Assessment of COVID-19 Messaging Strategies to Increase Testing for Students With Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.

BACKGROUND: Students with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) were disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. This study's goal was to assess the effectiveness of 2 messaging strategies on participation in SARS-CoV-2 weekly testing. METHODS: Cluster randomized trials were conducted at 2 school systems, the special school district (SSD) and Kennedy Krieger Institute (Kennedy) to assess messaging strategies, general versus enhanced, to increase weekly screening for SARS-CoV-2. Testing was offered to staff and students from November 23, 2020 to May 26, 2022. The primary outcomes were percentage of students and staff consented weekly and percentage of study participants who had a test performed weekly. Generalized estimating equation models were utilized to evaluate the primary outcomes. RESULTS: Increases in enrollment and testing occurred during study start up, the beginning of school years, and following surges in both systems. No statistical difference was observed in the primary outcomes between schools receiving standard versus enhanced messaging. IMPLICATIONS FOR SCHOOL HEALTH POLICY, PRACTICE, AND EQUITY: Frequent and consistent communication is vital for families and staff. Weekly screening testing within schools is possible and highlighted the importance of utilizing equitable protocols to provide important testing to students with IDD. CONCLUSION: Enhanced messaging strategies did not increase the number of participants enrolled or the percentage of enrolled participants being tested on a weekly basis.

Clusters of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Across Six Schools for Students with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.

INTRODUCTION: Individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities are at increased risk for adverse outcomes from coronavirus disease 2019. Clusters of COVID-19 infections can be used to track SARS-CoV-2 transmission. This is particularly important in environments frequently used for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities, such as schools. The objective of this study was to compare the number of clusters of student and staff cases identified during three distinct periods (pre-Delta, Delta, and Omicron) of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Weekly COVID-19 testing occurred from November 23, 2020 to May 27, 2022 during three phases of the COVID-19 pandemic: pre-Delta, Delta, and Omicron. Structured interviews were conducted with positive cases to determine if they contracted COVID-19 in the school environment, and interviews with school administrators responsible for contact tracing determined school-based clusters. RESULTS: 160 cases of COVID-19 were identified and 55 cluster positives were recorded during the study period. 0 (0%) cluster positives were recorded during the pre-Delta variant wave, 3 (5%) cluster positives were recorded during the Delta variant wave, and 52 (95%) cluster positives were recorded during the Omicron variant wave. Additionally, 23 (85%) of all positives during pre-Delta, 12 (50%) of all positives during Delta, 66 (61%) of all positives during Omicron, and 36 (69%) of cluster positives during Omicron did not receive CDC-recommended dosages of the COVID-19 vaccine. CONCLUSION: The Omicron variant led to an increase in cluster-based transmission, and staying up to date with vaccination guidelines was crucial in limiting transmission. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prior to enrollment, this study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov on September 25, 2020 (identifier NCT04565509; titled "Supporting the Health and Well-being of Children with Intellectual and Developmental Disability During COVID-19 Pandemic").

Common Data Element Collection in Underserved School Communities: Challenges and Recommendations.

OBJECTIVES: To provide recommendations for future common data element (CDE) development and collection that increases community partnership, harmonizes data interpretation, and continues to reduce barriers of mistrust between researchers and underserved communities. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional qualitative and quantitative evaluation of mandatory CDE collection among Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics-Underserved Populations Return to School project teams with various priority populations and geographic locations in the United States to: (1) compare racial and ethnic representativeness of participants completing CDE questions relative to participants enrolled in project-level testing initiatives and (2) identify the amount of missing CDE data by CDE domain. Additionally, we conducted analyses stratified by aim-level variables characterizing CDE collection strategies. RESULTS: There were 15 study aims reported across the 13 participating Return to School projects, of which 7 (47%) were structured so that CDEs were fully uncoupled from the testing initiative, 4 (27%) were fully coupled, and 4 (27%) were partially coupled. In 9 (60%) study aims, participant incentives were provided in the form of monetary compensation. Most project teams modified CDE questions (8/13; 62%) to fit their population. Across all 13 projects, there was minimal variation in the racial and ethnic distribution of CDE survey participants from those who participated in testing; however, fully uncoupling CDE questions from testing increased the proportion of Black and Hispanic individuals participating in both initiatives. CONCLUSIONS: Collaboration with underrepresented populations from the early study design process may improve interest and participation in CDE collection efforts.

Utilization and Impact of Symptomatic and Exposure SARS-CoV-2 Testing in K-12 Schools.

OBJECTIVES: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend that schools can offer severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) diagnostic (on-demand) testing for students and staff with coronavirus disease 2019 symptoms or exposures. Data related to the uptake, implementation, and effect of school-associated on-demand diagnostic testing have not been described. METHODS: The Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics Underserved Populations Return to School program provided resources to researchers to implement on-demand SARS-CoV-2 testing in schools. This study describes the strategies used and uptake among the different testing programs. Risk of positivity was compared for symptomatic and exposure testing during the δ and ο variant periods. We estimated the number of school absence days saved with school-based diagnostic testing. RESULTS: Of the 16 eligible programs, 7 provided school-based on-demand testing. The number of persons that participated in these testing programs is 8281, with 4134 (49.9%) receiving >1 test during the school year. Risk of positivity was higher for symptomatic testing compared with exposure testing and higher during the ο variant predominant period compared with the δ variant predominant period. Overall, access to testing saved an estimated 13 806 absent school days. CONCLUSIONS: School-based on-demand SARS-CoV-2 testing was used throughout the school year, and nearly half the participants accessed testing on more than 1 occasion. Future studies should work to understand participant preferences around school-based testing and how these strategies can be used both during and outside of pandemics.

Recommendations for SARS-CoV-2 Testing in Children With Disabilities and Medical Complexity.

Schools provide important services that cannot be provided virtually to children with medical complexity and children with intellectual and developmental disabilities, yet these children are among the most at risk from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To keep schools open for children with medical complexity and/or intellectual and developmental disabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic, we implemented severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 testing at 3 sites across the United States. We evaluated testing strategies for staff and students at each site, including specimen source (nasopharyngeal or saliva), test type (polymerase chain reaction or rapid antigen), and frequency and type (screening versus exposure/symptomatic) of testing provided. Among the greatest barriers to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 testing in these schools was the engagement of caregivers and challenges navigating legal guardianship for consenting adult students. Additionally, variability in testing strategies nationally and in the community, as well as surges in viral transmission across the United States during the course of the pandemic, led to testing hesitancy and variable participation rates. Essential to the successful implementation of testing programs is building a trusted relationship with school administrators and guardians. Leveraging our experiences with COVID-19 and forming lasting school partnerships can help keep schools for vulnerable children safe in future pandemics.

Building School-Academic Partnerships to Implement COVID-19 Testing in Underserved Populations.

OBJECTIVE: In April 2021, the US government made substantial investments in students' safe return to school by providing resources for school-based coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mitigation strategies, including COVID-19 diagnostic testing. However, testing uptake and access among vulnerable children and children with medical complexities remained unclear. METHODS: The Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics Underserved Populations program was established by the National Institutes of Health to implement and evaluate COVID-19 testing programs in underserved populations. Researchers partnered with schools to implement COVID-19 testing programs. The authors of this study evaluated COVID-19 testing program implementation and enrollment and sought to determine key implementation strategies. A modified Nominal Group Technique was used to survey program leads to identify and rank testing strategies to provide a consensus of high-priority strategies for infectious disease testing in schools for vulnerable children and children with medical complexities. RESULTS: Among the 11 programs responding to the survey, 4 (36%) included prekindergarten and early care education, 8 (73%) worked with socioeconomically disadvantaged populations, and 4 focused on children with developmental disabilities. A total of 81 916 COVID-19 tests were performed. "Adapting testing strategies to meet the needs, preferences, and changing guidelines," "holding regular meetings with school leadership and staff," and "assessing and responding to community needs" were identified as key implementation strategies by program leads. CONCLUSIONS: School-academic partnerships helped provide COVID-19 testing in vulnerable children and children with medical complexities using approaches that met the needs of these populations. Additional work is needed to develop best practices for in-school infectious disease testing in all children.

Implementation of School-Based COVID-19 Testing Programs in Underserved Populations.

Evidence suggests that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) testing in schools can add a layer of protection to reduce the spread of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 and facilitate a safer return to in-person learning. Despite this evidence, implementation of testing in school settings has been challenging initially because of a lack of funding and limited availability of testing, but, as the pandemic has progressed and more funding and resources have been devoted to testing, other implementation challenges have arisen. We describe key implementation barriers and strategies that have been operationalized across 5 projects working to help schools with predominantly underserved populations who have faced significant COVID-19-related health disparities. We leveraged a key framework from the implementation science field to identify the challenges and used a matching tool to align implementation strategies to these challenges. Our findings suggest that the biggest obstacles to COVID-19 testing were the perceived relative advantages versus burden of COVID-19 testing, limited engagement with the target beneficiaries (eg, families, students, staff), and innovation complexity. Common strategies to overcome these challenges included identifying and preparing testing champions, altering incentive and allowance structures, assessing for readiness, and identifying barriers and facilitators. We aim to augment existing implementation guidance for schools by describing common barriers and recommended solutions from the implementation science field. Our results indicate a clear need to provide implementation support to schools to facilitate COVID-19 testing as an added layered mitigation strategy.

SARS-CoV-2 screening testing in schools for children with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

BACKGROUND: Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in schools primarily for typically developing children is rare. However, less is known about transmission in schools for children with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD), who are often unable to mask or maintain social distancing. The objectives of this study were to determine SARS-CoV-2 positivity and in-school transmission rates using weekly screening tests for school staff and students and describe the concurrent deployment of mitigation strategies in six schools for children with IDD. METHODS: From November 23, 2020, to May, 28, 2021, weekly voluntary screening for SARS-CoV-2 with a high sensitivity molecular-based saliva test was offered to school staff and students. Weekly positivity rates were determined and compared to local healthcare system and undergraduate student screening data. School-based transmission was assessed among participants quarantined for in-school exposure. School administrators completed a standardized survey to assess school mitigation strategies. RESULTS: A total of 59 students and 416 staff participated. An average of 304 school staff and students were tested per week. Of 7289 tests performed, 21 (0.29%) new SARS-CoV-2 positive cases were identified. The highest weekly positivity rate was 1.2% (n = 4) across all schools, which was less than community positivity rates. Two cases of in-school transmission were identified, each among staff, representing 2% (2/103) of participants quarantined for in-school exposure. Mitigation strategies included higher than expected student mask compliance, reduced room capacity, and phased reopening. CONCLUSIONS: During 24 weeks that included the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic in winter 2020-21, we found lower rates of SARS-CoV-2 screening test positivity among staff and students of six schools for children with IDD compared to community rates. In-school transmission of SARS-CoV-2 was low among those quarantined for in-school exposure. However, the impact of the emerging SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant on the effectiveness of these proven mitigation strategies remains unknown. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prior to enrollment, this study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov on September 25, 2020, identifier NCT04565509 , titled Supporting the Health and Well-being of Children with Intellectual and Developmental Disability During COVID-19 Pandemic.

SARS-CoV-2 Screening Testing in Schools for Children with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.

BACKGROUNDTransmission of SARS-CoV-2 in schools primarily for typically developing children is rare. However, less is known about transmission in schools for children with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD), who are often unable to mask or maintain social distancing. The objectives of this study were to determine SARS-CoV-2 positivity and in-school transmission rates using weekly screening tests for school staff and students and describe the concurrent deployment of mitigation strategies in six schools for children with IDD.METHODSFrom 11/23/20 to 5/28/21, weekly voluntary screening for SARS-CoV-2 with a high sensitivity molecular-based saliva test was offered to school staff and students. Weekly positivity rates were determined and compared to local healthcare system and undergraduate student screening data. School-based transmission was assessed among participants quarantined for in-school exposure. School administrators completed a standardized survey to assess school mitigation strategies.RESULTSA total of 59 students and 416 staff participated. An average of 304 school staff and students were tested per week. Of 7,289 tests performed, 21 (0.29%) new SARS-CoV-2 positive cases were identified. The highest weekly positivity rate was 1.2% (n = 4) across all schools, which was less than community positivity rates. Two cases of in-school transmission were identified, each among staff, representing 2% (2/103) of participants quarantined for in-school exposure. Mitigation strategies included higher than expected student mask compliance, reduced room capacity, and phased reopening.CONCLUSIONSDuring 24 weeks that included the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, we found no evidence for elevated SARS-CoV-2 screening test positivity among staff and students of six schools for children with IDD compared to community rates. In-school transmission of SARS-CoV-2 was low among those quarantined for in-school exposure.Clinical Trial RegistryPrior to enrollment, this study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov on 9/25/2020, identifier NCT04565509, titled Supporting the Health and Well-being of Children with Intellectual and Developmental Disability During COVID-19 Pandemic (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04565509?term=NCT04565509).