Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
1.
BMJ Open ; 13(6): e071228, 2023 06 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20244540

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine the SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence among school workers within the Greater Vancouver area, British Columbia, Canada, after the first Omicron wave. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study by online questionnaire, with blood serology testing. SETTING: Three main school districts (Vancouver, Richmond and Delta) in the Vancouver metropolitan area. PARTICIPANTS: Active school staff enrolled from January to April 2022, with serology testing between 27 January and 8 April 2022. Seroprevalence estimates were compared with data obtained from Canadian blood donors weighted over the same sampling period, age, sex and postal code distribution. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antibody testing results adjusted for test sensitivity and specificity, and regional variation across school districts using Bayesian models. RESULTS: Of 1850 school staff enrolled, 65.8% (1214/1845) reported close contact with a COVID-19 case outside the household. Of those close contacts, 51.5% (625/1214) were a student and 54.9% (666/1214) were a coworker. Cumulative incidence of COVID-19 positive testing by self-reported nucleic acid or rapid antigen testing since the beginning of the pandemic was 15.8% (291/1845). In a representative sample of 1620 school staff who completed serology testing (87.6%), the adjusted seroprevalence was 26.5% (95% CrI 23.9% to 29.3%), compared with 32.4% (95% CrI 30.6% to 34.5%) among 7164 blood donors. CONCLUSION: Despite frequent COVID-19 exposures reported, SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence among school staff in this setting remained no greater than the community reference group. Results are consistent with the premise that many infections were acquired outside the school setting, even with Omicron.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , British Columbia , Cross-Sectional Studies , Bayes Theorem , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Antibodies, Viral
2.
BMJ Open ; 12(4): e057846, 2022 04 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1962255

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Few studies reported COVID-19 cases in schools during the 2020/21 academic year in a setting of uninterrupted in-person schooling. The main objective was to determine the SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence among school staff in Vancouver public schools. DESIGN: Cumulative incident COVID-19 cases among all students and school staff based on public health data, with an embedded cross-sectional serosurvey among a school staff sample that was compared to period, age, sex and geographical location-weighted data from blood donors. SETTING: Vancouver School District (British Columbia, Canada) from kindergarten to grade 12. PARTICIPANTS: Active school staff enrolled from 3 February to 23 April 2021 with serology testing from 10 February to 15 May 2021. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence among school staff, based on spike (S)-based (unvaccinated staff) or N-based serology testing (vaccinated staff). RESULTS: Public health data showed the cumulative incidence of COVID-19 among students attending in-person was 9.8 per 1000 students (n=47 280), and 13 per 1000 among school staff (n=7071). In a representative sample of 1689 school staff, 78.2% had classroom responsibilities, and spent a median of 17.6 hours in class per week (IQR: 5.0-25 hours). Although 21.5% (363/1686) of surveyed staff self-reported close contact with a COVID-19 case outside of their household (16.5% contacts were school-based), 5 cases likely acquired the infection at school based on viral testing. Sensitivity/Specificity-adjusted seroprevalence in 1556/1689 staff (92.1%) was 2.3% (95% CI: 1.6% to 3.2%), comparable to a sex, age, date and residency area-weighted seroprevalence of 2.6% (95% CI: 2.2% to 3.1%) among 5417 blood donors. CONCLUSION: Seroprevalence among staff was comparable to a reference group of blood donors from the same community. These data show that in-person schooling could be safely maintained during the 2020/21 school year with mitigation measures, in a large school district in Vancouver, Canada.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , British Columbia/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Seroepidemiologic Studies
3.
Microbiol Spectr ; 10(4): e0062222, 2022 08 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1938012

ABSTRACT

We prospectively studied SARS-CoV-2 transmission at schools in an era of variants of concern, offering all close contacts serial viral asymptomatic testing up to 14 days. From the 69 primary cases detected in schools, 392 close contacts were identified and offered asymptomatic testing. A total of 229 (58%) were close school contacts, and of these, 3 tested positive (1.3%), 2 of which were detected through asymptomatic testing. This is in contrast to the 117 household contacts, where 43 (37%) went on to become secondary cases. Routine asymptomatic testing of close contacts should be examined in the context of local testing rates, preventive measures, programmatic costs, and health impacts of asymptomatic transmission. IMPORTANCE There is concern that schools may be a setting where asymptomatic infections might result in significant "silent" transmission of SARS-CoV-2, particularly after the emergence of more transmissible variants of concern. After the programmatic implementation of a strategy of asymptomatic testing of close COVID-19 contacts as part of contact tracing in the school setting, the majority of the secondary cases were still found to have occurred in home or social contacts. However, for the 6.2% of secondary cases that occurred in close school contacts, the majority were detected through asymptomatic testing. The potential added yield of this approach needs to be considered within the overall setting, including consideration of the local epidemiology, ongoing goals of case and contact management, additional costs, logistical challenges for families, and possible health impacts of asymptomatic transmission.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , British Columbia/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Contact Tracing , Humans
4.
Epidemics ; 39: 100559, 2022 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1778118

ABSTRACT

Following the emergence of COVID-19 at the end of 2019, several mathematical models have been developed to study the transmission dynamics of this disease. Many of these models assume homogeneous mixing in the underlying population. However, contact rates and mixing patterns can vary dramatically among individuals depending on their age and activity level. Variation in contact rates among age groups and over time can significantly impact how well a model captures observed trends. To properly model the age-dependent dynamics of COVID-19 and understand the impacts of interventions, it is essential to consider heterogeneity arising from contact rates and mixing patterns. We developed an age-structured model that incorporates time-varying contact rates and population mixing computed from the ongoing BC Mix COVID-19 survey to study transmission dynamics of COVID-19 in British Columbia (BC), Canada. Using a Bayesian inference framework, we fit four versions of our model to weekly reported cases of COVID-19 in BC, with each version allowing different assumptions of contact rates. We show that in addition to incorporating age-specific contact rates and mixing patterns, time-dependent (weekly) contact rates are needed to adequately capture the observed transmission dynamics of COVID-19. Our approach provides a framework for explicitly including empirical contact rates in a transmission model, which removes the need to otherwise model the impact of many non-pharmaceutical interventions. Further, this approach allows projection of future cases based on clear assumptions of age-specific contact rates, as opposed to less tractable assumptions regarding transmission rates.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Bayes Theorem , British Columbia/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Models, Theoretical
5.
R Soc Open Sci ; 9(1): 211710, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1626952

ABSTRACT

Estimates of the basic reproduction number (R 0) for COVID-19 are particularly variable in the context of transmission within locations such as long-term healthcare (LTHC) facilities. We sought to characterize the heterogeneity of R 0 across known outbreaks within these facilities. We used a unique comprehensive dataset of all outbreaks that occurred within LTHC facilities in British Columbia, Canada as of 21 September 2020. We estimated R 0 in 18 LTHC outbreaks with a novel Bayesian hierarchical dynamic model of susceptible, exposed, infected and recovered individuals, incorporating heterogeneity of R 0 between facilities. We further compared these estimates to those obtained with standard methods that use the exponential growth rate and maximum likelihood. The total size of outbreaks varied dramatically, with range of attack rates 2%-86%. The Bayesian analysis provided an overall estimate of R 0 = 2.51 (90% credible interval 0.47-9.0), with individual facility estimates ranging between 0.56 and 9.17. Uncertainty in these estimates was more constrained than standard methods, particularly for smaller outbreaks informed by the population-level model. We further estimated that intervention led to 61% (52%-69%) of all potential cases being averted within the LTHC facilities, or 75% (68%-79%) when using a model with multi-level intervention effect. Understanding of transmission risks and impact of intervention are essential in planning during the ongoing global pandemic, particularly in high-risk environments such as LTHC facilities.

6.
Epidemics ; 35: 100453, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1220842

ABSTRACT

Following successful non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI) aiming to control COVID-19, many jurisdictions reopened their economies and borders. As little immunity had developed in most populations, re-establishing higher contact carried substantial risks, and therefore many locations began to see resurgence in COVID-19 cases. We present a Bayesian method to estimate the leeway to reopen, or alternatively the strength of change required to re-establish COVID-19 control, in a range of jurisdictions experiencing different COVID-19 epidemics. We estimated the timing and strength of initial control measures such as widespread distancing and compared the leeway jurisdictions had to reopen immediately after NPI measures to later estimates of leeway. Finally, we quantified risks associated with reopening and the likely burden of new cases due to introductions from other jurisdictions. We found widely varying leeway to reopen. After initial NPI measures took effect, some jurisdictions had substantial leeway (e.g., Japan, New Zealand, Germany) with > 0.99 probability that contact rates were below 80% of the threshold for epidemic growth. Others had little leeway (e.g., the United Kingdom, Washington State) and some had none (e.g., Sweden, California). For most such regions, increases in contact rate of 1.5-2 fold would have had high (> 0.7) probability of exceeding past peak sizes. Most jurisdictions experienced June-August trajectories consistent with our projections of contact rate increases of 1-2-fold. Under such relaxation scenarios for some regions, we projected up to ∼100 additional cases if just one case were imported per week over six weeks, even between jurisdictions with comparable COVID-19 risk. We provide an R package covidseir to enable jurisdictions to estimate leeway and forecast cases under different future contact patterns. Estimates of leeway can establish a quantitative basis for decisions about reopening. We recommend a cautious approach to reopening economies and borders, coupled with strong monitoring for changes in transmission.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Bayes Theorem , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Communicable Disease Control , Forecasting , Humans , Risk , SARS-CoV-2
7.
Vaccine ; 39(15): 2020-2023, 2021 04 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1121268

ABSTRACT

IMPORTANCE: An effective vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 will reduce morbidity and mortality and allow substantial relaxation of physical distancing policies. However, the ability of a vaccine to prevent infection or disease depends critically on protecting older individuals, who are at highest risk of severe disease. OBJECTIVE: We quantitatively estimated the relative benefits of COVID-19 vaccines, in terms of preventing infection and death, with a particular focus on effectiveness in elderly people. DESIGN: We applied compartmental mathematical modelling to determine the relative effects of vaccines that block infection and onward transmission, and those that prevent severe disease. We assumed that vaccines showing high efficacy in adults would be deployed, and examined the effects of lower vaccine efficacy among the elderly population. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Our mathematical model was calibrated to simulate the course of an epidemic among the entire population of British Columbia, Canada. Within our model, the population was structured by age and levels of contact. MAIN OUTCOME(S) AND MEASURE(S): We assessed the effectiveness of possible vaccines in terms of the predicted number of infections within the entire population, and deaths among people aged 65 years and over. RESULTS: In order to reduce the overall rate of infections in the population, high rates of deployment to all age groups will be critical. However, to substantially reduce mortality among people aged 65 years and over, a vaccine must directly protect a high proportion of people in that group. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Effective vaccines deployed to a large fraction of the population are projected to substantially reduce infection in an otherwise susceptible population. However, even if transmission were blocked highly effectively by vaccination of children and younger adults, overall mortality would not be substantially reduced unless the vaccine is also directly protective in elderly people. We strongly recommend: (i) the inclusion of people aged 65 years and over in future trials of COVID-19 vaccine candidates; (ii) careful monitoring of vaccine efficacy in older age groups following vaccination.


Subject(s)
Age Factors , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Aged , British Columbia , Humans , Pandemics
8.
PLoS Comput Biol ; 16(12): e1008274, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1004402

ABSTRACT

Extensive non-pharmaceutical and physical distancing measures are currently the primary interventions against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) worldwide. It is therefore urgent to estimate the impact such measures are having. We introduce a Bayesian epidemiological model in which a proportion of individuals are willing and able to participate in distancing, with the timing of distancing measures informed by survey data on attitudes to distancing and COVID-19. We fit our model to reported COVID-19 cases in British Columbia (BC), Canada, and five other jurisdictions, using an observation model that accounts for both underestimation and the delay between symptom onset and reporting. We estimated the impact that physical distancing (social distancing) has had on the contact rate and examined the projected impact of relaxing distancing measures. We found that, as of April 11 2020, distancing had a strong impact in BC, consistent with declines in reported cases and in hospitalization and intensive care unit numbers; individuals practising physical distancing experienced approximately 0.22 (0.11-0.34 90% CI [credible interval]) of their normal contact rate. The threshold above which prevalence was expected to grow was 0.55. We define the "contact ratio" to be the ratio of the estimated contact rate to the threshold rate at which cases are expected to grow; we estimated this contact ratio to be 0.40 (0.19-0.60) in BC. We developed an R package 'covidseir' to make our model available, and used it to quantify the impact of distancing in five additional jurisdictions. As of May 7, 2020, we estimated that New Zealand was well below its threshold value (contact ratio of 0.22 [0.11-0.34]), New York (0.60 [0.43-0.74]), Washington (0.84 [0.79-0.90]) and Florida (0.86 [0.76-0.96]) were progressively closer to theirs yet still below, but California (1.15 [1.07-1.23]) was above its threshold overall, with cases still rising. Accordingly, we found that BC, New Zealand, and New York may have had more room to relax distancing measures than the other jurisdictions, though this would need to be done cautiously and with total case volumes in mind. Our projections indicate that intermittent distancing measures-if sufficiently strong and robustly followed-could control COVID-19 transmission. This approach provides a useful tool for jurisdictions to monitor and assess current levels of distancing relative to their threshold, which will continue to be essential through subsequent waves of this pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Models, Biological , Physical Distancing , Bayes Theorem , British Columbia/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Humans
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL