-2 case was identified 5th March 2020 and national lockdown followed March 26th. Households are an important location for secondary SARS-CoV-2 infection. Physical distancing and sanitation - infection mitigation recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) at the time - are difficult to implement in limited-resource settings because of overcrowded living conditions. METHODS: This study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05119348) was conducted from August 2020 to September 2021 in two densely populated, low socioeconomic Cape Town community sub-districts. New COVID-19 index cases (ICs) identified at public clinics were randomised to an infection mitigation intervention (STOPCOV) delivered by lay community health workers (CHWs) or standard of care group. STOPCOV mitigation measures included one initial household assessment conducted by a CHW in which face masks, sanitiser, bleach and written information on managing and preventing spread were provided. This was followed by regular telephonic follow-up from CHWs. SARS-CoV-2 PCR and IgM/IgG serology was performed at baseline, weeks 1, 2, 3 and 4 of follow-up. RESULTS: The study randomised 81 ICs with 245 HHCs. At baseline, no HHCs in the control and 7 (5%) in the intervention group had prevalent SARS-CoV-2. The secondary infection rate (SIR) based on SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing was 1.9% (n = 2) in control and 2.9% (n = 4) in intervention HHCs (p = 0.598). At baseline, SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were present in 15% (16/108) of control and 38% (52/137) of intervention participants. At study end incidence was 8.3% (9/108) and 8.03% (11/137) in the intervention and control groups respectively. Antibodies were present in 23% (25/108) of control HHCs over the course of the study vs. 46% (63/137) in the intervention arm. CHWs made twelve clinic and 47 food parcel referrals for individuals in intervention households in need. DISCUSSION: Participants had significant exposure to SARS-CoV-2 infections prior to the study. In this setting, household transmission mitigation was ineffective. However, CHWs may have facilitated other important healthcare and social referrals.