Pooling in a Pod: A Strategy for COVID-19 Testing to Facilitate a Safe Return to School.

The COVID-19 pandemic prompted widespread closures of primary and secondary schools. Routine testing of asymptomatic students and staff members, as part of a comprehensive mitigation program, can help schools open safely. "Pooling in a pod" is a public health surveillance strategy whereby testing cohorts (pods) are based on social relationships and physical proximity. Pooled testing provides a single laboratory test result for the entire pod, rather than a separate result for each person in the pod. During the 2020-2021 school year, an independent preschool-grade 12 school in Washington, DC, used pooling in a pod for weekly on-site point-of-care testing of all staff members and students. Staff members and older students self-collected anterior nares samples, and trained staff members collected samples from younger students. Overall, 12 885 samples were tested in 1737 pools for 863 students and 264 staff members from November 30, 2020, through April 30, 2021. The average pool size was 7.4 people. The average time from sample collection to pool test result was 40 minutes. The direct testing cost per person per week was $24.24, including swabs. During the study period, 4 surveillance test pools received positive test results for COVID-19. A post-launch survey found most parents (90.3%), students (93.4%), and staff members (98.8%) were willing to participate in pooled testing with confirmatory tests for pool members who received a positive test result. The proportion of students in remote learning decreased by 62.2% for students in grades 6-12 (P < .001) and by 92.4% for students in preschool to grade 5 after program initiation (P < .001). Pooling in a pod is a feasible, cost-effective surveillance strategy that may facilitate safe, sustainable, in-person schooling during a pandemic.

The Psychological Well-Being of Medical Versus Dental GME Residents During the COVID 19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Study.

PURPOSE: Trainees are facing isolation and burnout, due to the fear of contracting and transmitting novel coronavirus-19 (COVID-19). There has been a reduction in clinical activities of residents. The purpose of this paper is to measure and compare the psychological well-being of dental versus medical residents during the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study whereby trainees of a hospital in New York City were sent a questionnaire. Participants were from the dental and medical departments. Psychological measures of depression and post traumatic stress disorder were assessed utilizing the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and The Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) questionnaire. Other variables compared were age, gender, smoking status, living situation and comorbidities. Data analysis utilized chi-squared (X2) and t-tests. Bivariate correlation and linear regression analyses were also utilized. RESULTS: The survey was sent to 19 dental (Dental) and 171 medical (MD) residents. There were 66 participants. The response rate was 63.16 and 35.09% for the Dental and MD residents, respectively. The mean age for the Dental and MD residents, respectively, was 29.62 ± 2.09 and 34.82 ± 9.32 (P = .014). Eighty-one percent of the Dental respondents were male and 33.3% of the MD respondents were male (P < .001). The mean PHQ-9 score was 18.29 ± 2.88 vs 7.24 ± 7.41 for Dental and MD residents, respectively (P < .001). A higher score represents increased severity of depression. The Dental residents scored 61.9 ± 3.90 on the IES-R vs 30.36 ± 24.67 (P < .001). A higher score indicates a greater frequency of intrusive thoughts and avoidance. Forty-two percent of Dental and 13.3% of MD residents tested positive; 25% of Dental and 28.9% of MD residents self-reported symptoms for COVID-19. Being positive or symptomatic resulted in statistically significant higher IES-R and PHQ-9 scores. CONCLUSIONS: Dental residents and being positive or symptomatic for COVID-19 resulted in higher PHQ-9 and IES-R scores. Being aware of the impact of COVID-19 is an important step in providing intervention.

The Psychological Impact of COVID-19 on Hospital Trainees in a New York City Hospital

Purpose On January 7, 2020, China reported a group of cases of pneumonia caused by the novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). This novel virus spread rapidly to other countries. As of August 2020, there are close to 6 million diagnosed cases in the United States and 460,000 diagnosed cases in New York State. The purpose of this article is to examine the psychological impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on trainees in a New York City hospital. To achieve this goal, trainees of the Brooklyn Hospital Center were sent a questionnaire via e-mail. The questionnaire asked about the residents’ demographic characteristics, health information, and self-report questions regarding anxiety, depression, and PTSD (posttraumatic stress disorder). Methods Participants were trainees at the Brooklyn Hospital Center from the OMFS (oral and maxillofacial surgery), general dentistry, and other medical departments. A 3-part survey including demographic information, a PHQ-9 (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), and an impact of events score revised (IES-R) questionnaire was obtained. Descriptive analysis assessed participant demographic characteristics and mean scores on questionnaires. Additionally, independent samples t-test was used to determine statistical difference in mean scores on PHQ-9 and IES-R questionnaires between dental (OMFS and general dentistry) and medical specialties. Bivariate correlation was used to assess the relationship between scores on the PHQ-9 and IES-R questionnaires. Level of significance was accepted at .05. Results The mean score on the PHQ-9 questionnaire was significantly higher for dental compared to medical specialties (18.9 vs 7.24, P < .001). Likewise, for the IES-R questionnaire, the dental group scored significantly higher than the medical group (61.9 vs 30.36, P < .001). Furthermore, depression severity was much worse for the dental group: 7 (33.3% vs 8.9% medical, P < .001) were classified as severe and 12 (57.1% vs 8.9% medical, P = .013) were moderately severe. Conclusion Currently, trainees are facing enormous isolation, burnout, and fear of contracting and transmitting COVID-19.1 Trainees are also facing concerns about inadequate training (clinical and didactic). Previous literature has demonstrated that one's physical location and holding an intermediate title during a pandemic were associated with severe depression, distress, and anxiety.2-4 The participants of our study were trainees from the oral and maxillofacial surgery, general dentistry, and other medical specialty departments. The trainees from the dental department scored significantly higher on the IES-R and PHQ-9 questionnaires. Many participants had graduated from dental school less than a year ago. Additionally, this study was conducted in New York, which was the epicenter to the pandemic for a period of time. Being aware of the impact of the coronavirus on health care workers is an important step in providing intervention. This intervention may prevent the anxiety, depression, and PTSD seen after previous pandemics.