High secondary attack rate and persistence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in household transmission study participants, Finland 2020-2021.

Background: Household transmission studies offer the opportunity to assess both secondary attack rate (SAR) and persistence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies over time. Methods: In Spring 2020, we invited confirmed COVID-19 cases and their household members to four visits, where we collected nasopharyngeal and serum samples over 28 days after index case onset. We calculated SAR based on the presence of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies (NAb) and assessed the persistence of NAb and IgG antibodies (Ab) against SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein and nucleoprotein. Results: SAR was 45% (39/87), including 35 symptomatic secondary cases. During the initial 28-day follow-up, 62% (80/129) of participants developed NAb. Of those that seroconverted, 90% (63/70), 85% (63/74), and 78% (45/58) still had NAb to early B-lineage SARS-CoV-2 3, 6, and 12 months after the onset of the index case. Anti-spike IgG Ab persisted in 100% (69/69), 97% (72/74), and 93% (55/59) of seroconverted participants after 3, 6, and 12 months, while anti-nucleoprotein IgG Ab levels waned faster, persisting in 99% (68/69), 78% (58/74), and 55% (39/71) of participants, respectively. Conclusion: Following detection of a COVID-19 case in a household, other members had a high risk of becoming infected. NAb to early B-lineage SARS-CoV-2 persisted for at least a year in most cases.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Gargle, Spit, and Sputum Specimens.

The gold standard for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection diagnosis is reverse transcription (RT)-PCR from a nasopharyngeal swab specimen (NPS). Its collection involves close contact between patients and health care workers, requiring a significant amount of workforce and putting them at risk of infection. We evaluated self-collection of alternative specimens and compared their sensitivity and cycle threshold (CT) values to those of NPS. We visited acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outpatients to collect concomitant NPS and gargle specimens and had patients self-collect gargle and either sputum or spit specimens the next morning. We included 40 patients and collected 40 concomitant NPS and gargle specimens, as well as 40 gargle, 22 spit, and 16 sputum specimens the next day (2 patients could not produce sputum). All specimens were as sensitive as NPS. Gargle specimens had a sensitivity of 0.97 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92 to 1.00), whether collected concomitantly with NPS or the next morning. Next-morning spit and sputum specimens showed sensitivities of 1.00 (95% CI, 1.00 to 1.00) and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.87 to 1.00]), respectively. The gargle specimens had significantly higher mean CT values of 29.89 (standard deviation [SD], 4.63; P < 0.001) and 29.25 (SD, 3.99; P < 0.001) when collected concomitantly and the next morning, respectively, compared to NPS (22.07 [SD, 4.63]). CT values obtained with spit (23.51 [SD, 4.57]; P = 0.11) and sputum (25.82 [SD, 9.21]; P = 0.28) specimens were close to those of NPS. All alternative specimen collection methods were as sensitive as NPS, but spit collection appeared more promising, with a low CT value and ease of collection. Our findings warrant further investigation. IMPORTANCE Control of the COVID-19 pandemic relies heavily on a test-trace-isolate strategy. The most commonly used specimen for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection is a nasopharyngeal swab. However, this method is quite uncomfortable for the patient, requires specific equipment (nose swabs and containers), and requires close proximity to health care workers, putting them at risk of infection. Developing alternative sampling strategies could decrease the burden for health care workers, help overcome potential shortages of equipment, and improve acceptability of testing by reducing patient discomfort.

Learning about COVID-19-related stigma, quarantine and isolation experiences in Finland.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has intensely changed the everyday lives of people worldwide. This study explores the forms and outcomes of coronavirus and COVID-19-related social stigma and the experiences of people who were home quarantined or isolated in Finland during the spring 2020. The findings of this study can be used to improve support for those quarantined or isolated and to develop strategies to reduce the stigma associated with coronavirus and COVID-19. METHODS: The study is based on qualitative one-to-one interviews with households with at least two members and at least one PCR confirmed COVID-19 case. Recruitment took place via website or SMS messages sent to PCR confirmed cases in the capital area of Helsinki. Sampling was based on maximum variation to acquire different types of respondents. The framework of health stigma was used to develop question guides and analyze stigma. Quarantine and isolation experiences were explored through open-ended questions. The analysis was based on thematic analysis. RESULTS: The study included 64 participants from 24 households. Perceived stigma among respondents was driven by fear and blame for infection, and it manifested in various ways leading to a reluctance to disclose their coronavirus status to others. Self-stigma developed from conflicting information and advice about coronavirus and COVID-19 led to difficulties interacting with others outside of the house and reluctance to meet people after quarantine and isolation. Quarantine and isolation experiences included uncertainty, health concerns, and boredom. Communication with others in similar situations was perceived vital, whereas discussions with family members about worries and fears related to coronavirus and COVID-19 was not preferred. CONCLUSIONS: This study shed light on the lives of those quarantined or isolated at home and provided a set of operational recommendations to minimize coronavirus and COVID-19-associated stigma and to reduce challenges faced by those in quarantine or isolation.