Covid-19 vaccine roll-out in England: A qualitative evaluation.

BACKGROUND: The UK was the first country to launch a national pandemic COVID-19 vaccination programme, which was implemented swiftly despite significant vaccine supply constraints. The delivery strategy used a combination of mass vaccination sites operated by NHS secondary care providers and local sites led by Primary Care Networks, and local pharmacies. Despite nation-wide rollout, persistent gaps in coverage continued to affect particular populations, including ethnic minority and marginalised social groups. AIM: The study examined sub-national immunisation commissioners and providers' perspectives on how the COVID-19 vaccine programme was operationalised, and how delivery strategies impacted inequalities in access to vaccination services and uptake. The study aimed to inform national programme implementation, sustainability and future pandemic preparedness. METHODS: Qualitative research was conducted in eight local NHS areas in 4 regions of England. Semi-structured interviews were performed with 82 sub-national NHS and public health vaccine providers and commissioners. RESULTS: England's COVID-19 vaccination programme was described as top down, centralised and highly political. The programme gradually morphed from a predominantly mass vaccination strategy into more locally driven and tailored approaches able to respond more effectively to inequalities in uptake. Over time more flexibility was introduced, as providers adapted services by "working around" the national systems for vaccine supply and appointment booking. The constant change faced by providers and commissioners was mitigated by high staff motivation and resilience, local collaboration and pragmatism. Opportunities for efficient implementation were missed because priority was given to achieving national performance targets at the expense of a more flexible sub-national tailored delivery. CONCLUSION: Pandemic vaccination delivery models need to be adapted for underserved and hesitant groups, working in collaboration with local actors. Learnings from the initial COVID-19 vaccine roll-out in England and elsewhere is important to inform future pandemic responses, in tailoring strategies to local communities, and improve large-scale vaccination programmes.

Adapting SARS-CoV-2 vaccination delivery in England to population needs: a thematic analysis of providers and commissioner's perceptions.

BACKGROUND: A national SARS-CoV-2 vaccination programme was implemented in England from 8th December 2020, adopting a series of local level service delivery models to maximise rollout. The evidence base informing service design programme at inception was limited. We examined the real-world implementation of the programme through an assessment of sub-national providers' and commissioners' perspectives on the service delivery models used, to strengthen evidence on the acceptability, effectiveness and efficiency of the service delivery approaches used for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in England or elsewhere. METHODS: Qualitative, cross-sectional analysis based on semi-structured interviews conducted with 87 stakeholders working in SARS-CoV-2 vaccination delivery across four regions in England. Localities were selected according to geography and population socio-economic status. Participants were purposively sampled from health service providers, commissioners and other relevant bodies. Interviews were conducted between February and October 2021, and transcripts were thematically analysed using inductive and deductive approaches. RESULTS: Various service delivery models were implemented over the course of the programme, beginning with hospital hubs and mass vaccination sites, before expanding to incorporate primary care-led services, mobile and other outreach services. Each had advantages and drawbacks but primary care-led models, and to some extent pharmacies, were perceived to offer a better combination of efficiency and community reach for equitable delivery. Common factors for success included availability of a motivated workforce, predictability in vaccine supply chains and strong community engagement. However, interviewees noted a lack of coordination between service providers in the vaccination programme, linked to differing financial incentives and fragmentated information systems, among other factors. CONCLUSION: A range of delivery models are needed to enable vaccine rollout at pace and scale, and to mitigate effects on routine care provision. However, primary care-led services offer a tried-and-trusted framework for vaccine delivery at scale and pace and should be central to planning for future pandemic responses. Mass vaccination sites can offer delivery at scale but may exacerbate inequalities in vaccination coverage and are unlikely to offer value for money. Policymakers in England should prioritise measures to improve collaboration between service providers, including better alignment of IT systems.

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 against SARS-CoV-2 household transmission: a prospective cohort study in England

Background: The ability of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines to protect against infection and onward transmission determines whether immunisation can control global circulation. We estimated the effectiveness of Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2) and Oxford AstraZeneca adenovirus vector vaccine (ChAdOx1) vaccines against acquisition and transmission of the Alpha and Delta variants in a prospective household study in England. Methods: : Households were recruited based on adult purported index cases testing positive after reverse transcription-quantitative (RT-q)PCR testing of oral-nasal swabs. Purported index cases and their household contacts took oral-nasal swabs on days 1, 3 and 7 after enrolment and a subset of the PCR-positive swabs underwent genomic sequencing conducted on a subset. We used Bayesian logistic regression to infer vaccine effectiveness against acquisition and transmission, adjusted for age, vaccination history and variant. Results: : Between 2 February 2021 and 10 September 2021, 213 index cases and 312 contacts were followed up. After excluding households lacking genomic proximity (N=2) or with unlikely serial intervals (N=16), 195 households with 278 contacts remained, of whom 113 (41%) became PCR positive. Delta lineages had 1.53 times the risk (95% Credible Interval: 1.04 – 2.20) of transmission than Alpha;contacts older than 18 years old were 1.48 (1.20 – 1.91) and 1.02 (0.93 – 1.16) times more likely to acquire an Alpha or Delta infection than children. Effectiveness of two doses of BNT162b2 against transmission of Delta was 36% (-1%, 66%) and 49% (18%, 73%) for ChAdOx1, similar to their effectiveness for Alpha. Protection against infection with Alpha was higher than for Delta, 69% (9%, 95%) vs. 18% (-11%, 59%), respectively, for BNT162b2 and 24% (-41%, 72%) vs. 9% (-15%, 42%), respectively, for ChAdOx1. Conclusions: : BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 reduce transmission of the Delta variant from breakthrough infections in the household setting, although their protection against infection within this setting is low.

A systematic review of communication interventions for countering vaccine misinformation.

BACKGROUND: Misinformation and disinformation around vaccines has grown in recent years, exacerbated during the Covid-19 pandemic. Effective strategies for countering vaccine misinformation and disinformation are crucial for tackling vaccine hesitancy. We conducted a systematic review to identify and describe communications-based strategies used to prevent and ameliorate the effect of mis- and dis-information on people's attitudes and behaviours surrounding vaccination (objective 1) and examined their effectiveness (objective 2). METHODS: We searched CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo and MedRxiv in March 2021. The search strategy was built around three themes(1) communications and media; (2) misinformation; and (3) vaccines. For trials addressing objective 2, risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias in randomized trials tool (RoB2). RESULTS: Of 2000 identified records, 34 eligible studies addressed objective 1, 29 of which also addressed objective 2 (25 RCTs and 4 before-and-after studies). Nine 'intervention approaches' were identified; most focused on content of the intervention or message (debunking/correctional, informational, use of disease images or other 'scare tactics', use of humour, message intensity, inclusion of misinformation warnings, and communicating weight of evidence), while two focused on delivery of the intervention or message (timing and source). Some strategies, such as scare tactics, appear to be ineffective and may increase misinformation endorsement. Communicating with certainty, rather than acknowledging uncertainty around vaccine efficacy or risks, was also found to backfire. Promising approaches include communicating the weight-of-evidence and scientific consensus around vaccines and related myths, using humour and incorporating warnings about encountering misinformation. Trying to debunk misinformation, informational approaches, and communicating uncertainty had mixed results. CONCLUSION: This review identifies some promising communication strategies for addressing vaccine misinformation. Interventions should be further evaluated by measuring effects on vaccine uptake, rather than distal outcomes such as knowledge and attitudes, in quasi-experimental and real-life contexts.

Tailoring immunisation programmes in a time of SARS-CoV-2: What can be learnt by comparing the findings of childhood and COVID-19 vaccine evaluation studies in an underserved population?

Objectives: A WHO Tailoring Immunization Programmes (TIP) evaluation was conducted in 2014-16 to investigate suboptimal childhood vaccination coverage in the north London Orthodox Jewish community. In 2021-22 a qualitative evaluation of the COVID-19 vaccine programme (CVP) was conducted in the same setting. This paper examines whether the issues identified by the TIP affected the CVP and what differences emerged between these two vaccine programme evaluations. Study design: Qualitative study. Methods: The CVP evaluation involved conducting 28 semi-structured interviews with public health professionals, Orthodox Jewish welfare and religious representatives, and household members in February-May 2021. The key considerations arising from the thematic analysis of this data was then compared systematically with the overarching findings from the TIP study. Results: The issues identified in the TIP study diverged and converged with results from the CVP evaluation: i) participants did not express concerns of unmet CVP information needs; ii) the social value of COVID-19 vaccines was influenced by international travel requirements; iii) in contrast to commissioning constraints noted to have limited flexible delivery of childhood immunisations in the TIP evaluation, the CVP was characterised by a flexible commissioning and delivery model. This model was facilitated by significant government investment as part of the COVID-19 pandemic response. Conclusions: The comparative analysis indicates that flexible vaccine commissioning and fit for purpose public health investment can influence how documented knowledge is translated into action. Implications are raised for how routine vaccination services are equipped to serve the needs of minority populations with historically suboptimal coverage levels.

Transmission dynamics of COVID-19 in household and community settings in the United Kingdom, January to March 2020.

BackgroundHouseholds appear to be the highest risk setting for COVID-19 transmission. Large household transmission studies in the early stages of the pandemic in Asia reported secondary attack rates ranging from 5 to 30%.AimWe aimed to investigate the transmission dynamics of COVID-19 in household and community settings in the UK.MethodsA prospective case-ascertained study design based on the World Health Organization FFX protocol was undertaken in the UK following the detection of the first case in late January 2020. Household contacts of cases were followed using enhanced surveillance forms to establish whether they developed symptoms of COVID-19, became confirmed cases and their outcomes. We estimated household secondary attack rates (SAR), serial intervals and individual and household basic reproduction numbers. The incubation period was estimated using known point source exposures that resulted in secondary cases.ResultsWe included 233 households with two or more people with 472 contacts. The overall household SAR was 37% (95% CI: 31-43%) with a mean serial interval of 4.67 days, an R0 of 1.85 and a household reproduction number of 2.33. SAR were lower in larger households and highest when the primary case was younger than 18 years. We estimated a mean incubation period of around 4.5 days.ConclusionsRates of COVID-19 household transmission were high in the UK for ages above and under 18 years, emphasising the need for preventative measures in this setting. This study highlights the importance of the FFX protocol in providing early insights on transmission dynamics.

Localising vaccination services: Qualitative insights on public health and minority group collaborations to co-deliver coronavirus vaccines.

Ethnic and religious minorities have been disproportionately affected by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and are less likely to accept coronavirus vaccinations. Orthodox (Haredi) Jewish neighbourhoods in England experienced high incidences of SARS-CoV-2 in 2020-21 and measles outbreaks (2018-19) due to suboptimal childhood vaccination coverage. The objective of our study was to explore how the coronavirus vaccination programme (CVP) was co-delivered between public health services and an Orthodox Jewish health organisation. Methods included 28 semi-structured interviews conducted virtually with public health professionals, community welfare and religious representatives, and household members. We examined CVP delivery from the perspectives of those involved in organising services and vaccine beneficiaries. Interview data was contextualised within debates of the CVP in Orthodox (Haredi) Jewish print and social media. Thematic analysis generated five considerations: i) Prior immunisation-related collaboration with public health services carved a role for Jewish health organisations to host and promote coronavirus vaccination sessions, distribute appointments, and administer vaccines ii) Public health services maintained responsibility for training, logistics, and maintaining vaccination records; iii) The localised approach to service delivery promoted vaccination in a minority with historically suboptimal levels of coverage; iv) Co-delivery promoted trust in the CVP, though a minority of participants maintained concerns around safety; v) Provision of CVP information and stakeholders' response to situated (context-specific) challenges and concerns. Drawing on this example of CVP co-delivery, we propose that a localised approach to delivering immunisation programmes could address service provision gaps in ways that involve trusted community organisations. Localisation of vaccination services can include communication or implementation strategies, but both approaches involve consideration of investment, engagement and coordination, which are not cost-neutral. Localising vaccination services in collaboration with welfare groups raises opportunities for the on-going CVP and other immunisation programmes, and constitutes an opportunity for ethnic and religious minorities to collaborate in safeguarding community health.

COVID-19 vaccination beliefs, attitudes, and behaviours among health and social care workers in the UK: A mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: The UK began delivering its COVID-19 vaccination programme on 8 December 2020, with health and social care workers (H&SCWs) given high priority for vaccination. Despite well-documented occupational exposure risks, however, there is evidence of lower uptake among some H&SCW groups. METHODS: We used a mixed-methods approach-involving an online cross-sectional survey and semi-structured interviews-to gain insight into COVID-19 vaccination beliefs, attitudes, and behaviours amongst H&SCWs in the UK by socio-demographic and employment variables. 1917 people were surveyed- 1656 healthcare workers (HCWs) and 261 social care workers (SCWs). Twenty participants were interviewed. FINDINGS: Workplace factors contributed to vaccination access and uptake. SCWs were more likely to not be offered COVID-19 vaccination than HCWs (OR:1.453, 95%CI: 1.244-1.696). SCWs specifically reported uncertainties around how to access COVID-19 vaccination. Participants who indicated stronger agreement with the statement 'I would recommend my organisation as a place to work' were more likely to have been offered COVID-19 vaccination (OR:1.285, 95%CI: 1.056-1.563). Those who agreed more strongly with the statement 'I feel/felt under pressure from my employer to get a COVID-19 vaccine' were more likely to have declined vaccination (OR:1.751, 95%CI: 1.271-2.413). Interviewees that experienced employer pressure to get vaccinated felt this exacerbated their vaccine concerns and increased distrust. In comparison to White British and White Irish participants, Black African and Mixed Black African participants were more likely to not be offered (OR:2.011, 95%CI: 1.026-3.943) and more likely to have declined COVID-19 vaccination (OR:5.550, 95%CI: 2.294-13.428). Reasons for declining vaccination among Black African participants included distrust in COVID-19 vaccination, healthcare providers, and policymakers. CONCLUSION: H&SCW employers are in a pivotal position to facilitate COVID-19 vaccination access, by ensuring staff are aware of how to get vaccinated and promoting a workplace environment in which vaccination decisions are informed and voluntary.

Antibody persistence and neutralising activity in primary school students and staff: Prospective active surveillance, June to December 2020, England.

BACKGROUND: Prospective, longitudinal SARS-CoV-2 sero-surveillance in schools across England was initiated after the first national lockdown, allowing comparison of child and adult antibody responses over time. METHODS: Prospective active serological surveillance in 46 primary schools in England tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies during June, July and December 2020. Samples were tested for nucleocapsid (N) and receptor binding domain (RBD) antibodies, to estimate antibody persistence at least 6 months after infection, and for the correlation of N, RBD and live virus neutralising activity. FINDINGS: In June 2020, 1,344 staff and 835 students were tested. Overall, 11.5% (95%CI: 9.4-13.9) and 11.3% (95%CI: 9.2-13.6; p = 0.88) of students had nucleoprotein and RBD antibodies, compared to 15.6% (95%CI: 13.7-17.6) and 15.3% (95%CI: 13.4-17.3; p = 0.83) of staff. Live virus neutralising activity was detected in 79.8% (n = 71/89) of nucleocapsid and 85.5% (71/83) of RBD antibody positive children. RBD antibodies correlated more strongly with neutralising antibodies (rs=0.7527; p<0.0001) than nucleocapsid antibodies (rs=0.3698; p<0.0001). A median of 24.4 weeks later, 58.2% (107/184) participants had nucleocapsid antibody seroreversion, compared to 20.9% (33/158) for RBD (p<0.001). Similar seroreversion rates were observed between staff and students for nucleocapsid (p = 0.26) and RBD-antibodies (p = 0.43). Nucleocapsid and RBD antibody quantitative results were significantly lower in staff compared to students (p = 0.028 and <0.0001 respectively) at baseline, but not at 24 weeks (p = 0.16 and p = 0.37, respectively). INTERPRETATION: The immune response in children following SARS-CoV-2 infection was robust and sustained (>6 months) but further work is required to understand the extent to which this protects against reinfection.

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the household setting: A prospective cohort study in children and adults in England.

OBJECTIVES: To measure secondary attack rates (SARs) in prospectively followed household contacts of paediatric and adult cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection in England. METHODS: Self-taken nasal swabs from household contacts of PCR confirmed cases of COVID-19  and blood samples  on day 35 were tested for evidence of infection with SARS-CoV-2 virus. RESULTS: The secondary attack rate (SAR) among 431 contacts of 172 symptomatic index cases  was 33% (95% confidence intervals [CI] 25-40) and was lower from primary cases without respiratory symptoms, 6% (CI 0-14) vs 37% (CI 29-45), p = 0.030. The SAR from index cases <11 years  was  25% (CI 12-38). SARs ranged from 16% (4-28) in contacts <11 years old to 36% (CI 28-45) in contacts aged 19-54 years (p = 0.119). The proportion infected who developed symptoms (78%) was similar by age (p = 0.44) though <19 year olds had fewer mean number of symptoms than adults (p = 0.001) and fewer reported loss of sense of taste or smell (p = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: There are high risks of  transmission of SARS-CoV-2 virus in the home, including those where infection is introduced by a child. The risk of children acquiring infection was lower than that in adults and fewer developed typical symptoms of Covid-19 infection.

SARS-CoV-2 infection, antibody positivity and seroconversion rates in staff and students following full reopening of secondary schools in England: A prospective cohort study, September-December 2020.

BACKGROUND: Older children have higher SARS-CoV-2 infection rates than younger children. We investigated SARS-CoV-2 infection, seroprevalence and seroconversion rates in staff and students following the full reopening of all secondary schools in England. METHODS: Public Health England (PHE) invited secondary schools in six regions (East and West London, Hertfordshire, Derbyshire, Manchester and Birmingham) to participate in SARS-CoV-2 surveillance during the 2020/21 academic year. Participants had nasal swabs for RT-PCR and blood samples for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at the beginning (September 2020) and end (December 2020) of the autumn term. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess independent risk factors for seropositivity and seroconversion. FINDINGS: Eighteen schools in six regions enrolled 2,209 participants, including 1,189 (53.8%) students and 1,020 (46.2%) staff. SARS-CoV-2 infection rates were not significantly different between students and staff in round one (5/948; [0.53%] vs. 2/876 [0.23%]; p = 0.46) or round two (10/948 [1.05%] vs. 7/886 [0.79%]; p = 0.63), and similar to national prevalence. None of four and 7/15 (47%) sequenced strains in rounds 1 and 2 were the highly transmissible SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.7 variant. In round 1, antibody seropositivity was higher in students than staff (114/893 [12.8%] vs. 79/861 [9.2%]; p = 0.016), but similar in round 2 (117/893 [13.1%] vs.117/872 [13.3%]; p = 0.85), comparable to local community seroprevalence. Between the two rounds, 8.7% (57/652) staff and 6.6% (36/549) students seroconverted (p = 0.16). INTERPRETATION: In secondary schools, SARS-CoV-2 infection, seropositivity and seroconversion rates were similar in staff and students, and comparable to local community rates. Ongoing surveillance will be important for monitoring the impact of new variants in educational settings.

Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of early COVID-19 cases, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the clinical presentation, course of disease and health-care seeking behaviour of the first few hundred cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. METHODS: We implemented the World Health Organization's First Few X cases and contacts investigation protocol for COVID-19. Trained public health professionals collected information on 381 virologically confirmed COVID-19 cases from 31 January 2020 to 9 April 2020. We actively followed up cases to identify exposure to infection, symptoms and outcomes. We also collected limited data on 752 symptomatic people testing negative for COVID-19, as a control group for analyses of the sensitivity, specificity and predictive value of symptoms. FINDINGS: Approximately half of the COVID-19 cases were imported (196 cases; 51.4%), of whom the majority had recent travel to Italy (140 cases; 71.4%). Of the 94 (24.7%) secondary cases, almost all reported close contact with a confirmed case (93 cases; 98.9%), many through household contact (37 cases; 39.8%). By age, a lower proportion of children had COVID-19. Most cases presented with cough, fever and fatigue. The sensitivity and specificity of symptoms varied by age, with nonlinear relationships with age. Although the proportion of COVID-19 cases with fever increased with age, for those with other respiratory infections the occurrence of fever decreased with age. The occurrence of shortness of breath also increased with age in a greater proportion of COVID-19 cases. CONCLUSION: The study has provided useful evidence for generating case definitions and has informed modelling studies of the likely burden of COVID-19.

COVID-19 outbreaks following full reopening of primary and secondary schools in England: Cross-sectional national surveillance, November 2020.

BACKGROUND: The full reopening of schools in September 2020 was associated with an increase in COVID-19 cases and outbreaks in educational settings across England. METHODS: Primary and secondary schools reporting an outbreak (≥2 laboratory-confirmed cases within 14 days) to Public Health England (PHE) between 31 August and 18 October 2020 were contacted in November 2020 to complete an online questionnaire. INTERPRETATION: There were 969 school outbreaks reported to PHE, comprising 2% (n = 450) of primary schools and 10% (n = 519) of secondary schools in England. Of the 369 geographically-representative schools contacted, 179 completed the questionnaire (100 primary schools, 79 secondary schools) and 2,314 cases were reported. Outbreaks were larger and across more year groups in secondary schools than in primary schools. Teaching staff were more likely to be the index case in primary (48/100, 48%) than secondary (25/79, 32%) school outbreaks (P = 0.027). When an outbreak occurred, attack rates were higher in staff (881/17,362; 5.07; 95%CI, 4.75-5.41) than students, especially primary school teaching staff (378/3852; 9.81%; 95%CI, 8.90-10.82%) compared to secondary school teaching staff (284/7146; 3.97%; 95%CI, 3.79-5.69%). Secondary school students (1105/91,919; 1.20%; 95%CI, 1.13-1.28%) had higher attack rates than primary school students (328/39,027; 0.84%; 95%CI, 0.75-0.94%). CONCLUSIONS: A higher proportion of secondary schools than primary schools reported a COVID-19 outbreak and experienced larger outbreaks across multiple school year groups. The higher attack rate among teaching staff during an outbreak, especially in primary schools, suggests that additional protective measures may be needed. FUNDING: PHE.

SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission in primary schools in England in June-December, 2020 (sKIDs): an active, prospective surveillance study.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission in educational settings. Public Health England initiated a study, COVID-19 Surveillance in School KIDs (sKIDs), in primary schools when they partially reopened from June 1, 2020, after the first national lockdown in England to estimate the incidence of symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, seroprevalence, and seroconversion in staff and students. METHODS: sKIDs, an active, prospective, surveillance study, included two groups: the weekly swabbing group and the blood sampling group. The swabbing group underwent weekly nasal swabs for at least 4 weeks after partial school reopening during the summer half-term (June to mid-July, 2020). The blood sampling group additionally underwent blood sampling for serum SARS-CoV-2 antibodies to measure previous infection at the beginning (June 1-19, 2020) and end (July 3-23, 2020) of the summer half-term, and, after full reopening in September, 2020, and at the end of the autumn term (Nov 23-Dec 18, 2020). We tested for predictors of SARS-CoV-2 antibody positivity using logistic regression. We calculated antibody seroconversion rates for participants who were seronegative in the first round and were tested in at least two rounds. FINDINGS: During the summer half-term, 11 966 participants (6727 students, 4628 staff, and 611 with unknown staff or student status) in 131 schools had 40 501 swabs taken. Weekly SARS-CoV-2 infection rates were 4·1 (one of 24 463; 95% CI 0·1-21·8) per 100 000 students and 12·5 (two of 16 038; 1·5-45·0) per 100 000 staff. At recruitment, in 45 schools, 91 (11·2%; 95% CI 7·9-15·1) of 816 students and 209 (15·1%; 11·9-18·9) of 1381 staff members were positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, similar to local community seroprevalence. Seropositivity was not associated with school attendance during lockdown (p=0·13 for students and p=0·20 for staff) or staff contact with students (p=0·37). At the end of the summer half-term, 603 (73·9%) of 816 students and 1015 (73·5%) of 1381 staff members were still participating in the surveillance, and five (four students, one staff member) seroconverted. By December, 2020, 55 (5·1%; 95% CI 3·8-6·5) of 1085 participants who were seronegative at recruitment (in June, 2020) had seroconverted, including 19 (5·6%; 3·4-8·6) of 340 students and 36 (4·8%; 3·4-6·6) of 745 staff members (p=0·60). INTERPRETATION: In England, SARS-CoV-2 infection rates were low in primary schools following their partial and full reopening in June and September, 2020. FUNDING: UK Department of Health and Social Care.