Implementation of SARS-CoV2 Screening in K-12 Schools Using In-School Pooled Molecular Testing and Deconvolution by Rapid Antigen Test.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) testing is one component of a multilayered mitigation strategy to enable safe in-person school attendance for the K-12 school population. However, costs, logistics, and uncertainty about effectiveness are potential barriers to implementation. We assessed early data from the Massachusetts K-12 public school pooled SARS-CoV2 testing program, which incorporates two novel design elements: in-school "pod pooling" for assembling pools of dry anterior nasal swabs from 5 to 10 individuals and positive pool deconvolution using the BinaxNOW antigen rapid diagnostic test (Ag RDT), to assess the operational and analytical feasibility of this approach. Over 3 months, 187,597 individual swabs were tested across 39,297 pools from 738 schools. The pool positivity rate was 0.8%; 98.2% of pools tested negative and 0.2% inconclusive, and 0.8% of pools submitted could not be tested. Of 310 positive pools, 70.6% had an N1 or N2 probe cycle threshold (CT) value of ≤30. In reflex testing (performed on specimens newly collected from members of the positive pool), 92.5% of fully deconvoluted pools with an N1 or N2 target CT of ≤30 identified a positive individual using the BinaxNOW test performed 1 to 3 days later. However, of 124 positive pools with full reflex testing data available for analysis, 32 (25.8%) of BinaxNOW pool deconvolution testing attempts did not identify a positive individual, requiring additional reflex testing. With sufficient staffing support and low pool positivity rates, pooled sample collection and reflex testing were feasible for schools. These early program findings confirm that screening for K-12 students and staff is achievable at scale with a scheme that incorporates in-school pooling, primary testing by reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR), and Ag RDT reflex/deconvolution testing.

COVID-19 exacerbates existing system factors that disadvantage defendants: Findings from a national survey of defense attorneys.

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 has impacted many facets of daily life and the legal system is no exception. Legal scholars have hypothesized that the effects of the pandemic may contribute to more coercive plea bargains (Cannon, 2020; Johnson, 2020). In this study, we explored defense attorneys' perceptions of whether and how the plea process has changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. HYPOTHESES: This study was exploratory, and we made no a priori hypotheses. METHOD: We surveyed 93 practicing United States defense attorneys about their perceptions of whether and how the pandemic has affected court procedures, plea-bargaining and prosecutorial behavior, and defendant decision-making. We conducted semistructured follow-up interviews with 13 defense attorneys to help contextualize the survey responses. RESULTS: The majority of defense attorneys (81%, n = 76) reported that the plea process had changed during the COVID-19 pandemic, and that they experienced difficulty contacting and communicating with their clients, especially those who were detained. Two thirds of defense attorneys (n = 42) who said the plea process had changed thought that prosecutors were offering more lenient deals. One third of defense attorneys with detained clients (n = 23) reported having had clients plead guilty due to COVID-19 related conditions who might not have under normal circumstances. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of defense attorneys reported that the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted their ability to access and advise clients, and they believed that leverage in plea negotiations had shifted further to individual prosecutors. At the same time, the attorneys reported that prosecutors were offering more lenient deals, painting a complex picture of the plea negotiation process during the pandemic. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).