Urban Classification, Not COVID-19 Community Rates, Was Associated With Modes of Learning in US K-12 Schools?

OBJECTIVES: To identify factors associated with the decision to provide in-person, hybrid, and remote learning in kindergarten through 12th grade school districts during the 2020-2021 school year. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study evaluating school district mode of learning and community coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) incidence and percentage positivity rates at 3 time points during the pandemic: (1) September 15, 2020 (the beginning of the school year, before Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidance); (2) November 15, 2020 (midsemester after the release of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidance and an increase of COVID-19 cases); and (3) January 15, 2021 (start of the second semester and peak COVID-19 rates). Five states were included in the analysis: Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, and Wisconsin. The primary outcome was mode of learning in elementary, middle, and high schools during 3 time points. The measures included community COVID-19 incidence and percentage positivity rates, school and student demographics, and county size classification of school location. RESULTS: No relationship between mode of learning and community COVID-19 rates was observed. County urban classification of school location was associated with mode of learning with school districts in nonmetropolitan and small metropolitan counties more likely to be in-person. CONCLUSIONS: Community COVID-19 rates did not appear to influence the decision of when to provide in-person learning. Further understanding of factors driving the decisions to bring children back into the classroom are needed. Standardizing policies on how schools apply national guidance to local decision-making may decrease disparities in emergent crises.

Building a National Framework to Pair Scientists and Schools During a Global Pandemic.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic forced the suspension of in-person education in schools serving students in kindergarten through 12th grade (K-12) across the United States. As time passed, teachers, students, and parents struggled with remote education. With limited guidance at the federal level, physicians and school leaders across the country collaborated to develop local solutions for schools. This article describes the lessons learned from the development of 4 academic-community partnerships and collaboration among these partnerships to provide national leadership on managing COVID-19 mitigation in the K-12 environment. In addition, we describe a pathway forward for using academic-community partnerships to improve child health.

In-Home COVID-19 Testing for Children With Medical Complexity: Feasibility and Association With School Attendance and Safety Perceptions.

The REstarting Safe Education and Testing program for children with medical complexity was implemented in May 2021 at the University of Wisconsin to evaluate the feasibility of in-home rapid antigen COVID-19 testing among neurocognitively affected children. Parents or guardians administered BinaxNOW rapid antigen self-tests twice weekly for three months and changed to symptom and exposure testing or continued surveillance. In-home testing was feasible: nearly all (92.5%) expected tests were conducted. Symptomatic testing identified seven of nine COVID-19 cases. School safety perceptions were higher among those opting for symptom testing. Clinical Trials.gov identifier: NCT04895085. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(S9):S878-S882. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.306971).

COVID-19 Vaccination Intentions for Children With Medical Complexity.

OBJECTIVES: The chronic conditions and functional limitations experienced by children with medical complexity (CMC) place them at disproportionate risk for COVID-19 transmission and poor outcomes. To promote robust vaccination uptake, specific constructs associated with vaccine hesitancy must be understood. Our objective was to describe demographic, clinical, and vaccine perception variables associated with CMC parents' intention to vaccinate their child against COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey (June-August 2021) for primary caregivers of CMC between ages 5 to 17 at an academic medical center in the Midwest. Multivariable logistic regression examined associations between vaccination intent and selected covariates. RESULTS: Among 1330 families, 65.8% indicated vaccination intent. In multivariable models, demographics had minimal associations with vaccination intent; however, parents of younger children (<12 years) had significantly lower adjusted odds of vaccination intent (adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.26 [0.17-0.3]) compared to parents of older children (≥12 years). CMC with higher severity of illness, ie, those with ≥1 hospitalization in the previous year (versus none) or >1 complex chronic condition (vs 1), had higher adjusted odds of vaccination intent (1.82 [1.14-2.92] and 1.77 [1.16-2.71], respectively). Vaccine perceptions associated with vaccine intention included "My doctor told me to get my child a COVID-19 vaccine" (2.82 [1.74-4.55]); and "I'm concerned about my child's side effects from the vaccine" (0.18 [0.12-0.26]). CONCLUSIONS: One-third of CMC families expressed vaccine hesitation; however, constructs strongly associated with vaccination intent are potentially modifiable. Pediatrician endorsement of COVID-19 vaccination and careful counseling on side effects might be promising strategies to encourage uptake.

Priorities for Safer In-Person School for Children With Medical Complexity During COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: To establish statewide consensus priorities for safer in-person school for children with medical complexity (CMC) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic using a rapid, replicable, and transparent priority-setting method. METHODS: We adapted the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative Method, which allows for crowdsourcing ideas from diverse stakeholders and engages technical experts in prioritizing these ideas using predefined scoring criteria. Crowdsourcing surveys solicited ideas from CMC families, school staff, clinicians and administrators through statewide distribution groups/listservs using the prompt: "It is safe for children with complex health issues and those around them (families, teachers, classmates, etc.) to go to school in-person during the COVID-19 pandemic if/when…" Ideas were aggregated and synthesized into a unique list of candidate priorities. Thirty-four experts then scored each candidate priority against 5 criteria (equity, impact on COVID-19, practicality, sustainability, and cost) using a 5-point Likert scale. Scores were weighted and predefined thresholds applied to identify consensus priorities. RESULTS: From May to June 2021, 460 stakeholders contributed 1166 ideas resulting in 87 candidate priorities. After applying weighted expert scores, 10 consensus CMC-specific priorities exceeded predetermined thresholds. These priorities centered on integrating COVID-19 safety and respiratory action planning into individualized education plans, educating school communities about CMC's unique COVID-19 risks, using medical equipment safely, maintaining curricular flexibility, ensuring masking and vaccination, assigning seats during transportation, and availability of testing and medical staff at school. CONCLUSIONS: Priorities for CMC, identified by statewide stakeholders, complement and extend existing recommendations. These priorities can guide implementation efforts to support safer in-person education for CMC.

Secondary Transmission of COVID-19 in K-12 Schools: Findings From 2 States.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the impact of distancing practices on secondary transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and the degree of sports-associated secondary transmission across a large diverse cohort of schools during spring 2021. METHODS: Participating districts in North Carolina and Wisconsin and North Carolina charter schools offering in-person instruction between March 15, 2021 and June 25, 2021 reported on distancing policies, community- and school-acquired infections, quarantines, and infections associated with school-sponsored sports. We calculated the ratio of school-acquired to community-acquired infection, secondary attack rates, and the proportion of secondary transmission events associated with sports. To estimate the effect of distancing and bus practices on student secondary transmission, we used a quasi-Poisson regression model with the number of primary student cases as the denominator. RESULTS: During the study period, 1 102 039 students and staff attended in-person instruction in 100 North Carolina school districts, 13 Wisconsin school districts, and 14 North Carolina charter schools. Students and staff had 7865 primary infections, 386 secondary infections, and 48 313 quarantines. For every 20 community-acquired infections, there was 1 within-school transmission event. Secondary transmissions associated with school sports composed 46% of secondary transmission events in middle and high schools. Relaxed distancing practices (<3 ft, 3 ft) and increased children per bus seat were not associated with increased relative risk of secondary transmission. CONCLUSIONS: With universal masking, in-person education was associated with low rates of secondary transmission, even with less stringent distancing and bus practices. Given the rates of sports-associated secondary transmission, additional mitigation may be warranted.

Mitigating the Impacts of COVID-19 on Global Child Health: a Call to Action.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the cause of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), continues to affect individuals, communities, and health systems worldwide. Here, we highlight how COVID-19 threatens to jeopardize the tremendous gains made over the last few decades on improving children's health globally. RECENT FINDINGS: In contrast to adults, children with COVID-19 are less likely to develop severe disease requiring hospitalization or die as a direct result of infection. However, the pandemic will likely have other important health impacts disproportionately affecting vulnerable children globally. Possible effects include worsening of poverty and food insecurity; disruption of already strained routine child health services; damage to already imperiled healthcare workforces; a wave of mental health challenges; interruption of education; and increased risks of violence, abuse, exploitation, and neglect. These challenges notwithstanding, the response to COVID-19 may also provide opportunities, such as for health system strengthening, that could improve child health after the pandemic. SUMMARY: The negative impacts of COVID-19 on global child health may be substantial. However, these are not foregone conclusions and much can be done to mitigate the worst outcomes. Child health providers should advocate for an equitable response to COVID-19 that prioritizes the health of vulnerable children and furthers the gains made in global child health.