Compliance with Barrier Gestures during COVID-19 Pandemic as a Function of the Context: A Longitudinal Observational Survey at the University of Liège.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, barrier gestures such as mask wearing, physical distancing, greetings without contact, one-way circulation flow, and hand sanitization were major strategies to prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2, but they were only useful if consistently applied. This survey was a follow-up of the first survey performed in 2020 at the University of Liège. We aim to evaluate the compliance with these gestures on campuses and examine differences in the extent of the compliance observed in different educational activities and contexts. During 3.5 months, the counting of compliant and non-compliant behaviors was performed each week in randomly selected rooms. Using data collected during both surveys (2020 and 2021), binomial negative regression models of compliance depending on periods (teaching periods and exam sessions), type of rooms, and campuses were conducted to evaluate prevalence ratios of compliance. The percentage of compliance in this second survey was the highest for mask wearing and physical distancing during educational activities (90% and 88%, respectively) and lowest for physical distancing outside educational activities and hand sanitization (45% and 52%, respectively). Multivariate analyses revealed that the compliance with most gestures was significantly higher in teaching rooms than in hallways and restaurants and during exam sessions. The compliance with physical distancing was significantly higher (from 66%) in auditoriums, where students had to remain seated, than during practical works that allowed or required free movement. Therefore, the compliance with barrier gestures was associated with contextual settings, which should be considered when communicating and managing barrier gestures. Further studies should specify and confirm the determining contextual characteristics regarding the compliance with barrier gestures in times of pandemic.

Factors influencing the adoption and participation rate of nursing homes staff in a saliva testing screening programme for COVID-19.

Testing strategies are crucial to prevent and control the spread of covid-19 but suffer from a lack of investment in understanding the human factors that influence their implementation. The aim of this study was to understand the factors that encourage participation and the level of engagement of nursing homes staff in a routine saliva testing programme for COVID-19 In December 2020, nursing homes (n = 571) in Wallonia (Belgium) were invited to participate in a saliva testing programme for their staff. The directors were questioned by telephone at the end of a 3-week pilot phase. 445 nursing homes took part in the evaluation questionnaire, of which 36(8%) answered that they chose not to participate in the testing programme. The average participation rate of nursing staff was 49(±25)%. Perception of the justification of the efforts required for testing and perception of practicability of the procedure were significantly associated with the adoption of the system by the nursing homes directors (OR(95%CI): 5.96(1.97-18.0), p = 0.0016); OR(95%CI): 5.64(1.94-16.4), p = 0.0015 respectively). Staff support, incentives and meetings increased the level of engagement in testing (p<0.05). While the adoption of the programme confirmed the acceptability of salivary testing as a means of screening, the participation rate confirmed the need for studies to understand the factors that encourage health care staff to take part. The results suggested rethinking strategies to consider staff engagement from a health promotion perspective.

A 2-month field cohort study of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva of BNT162b2 vaccinated nursing home workers.

Background: Nursing home (NH) residents have been severely affected during the COVID-19 pandemic because of their age and underlying comorbidities. Infection and outbreaks in NHs are most likely triggered by infected workers. Screening for asymptomatic NH workers can prevent risky contact and viral transmission to the residents. This study examined the effect of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID­19 (Comirnaty®; BioNTech and Pfizer) vaccination on the saliva excretion of SARS-CoV-2 among NH workers, through weekly saliva RT-qPCR testing. Methods: A 2-month cohort study was conducted among 99 NHs in the Walloon region (Belgium), at the start of February 2021. Three groups of workers, i.e., non-vaccinated (n = 1618), one-dosed vaccinated (n = 1454), and two-dosed vaccinated (n = 2379) of BNT162b2 mRNA COVID­19 vaccine, were followed-up weekly. Their saliva samples were used to monitor the shedding of SARS-CoV-2. All positive samples were sequenced and genotyped to identify the circulating wild-type virus or variants of concern. Results: The protection fraction against the excretion of the SARS-CoV-2 in the saliva samples of the workers after the second dose is estimated at 0.90 (95% CI: 0.18; 0.99) at 1 week and 0.83 (95% CI: 0.54; 0.95) at 8 weeks. We observe more circulating SARS-CoV-2 and a greater variability of viral loads in the unvaccinated group compared to those of the vaccinated group. Conclusions: This field cohort study advances our knowledge of the efficacy of the mRNA BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine on the viral shedding in the saliva specimens of vaccinated NH workers, contributing to better decision-making in public health interventions and management.

Acceptability of Community Saliva Testing in Controlling the COVID-19 Pandemic: Lessons Learned from Two Case Studies in Nursing Homes and Schools.

Current public health debate centers on COVID-19 testing methods and strategies. In some communities, high transmission risk may justify routine testing, and this requires test methods that are safe and efficient for both patients and the administrative or health-care workers administering them. Saliva testing appears to satisfy those criteria. There is, however, little documentation on the acceptability of this method among beneficiaries. This article presents the lessons learned from a pilot study on the use of saliva testing for routine screening of nursing home and secondary school personnel in Wallonia (the French-speaking part of Belgium), conducted in December 2020 to April 2021, respectively. Administrators at the facilities in question seemed to think highly of saliva testing and wished to continue it after the pilot study was over. This result reinforces the criteria (the noninvasive aspect, in particular) supporting a key role for saliva testing in monitoring community spread of the virus. Nevertheless, wider-scale deployment of this particular method will only be possible if the testing strategy as a whole takes a health promotion approach.

Decision-based interactive model to determine re-opening conditions of a large university campus in Belgium during the first COVID-19 wave.

BACKGROUND: The role played by large-scale repetitive SARS-CoV-2 screening programs within university populations interacting continuously with an urban environment, is unknown. Our objective was to develop a model capable of predicting the dispersion of viral contamination among university populations dividing their time between social and academic environments. METHODS: Data was collected through real, large-scale testing developed at the University of Liège, Belgium, during the period Sept. 28th-Oct. 29th 2020. The screening, offered to students and staff (n = 30,000), began 2 weeks after the re-opening of the campus but had to be halted after 5 weeks due to an imposed general lockdown. The data was then used to feed a two-population model (University + surrounding environment) implementing a generalized susceptible-exposed-infected-removed compartmental modeling framework. RESULTS: The considered two-population model was sufficiently versatile to capture the known dynamics of the pandemic. The reproduction number was estimated to be significantly larger on campus than in the urban population, with a net difference of 0.5 in the most severe conditions. The low adhesion rate for screening (22.6% on average) and the large reproduction number meant the pandemic could not be contained. However, the weekly screening could have prevented 1393 cases (i.e. 4.6% of the university population; 95% CI: 4.4-4.8%) compared to a modeled situation without testing. CONCLUSION: In a real life setting in a University campus, periodic screening could contribute to limiting the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic cycle but is highly dependent on its environment.

Millennials' Consumption of and Attitudes toward Meat and Plant-Based Meat Alternatives by Consumer Segment in Finland.

Millennials are considered the key generation with regard to the consumption of plant-based meat alternatives via flexitarianism. This study sought to characterize millennials' consumer segments based on their consumption of and attitudes toward meat and meat alternatives. We conducted an online survey on the hedonic tones of the associations evoked by meat and meat alternatives, consumption of such foods, and diet-related attitudes among a representative sample of Finnish millennials (N = 546, 59% women, age 20-39 years). Some 41% of respondents regularly ate plant-based meat alternatives, while 43% had tried such foods. We divided the respondents into six segments based on the hedonic tones of their meat vs. meat alternatives associations. The segments differed in terms of their consumption of meat alternatives and the underlying reasons why, importance of meat in meals, and Meat Commitment Scale scores. The segment that reported much more positive associations with meat than meat alternatives (~14% of the respondents) may prove resistant to interventions intended to reduce meat intake, whereas the segment that displayed the most positive attitudes toward meat alternatives (~18%) did not eat much meat. Thus, the four middle segments (totaling ~68%), whose associations' hedonic tones were close to each other, may be the best targets for future interventions designed to reduce meat consumption through the use of meat alternatives. To conclude, introducing a simple segmentation allowed us to identify consumer segments with large potential to reduce meat consumption.

University population-based prospective cohort study of SARS-CoV-2 infection and immunity (SARSSURV-ULiège): a study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: For a safe and sustainable return to normal functioning of academic activities in higher education, objective-driven testing strategies that are flexible and rapidly adaptable are essential to effectively monitor and respond to new developments of the COVID-19 pandemic. To date, prospective longitudinal research on SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing in saliva and seroprevalence in higher education contexts is substantially lacking, limiting our understanding of COVID-19 prevalence, incidence and nature of the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 at various stages of the infection and vaccination. To address this lack of evidence, a prospective population-based cohort study (SARSSURV-ULiège) has recently been started. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Students (n=1396) and staff members (n=1143) of the University of Liège are followed up over more than 1 year. All participants are required to complete anamnestic, clinical and vaccine hesitancy questionnaires for medical histories and undertaken treatments. Previous proven or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection is also registered. In phase 1, weekly saliva samples to perform RT-qPCR to detect SARS-CoV-2 and monthly COVID-19 serological rapid test results are collected. Once being positive to either saliva RT-qPCR assay for SARS-CoV-2 presence or to serological test, the participant is invited to enter phase 2. If participants get vaccinated during the study period, they are invited to phase 2. In this second phase, besides weekly saliva self-test, depending on the participants' profiles, both gargle and blood samples are collected to obtain various biological data to measure the presence of neutralising antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, determine the magnitude and the duration of antibody responses over time. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has received the approval from the University Hospital of Liège Ethics Committee (reference number 2021/96, dated 26 March 2021). Potential protocol amendments will be presented to the Research Ethics Committee. The findings of the present study will be presented at scientific conferences and the results published in peer-review publications. Weekly reports will be submitted to the risk assessment group and the risk management group against COVID-19 of the university to enable a timely public health action if necessary.

Repetitive saliva-based mass screening as a tool for controlling SARS-CoV-2 transmission in nursing homes.

Nursing home (NH) residents and staff have been severely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study was to examine the use of weekly saliva RT-qPCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 detection among NH workers as a strategy to control disease transmission within NHs in Belgium. From 16 November to 27 December 2020, a voluntary and anonymous weekly screening was implemented in a cohort of 50,000 workers across 572 NHs in the Walloon region of Belgium to detect asymptomatic cases of SARS-CoV-2 via saliva RT-qPCR testing and using the Diagenode saliva sample collection device. Positive workers were isolated to avoid subsequent infections in residents and other staff. RT-qPCR testing was based on pooled saliva sampling techniques from three workers, followed by individual testing of each positive or inconclusive pool. The majority of NHs (85%) and 55% of their workers participated. Pooling did not affect sensitivity as it only induced a very decrease in sensitivity estimated as 0.33%. Significant decreases in the prevalence (34.4-13.4%) and incidence of NHs with either single (13.8-2%) or multiple positive workers (3.7-0%) were observed over time. In addition, deaths among NH residents and NH worker absences decreased significantly over time. Weekly saliva RT-qPCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 demonstrated large-scale feasibility and efficacy in disrupting the chain of transmission. Implementation of this testing strategy in NHs could also be extended to other settings with the aim to control viral transmission for maintaining essential activities.

How should importance of naturalness be measured? A comparison of different scales.

Naturalness is an important heuristic method for examining consumers' evaluation and choice of food. In recent years, several scales have been proposed to measure the importance of naturalness for consumers. These scales vary in the number of items they contain and in the aspects they cover. The aim of our research was to examine how strongly the different scales are correlated, whether they differ in their predictive validity, and which scale should be recommended for the assessment of the importance of naturalness for consumers in future studies. Because existing scales incorporated items that are also used for the validation of the scale and many scales only consider a restricted number of different aspect on naturalness, we constructed a new naturalness scale that covers the production process and the ingredients. To compare the scales, we conducted an online survey (n = 632) with participants from Germany. The results showed that the various scales are highly intercorrelated. All scales were good predictors of the purchase frequency of organic foods, perceived willingness to eat in-vitro meat and perceived naturalness of in-vitro meat but our new scale was not particularly better than the others. We conclude that the scales can be used interchangeably and we recommend using the shortest, and therefore, most efficient measure for the importance of naturalness. The results illuminate a general problem, new scales have been introduced without demonstrating that they measure something different than the existing scales.