Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
J Travel Med ; 30(4)2023 Jun 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2189337

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Early in the pandemic, cruise travel exacerbated the global spread of SARS-CoV-2. We report epidemiologic and molecular findings from an investigation of a cluster of travellers with confirmed COVID-19 returning to the USA from Nile River cruises in Egypt. METHODS: State health departments reported data on real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction-confirmed COVID-19 cases with a history of Nile River cruise travel during February-March 2020 to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Demographic and epidemiologic data were collected through routine surveillance channels. Sequences were obtained either from state health departments or from the Global Initiative on Sharing Avian Flu Data (GISAID). We conducted descriptive analyses of epidemiologic data and explored phylogenetic relationships between sequences. RESULTS: We identified 149 Nile River cruise travellers with confirmed COVID-19 who returned to 67 different US counties in 27 states: among those with complete data, 4.7% (6/128) died and 28.1% (38/135) were hospitalized. These individuals travelled on 20 different Nile River cruise voyages (12 unique vessels). Fifteen community transmission events were identified in four states, with 73.3% (11/15) of these occurring in Wisconsin (as the result of a more detailed contact investigation in that state). Phylogenetic analyses supported the hypothesis that travellers were most likely infected in Egypt, with most sequences in Nextstrain clade 20A 93% (87/94). We observed genetic clustering by Nile River cruise voyage and vessel. CONCLUSIONS: Nile River cruise travellers with COVID-19 introduced SARS-CoV-2 over a very large geographic range, facilitating transmission across the USA early in the pandemic. Travellers who participate in cruises, even on small river vessels as investigated in this study, are at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure. Therefore, history of river cruise travel should be considered in contact tracing and outbreak investigations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , United States/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Phylogeny , Cross-Sectional Studies , Rivers
2.
Perspectives in Education ; 40(3):163-180, 2022.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-2081214

ABSTRACT

This article explores the evolving trajectory of the Teaching Practicum (TP) models within a selected South African teacher education institution (TEI) to accommodate the localised challenges of shifting from face-to-face support of professional learning towards online modes of delivery during Covid-19 times. The study draws on the ethnographic tradition of celebrating participants' lived experiences within the feld of teacher education by capturing how a teaching practicum coordinator attempted to deal with complex and multiple challenges to enact and sustain a re-imagined TP programme. Keywords: teaching practicum models, under-served teacher education institution, transformation, conversational ethnodrama analysis and representation. 1. The ethnodrama created represents the teachers' responses to the national curriculum reform initiatives led largely by a governmental-directed professional development strategy methodologically, analytically and representationally The approach in ethnographic research extends research possibilities to develop theoretical insights from the fieldwork (data-driven analysis).

3.
Trop Dis Travel Med Vaccines ; 8(1): 8, 2022 Mar 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1745415

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Many health departments and private enterprises began offering SARS-CoV-2 testing to travelers at US airports in 2020. Persons with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results who have planned upcoming travel may be subject to US federal public health travel restrictions. We assessed availability of testing for SARS-CoV-2 at major US airports. We then describe the management of cases and close contacts at Denver International Airport's testing site. METHODS: We selected 100 US airports. Online surveys were conducted during November-December 2020 and assessed availability of testing for air travelers, flight crew, and airport employees. Respondents included health department (HD) staff or airport directors. We analyzed testing data and management practices for persons who tested positive and their close contacts at one airport (Denver International) from 12/21/2020 to 3/31/2021. RESULTS: Among the 100 selected airports, we received information on 77 airports; 38 (49%) had a testing site and several more planned to offer one (N = 7; 9%). Most sites began testing in the fall of 2020. The most frequently offered tests were RT-PCR or other NAAT tests (N = 28). Denver International Airport offered voluntary SARS-CoV-2 testing. Fifty-four people had positive results among 5724 tests conducted from 12/21/2020 to 3/31/2021 for a total positivity of < 1%. Of these, 15 were travelers with imminent flights. The Denver HD issued an order requiring the testing site to immediately report cases and notify airlines to cancel upcoming flight itineraries for infected travelers and their traveling close contacts, minimizing the use of federal travel restrictions. CONCLUSIONS: As of December 2020, nearly half of surveyed US airports had SARS-CoV-2 testing sites. Such large-scale adoption of airport testing for a communicable disease is unprecedented and presents new challenges for travelers, airlines, airports, and public health authorities. This assessment was completed before the US and other countries began enforcing entry testing requirements; testing at airports will likely increase as travel demand returns and test requirements for travel evolve. Lessons from Denver demonstrate how HDs can play a key role in engaging airport testing sites to ensure people who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 immediately before travel do not travel on commercial aircraft.

4.
Clin Infect Dis ; 74(3): 490-497, 2022 02 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1684539

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Cruise travel contributed to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission when there were relatively few cases in the United States. By 14 March 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued a No Sail Order suspending US cruise operations; the last US passenger ship docked on 16 April. METHODS: We analyzed SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks on cruises in US waters or carrying US citizens and used regression models to compare voyage characteristics. We used compartmental models to simulate the potential impact of 4 interventions (screening for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms; viral testing on 2 days and isolation of positive persons; reduction of passengers by 40%, crew by 20%, and reducing port visits to 1) for 7-day and 14-day voyages. RESULTS: During 19 January to 16 April 2020, 89 voyages on 70 ships had known SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks; 16 ships had recurrent outbreaks. There were 1669 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections and 29 confirmed deaths. Longer voyages were associated with more cases (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 1.10, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03-1.17, P < .003). Mathematical models showed that 7-day voyages had about 70% fewer cases than 14-day voyages. On 7-day voyages, the most effective interventions were reducing the number of individuals onboard (43.3% reduction in total infections) and testing passengers and crew (42% reduction in total infections). All four interventions reduced transmission by 80.1%, but no single intervention or combination eliminated transmission. Results were similar for 14-day voyages. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks on cruises were common during January-April 2020. Despite all interventions modeled, cruise travel still poses a significant SARS-CoV-2 transmission risk.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Disease Outbreaks , Humans , Public Health , SARS-CoV-2 , Ships , Travel , United States/epidemiology
5.
PLoS One ; 16(9): e0254287, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1398927

ABSTRACT

Dog importation data from 2018-2020 were evaluated to ascertain whether the dog importation patterns in the United States changed during the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically with regard to denial of entry. Dog denial of entry reports from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2020, stored within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Quarantine Activity Reporting System (QARS), were reviewed. Basic descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data. Reason for denial, country of origin, and month of importation were all examined to determine which countries of origin resulted in the largest number of denials, and whether there was a seasonal change in importations during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020), compared to previous years (2018 and 2019). During 2020, CDC denied entry to 458 dogs. This represents a 52% increase in dogs denied entry compared to the averages in 2018 and 2019. Dogs were primarily denied entry for falsified rabies vaccination certificates (56%). Three countries exported 74% of all dogs denied entry into the United States, suggesting that targeted interventions may be needed for certain countries. Increased attempts to import inadequately vaccinated dogs from countries with canine rabies in 2020 may have been due to the increased demand for domestic pets during the COVID-19 pandemic. Educational messaging should highlight the risk of rabies and the importance of making informed pet purchases from foreign entities to protect pet owners, their families, and the public.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Dog Diseases/prevention & control , Rabies/epidemiology , Rabies/prevention & control , Animals , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Dog Diseases/immunology , Dogs , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Quarantine , Rabies/immunology , Rabies Vaccines/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , United States/epidemiology , Vaccination/methods
6.
BMC Med ; 19(1): 94, 2021 04 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1388761

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Balancing the control of SARS-CoV-2 transmission with the resumption of travel is a global priority. Current recommendations include mitigation measures before, during, and after travel. Pre- and post-travel strategies including symptom monitoring, antigen or nucleic acid amplification testing, and quarantine can be combined in multiple ways considering different trade-offs in feasibility, adherence, effectiveness, cost, and adverse consequences. METHODS: We used a mathematical model to analyze the expected effectiveness of symptom monitoring, testing, and quarantine under different estimates of the infectious period, test-positivity relative to time of infection, and test sensitivity to reduce the risk of transmission from infected travelers during and after travel. RESULTS: If infection occurs 0-7 days prior to travel, immediate isolation following symptom onset prior to or during travel reduces risk of transmission while traveling by 30-35%. Pre-departure testing can further reduce risk, with testing closer to the time of travel being optimal even if test sensitivity is lower than an earlier test. For example, testing on the day of departure can reduce risk while traveling by 44-72%. For transmission risk after travel with infection time up to 7 days prior to arrival at the destination, isolation based on symptom monitoring reduced introduction risk at the destination by 42-56%. A 14-day quarantine after arrival, without symptom monitoring or testing, can reduce post-travel risk by 96-100% on its own. However, a shorter quarantine of 7 days combined with symptom monitoring and a test on day 5-6 after arrival is also effective (97--100%) at reducing introduction risk and is less burdensome, which may improve adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Quarantine is an effective measure to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission risk from travelers and can be enhanced by the addition of symptom monitoring and testing. Optimal test timing depends on the effectiveness of quarantine: with low adherence or no quarantine, optimal test timing is close to the time of arrival; with effective quarantine, testing a few days later optimizes sensitivity to detect those infected immediately before or while traveling. These measures can complement recommendations such as social distancing, using masks, and hand hygiene, to further reduce risk during and after travel.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Quarantine/methods , Travel-Related Illness , COVID-19/diagnosis , Disease Transmission, Infectious/prevention & control , Humans , Models, Statistical , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification
7.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 27(3): 710-718, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1054979

ABSTRACT

Public health travel restrictions (PHTR) are crucial measures during communicable disease outbreaks to prevent transmission during commercial airline travel and mitigate cross-border importation and spread. We evaluated PHTR implementation for US citizens on the Diamond Princess during its coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak in Japan in February 2020 to explore how PHTR reduced importation of COVID-19 to the United States during the early phase of disease containment. Using PHTR required substantial collaboration among the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, other US government agencies, the cruise line, and public health authorities in Japan. Original US PHTR removal criteria were modified to reflect international testing protocols and enable removal of PHTR for persons who recovered from illness. The impact of PHTR on epidemic trajectory depends on the risk for transmission during travel and geographic spread of disease. Lessons learned from the Diamond Princess outbreak provide critical information for future PHTR use.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/transmission , Communicable Diseases, Imported/prevention & control , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Quarantine , Travel , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Government , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Risk Factors , Ships , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
8.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 69(45): 1681-1685, 2020 Nov 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-922983

ABSTRACT

In January 2020, with support from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), CDC instituted an enhanced entry risk assessment and management (screening) program for air passengers arriving from certain countries with widespread, sustained transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The objectives of the screening program were to reduce the importation of COVID-19 cases into the United States and slow subsequent spread within states. Screening aimed to identify travelers with COVID-19-like illness or who had a known exposure to a person with COVID-19 and separate them from others. Screening also aimed to inform all screened travelers about self-monitoring and other recommendations to prevent disease spread and obtain their contact information to share with public health authorities in destination states. CDC delegated postarrival management of crew members to airline occupational health programs by issuing joint guidance with the Federal Aviation Administration.* During January 17-September 13, 2020, a total of 766,044 travelers were screened, 298 (0.04%) of whom met criteria for public health assessment; 35 (0.005%) were tested for SARS-CoV-2, and nine (0.001%) had a positive test result. CDC shared contact information with states for approximately 68% of screened travelers because of data collection challenges and some states' opting out of receiving data. The low case detection rate of this resource-intensive program highlighted the need for fundamental change in the U.S. border health strategy. Because SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission can occur in the absence of symptoms and because the symptoms of COVID-19 are nonspecific, symptom-based screening programs are ineffective for case detection. Since the screening program ended on September 14, 2020, efforts to reduce COVID-19 importation have focused on enhancing communications with travelers to promote recommended preventive measures, reinforcing mechanisms to refer overtly ill travelers to CDC, and enhancing public health response capacity at ports of entry. More efficient collection of contact information for international air passengers before arrival and real-time transfer of data to U.S. health departments would facilitate timely postarrival public health management, including contact tracing, when indicated. Incorporating health attestations, predeparture and postarrival testing, and a period of limited movement after higher-risk travel, might reduce risk for transmission during travel and translocation of SARS-CoV-2 between geographic areas and help guide more individualized postarrival recommendations.


Subject(s)
Airports , Communicable Diseases, Imported/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Mass Screening , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , COVID-19 , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Communicable Diseases, Imported/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Humans , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Risk Assessment , Travel , United States/epidemiology
9.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 26(9): 1998-2004, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-634848

ABSTRACT

To determine prevalence of, seroprevalence of, and potential exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among a cohort of evacuees returning to the United States from Wuhan, China, in January 2020, we conducted a cross-sectional study of quarantined evacuees from 1 repatriation flight. Overall, 193 of 195 evacuees completed exposure surveys and submitted upper respiratory or serum specimens or both at arrival in the United States. Nearly all evacuees had taken preventive measures to limit potential exposure while in Wuhan, and none had detectable SARS-CoV-2 in upper respiratory tract specimens, suggesting the absence of asymptomatic respiratory shedding among this group at the time of testing. Evidence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 1 evacuee, who reported experiencing no symptoms or high-risk exposures in the previous 2 months. These findings demonstrated that this group of evacuees posed a low risk of introducing SARS-CoV-2 to the United States.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Quarantine/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Child , Child, Preschool , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Prevalence , SARS-CoV-2 , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Travel , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
10.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 69(12): 347-352, 2020 03 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-18476

ABSTRACT

An estimated 30 million passengers are transported on 272 cruise ships worldwide each year* (1). Cruise ships bring diverse populations into proximity for many days, facilitating transmission of respiratory illness (2). SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease (COVID-19) was first identified in Wuhan, China, in December 2019 and has since spread worldwide to at least 187 countries and territories. Widespread COVID-19 transmission on cruise ships has been reported as well (3). Passengers on certain cruise ship voyages might be aged ≥65 years, which places them at greater risk for severe consequences of SARS-CoV-2 infection (4). During February-March 2020, COVID-19 outbreaks associated with three cruise ship voyages have caused more than 800 laboratory-confirmed cases among passengers and crew, including 10 deaths. Transmission occurred across multiple voyages of several ships. This report describes public health responses to COVID-19 outbreaks on these ships. COVID-19 on cruise ships poses a risk for rapid spread of disease, causing outbreaks in a vulnerable population, and aggressive efforts are required to contain spread. All persons should defer all cruise travel worldwide during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Global Health/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Public Health Practice , Ships , Travel-Related Illness , Adult , Aged , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL