ABSTRACT
The optimal time to initiate research on emergencies is before they occur. However, timely initiation of high quality research may launch during an emergency under the right conditions. These include an appropriate context, clarity in scientific aims, preexisting resources, strong operational and research structures that are facile, and good governance. Here, Nebraskan rapid research efforts early during the 2020 coronavirus disease pandemic, while participating in the firstuse of U.S. federal quarantine in 50 years, are described from these aspects, as the global experience with this severe emerging infection grew apace. The experience has lessons in purpose, structure, function, and performance of research in any emergency, when facing any threat.
ABSTRACT
Mass gatherings have been implicated in higher rates of transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and many sporting events have been restricted or canceled to limit disease spread. Based on current CDC COVID-19 mitigation recommendations related to events and gatherings, Major League Baseball (MLB) developed new health and safety protocols before the July 24 start of the 2020 season. In addition, MLB made the decision that games would be played without spectators. Before a three-game series between teams A and B, the Philadelphia Department of Public Health was notified of a team A player with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19;the player was isolated as recommended. During the series and the week after, laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 was diagnosed among 19 additional team A players and staff members and one team B staff member. Throughout their potentially infectious periods, some asymptomatic team A players and coaches, who subsequently received positive SARS-CoV-2 test results, engaged in on-field play with teams B and C. No on-field team B or team C players or staff members subsequently received a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19. Certain MLB health and safety protocols, which include frequent diagnostic testing for rapid case identification, isolation of persons with positive test results, quarantine for close contacts, mask wearing, and social distancing, might have limited COVID-19 transmission between teams.
ABSTRACT
We evaluated the performance of the BioFire® Respiratory Panel 2.1 (RP2.1) in the detection of SARS CoV-2 in comparison against three other SARS CoV-2 EUA assays. In these studies, the RP2.1 panel had 98 % positive percent agreement (48/49) and 100 % negative percent agreement (49/49). Since 30 % of nasopharyngeal swab specimens have a SARS CoV-2 Ct >30 and thus detection of virus in low titers is clinically relevant, a sample with a high titer was diluted and each 10 fold dilution was tested in triplicate and compared against 6 other EUA approved SARS CoV-2 assays. These data suggested that the BioFire® RP2.1 panel, along with four other SARS CoV-2 assays (Roche cobas, Cepheid Xpert Xpress, BioFire® Defense COVID19, and NECoV19), consistently detected viral RNA at the 10-7 dilution. Overall, these studies suggest that the BioFire® RP2.1 assay can be used to detect acute cases of SARS CoV2 in addition to patients with low viral titer later in disease presentation.