Risk factors for infection with influenza A(H3N2) virus on a US university campus, October-November 2021.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of the specific dynamics of influenza introduction and spread in university settings is limited. METHODS: Persons with acute respiratory illness symptoms received influenza testing by molecular assay during October 6-November 23, 2022. Viral sequencing and phylogenetic analysis were conducted on nasal swab samples from case-patients. Case-control analysis of a voluntary survey of persons tested was used to identify factors associated with influenza; logistic regression was conducted to calculate odds ratios and 95% CIs. A subset of case-patients tested during the first month of the outbreak was interviewed to identify sources of introduction and early spread. RESULTS: Among 3268 persons tested, 788 (24.1%) tested positive for influenza; 744 (22.8%) were included in the survey analysis. All 380 sequenced specimens were influenza A (H3N2) virus clade 3C.2a1b.2a.2, suggesting rapid transmission. Influenza (OR [95% CI]) was associated with indoor congregate dining (1.43 [1.002-2.03]), attending large gatherings indoors (1.83 [1.26-2.66]) or outdoors (2.33 [1.64-3.31]), and varied by residence type (apartment with ≥1 roommate: 2.93 [1.21-7.11], residence hall room alone: 4.18 [1.31-13.31], or with roommate: 6.09 [2.46-15.06], or fraternity/sorority house: 15.13 [4.30-53.21], all compared with single-dwelling apartment). Odds of influenza were lower among persons who left campus for ≥1 day during the week before their influenza test (0.49 [0.32-0.75]). Almost all early cases reported attending large events. CONCLUSIONS: Congregate living and activity settings on university campuses can lead to rapid spread of influenza following introduction. Isolating following a positive influenza test or administering antiviral medications to exposed persons may help mitigate outbreaks.

Vaccine effectiveness against influenza A(H3N2)-associated hospitalized illness, United States, 2022.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with historically low influenza circulation during the 2020-2021 season, followed by increase in influenza circulation during the 2021-2022 US season. The 2a.2 subgroup of the influenza A(H3N2) 3C.2a1b subclade that predominated was antigenically different from the vaccine strain. METHODS: To understand the effectiveness of the 2021-2022 vaccine against hospitalized influenza illness, a multi-state sentinel surveillance network enrolled adults aged ≥18 years hospitalized with acute respiratory illness (ARI) and tested for influenza by a molecular assay. Using the test-negative design, vaccine effectiveness (VE) was measured by comparing the odds of current season influenza vaccination in influenza-positive case-patients and influenza-negative, SARS-CoV-2-negative controls, adjusting for confounders. A separate analysis was performed to illustrate bias introduced by including SARS-CoV-2 positive controls. RESULTS: A total of 2334 patients, including 295 influenza cases (47% vaccinated), 1175 influenza- and SARS-CoV-2 negative controls (53% vaccinated), and 864 influenza-negative and SARS-CoV-2 positive controls (49% vaccinated), were analyzed. Influenza VE was 26% (95%CI: -14 to 52%) among adults aged 18-64 years, -3% (95%CI: -54 to 31%) among adults aged ≥65 years, and 50% (95%CI: 15 to 71%) among adults 18-64 years without immunocompromising conditions. Estimated VE decreased with inclusion of SARS-CoV-2-positive controls. CONCLUSIONS: During a season where influenza A(H3N2) was antigenically different from the vaccine virus, vaccination was associated with a reduced risk of influenza hospitalization in younger immunocompetent adults. However, vaccination did not provide protection in adults ≥65 years of age. Improvements in vaccines, antivirals, and prevention strategies are warranted.

One Health Investigation of SARS-CoV-2 in People and Animals on Multiple Mink Farms in Utah.

From July−November 2020, mink (Neogale vison) on 12 Utah farms experienced an increase in mortality rates due to confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. We conducted epidemiologic investigations on six farms to identify the source of virus introduction, track cross-species transmission, and assess viral evolution. Interviews were conducted and specimens were collected from persons living or working on participating farms and from multiple animal species. Swabs and sera were tested by SARS-CoV-2 real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) and serological assays, respectively. Whole genome sequencing was attempted for specimens with cycle threshold values <30. Evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was detected by rRT-PCR or serology in ≥1 person, farmed mink, dog, and/or feral cat on each farm. Sequence analysis showed high similarity between mink and human sequences on corresponding farms. On farms sampled at multiple time points, mink tested rRT-PCR positive up to 16 weeks post-onset of increased mortality. Workers likely introduced SARS-CoV-2 to mink, and mink transmitted SARS-CoV-2 to other animal species; mink-to-human transmission was not identified. Our findings provide critical evidence to support interventions to prevent and manage SARS-CoV-2 in people and animals on mink farms and emphasizes the importance of a One Health approach to address emerging zoonoses.

Absolute and Relative Vaccine Effectiveness of Primary and Booster Series of COVID-19 Vaccines (mRNA and Adenovirus Vector) Against COVID-19 Hospitalizations in the United States, December 2021-April 2022.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies are increasingly reporting relative VE (rVE) comparing a primary series plus booster doses with a primary series only. Interpretation of rVE differs from traditional studies measuring absolute VE (aVE) of a vaccine regimen against an unvaccinated referent group. We estimated aVE and rVE against COVID-19 hospitalization in primary-series plus first-booster recipients of COVID-19 vaccines. Methods: Booster-eligible immunocompetent adults hospitalized at 21 medical centers in the United States during December 25, 2021-April 4, 2022 were included. In a test-negative design, logistic regression with case status as the outcome and completion of primary vaccine series or primary series plus 1 booster dose as the predictors, adjusted for potential confounders, were used to estimate aVE and rVE. Results: A total of 2060 patients were analyzed, including 1104 COVID-19 cases and 956 controls. Relative VE against COVID-19 hospitalization in boosted mRNA vaccine recipients versus primary series only was 66% (95% confidence interval [CI], 55%-74%); aVE was 81% (95% CI, 75%-86%) for boosted versus 46% (95% CI, 30%-58%) for primary. For boosted Janssen vaccine recipients versus primary series, rVE was 49% (95% CI, -9% to 76%); aVE was 62% (95% CI, 33%-79%) for boosted versus 36% (95% CI, -4% to 60%) for primary. Conclusions: Vaccine booster doses increased protection against COVID-19 hospitalization compared with a primary series. Comparing rVE measures across studies can lead to flawed interpretations of the added value of a new vaccination regimen, whereas difference in aVE, when available, may be a more useful metric.

Early Estimates of Bivalent mRNA Vaccine Effectiveness in Preventing COVID-19-Associated Hospitalization Among Immunocompetent Adults Aged ≥65 Years - IVY Network, 18 States, September 8-November 30, 2022.

Monovalent COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, designed against the ancestral strain of SARS-CoV-2, successfully reduced COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality in the United States and globally (1,2). However, vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19-associated hospitalization has declined over time, likely related to a combination of factors, including waning immunity and, with the emergence of the Omicron variant and its sublineages, immune evasion (3). To address these factors, on September 1, 2022, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended a bivalent COVID-19 mRNA booster (bivalent booster) dose, developed against the spike protein from ancestral SARS-CoV-2 and Omicron BA.4/BA.5 sublineages, for persons who had completed at least a primary COVID-19 vaccination series (with or without monovalent booster doses) ≥2 months earlier (4). Data on the effectiveness of a bivalent booster dose against COVID-19 hospitalization in the United States are lacking, including among older adults, who are at highest risk for severe COVID-19-associated illness. During September 8-November 30, 2022, the Investigating Respiratory Viruses in the Acutely Ill (IVY) Network§ assessed effectiveness of a bivalent booster dose received after ≥2 doses of monovalent mRNA vaccine against COVID-19-associated hospitalization among immunocompetent adults aged ≥65 years. When compared with unvaccinated persons, VE of a bivalent booster dose received ≥7 days before illness onset (median = 29 days) against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was 84%. Compared with persons who received ≥2 monovalent-only mRNA vaccine doses, relative VE of a bivalent booster dose was 73%. These early findings show that a bivalent booster dose provided strong protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalization in older adults and additional protection among persons with previous monovalent-only mRNA vaccination. All eligible persons, especially adults aged ≥65 years, should receive a bivalent booster dose to maximize protection against COVID-19 hospitalization this winter season. Additional strategies to prevent respiratory illness, such as masking in indoor public spaces, should also be considered, especially in areas where COVID-19 community levels are high (4,5).

Effectiveness of the Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson) Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Vaccine for Preventing COVID-19 Hospitalizations and Progression to High Disease Severity in the United States.

Background . Adults in the United States (US) began receiving the adenovirus vector coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine, Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson [Janssen]), in February 2021. We evaluated Ad26.COV2.S vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 hospitalization and high disease severity during the first 10 months of its use. Methods . In a multicenter case-control analysis of US adults (≥18 years) hospitalized 11 March to 15 December 2021, we estimated VE against susceptibility to COVID-19 hospitalization (VEs), comparing odds of prior vaccination with a single dose Ad26.COV2.S vaccine between hospitalized cases with COVID-19 and controls without COVID-19. Among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, we estimated VE against disease progression (VEp) to death or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), comparing odds of prior vaccination between patients with and without progression. Results . After excluding patients receiving mRNA vaccines, among 3979 COVID-19 case-patients (5% vaccinated with Ad26.COV2.S) and 2229 controls (13% vaccinated with Ad26.COV2.S), VEs of Ad26.COV2.S against COVID-19 hospitalization was 70% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 63-75%) overall, including 55% (29-72%) among immunocompromised patients, and 72% (64-77%) among immunocompetent patients, for whom VEs was similar at 14-90 days (73% [59-82%]), 91-180 days (71% [60-80%]), and 181-274 days (70% [54-81%]) postvaccination. Among hospitalized COVID-19 case-patients, VEp was 46% (18-65%) among immunocompetent patients. Conclusions . The Ad26.COV2.S COVID-19 vaccine reduced the risk of COVID-19 hospitalization by 72% among immunocompetent adults without waning through 6 months postvaccination. After hospitalization for COVID-19, vaccinated immunocompetent patients were less likely to require IMV or die compared to unvaccinated immunocompetent patients.

Ascertainment of vaccination status by self-report versus source documentation: Impact on measuring COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, self-reported COVID-19 vaccination might facilitate rapid evaluations of vaccine effectiveness (VE) when source documentation (e.g., immunization information systems [IIS]) is not readily available. We evaluated the concordance of COVID-19 vaccination status ascertained by self-report versus source documentation and its impact on VE estimates. METHODS: Hospitalized adults (≥18 years) admitted to 18 U.S. medical centers March-June 2021 were enrolled, including COVID-19 cases and SARS-CoV-2 negative controls. Patients were interviewed about COVID-19 vaccination. Abstractors simultaneously searched IIS, medical records, and other sources for vaccination information. To compare vaccination status by self-report and documentation, we estimated percent agreement and unweighted kappa with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We then calculated VE in preventing COVID-19 hospitalization of full vaccination (2 doses of mRNA product ≥14 days prior to illness onset) independently using data from self-report or source documentation. RESULTS: Of 2520 patients, 594 (24%) did not have self-reported vaccination information to assign vaccination group; these patients tended to be more severely ill. Among 1924 patients with both self-report and source documentation information, 95.0% (95% CI: 93.9-95.9%) agreement was observed, with a kappa of 0.9127 (95% CI: 0.9109-0.9145). VE was 86% (95% CI: 81-90%) by self-report data only and 85% (95% CI: 81-89%) by source documentation data only. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one-quarter of hospitalized patients could not provide self-report COVID-19 vaccination status. Among patients with self-report information, there was high concordance with source documented status. Self-report may be a reasonable source of COVID-19 vaccination information for timely VE assessment for public health action.

Associations between persistent symptoms after mild COVID-19 and long-term health status, quality of life, and psychological distress.

BACKGROUND: We sought to assess whether persistent COVID-19 symptoms beyond 6 months (Long-COVID) among patients with mild COVID-19 is associated with poorer health status, quality of life, and psychological distress. METHODS: This was a multicenter prospective cohort study that included adult outpatients with acute COVID-19 from eight sites during 2-week sampling periods from April 1 and July 28, 2020. Participants were contacted 6-11 months after their first positive SARS-CoV-2 to complete a survey, which collected information on the severity of eight COVID-19 symptoms using a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (not present) to 3 (severe) at 1 month before COVID-19 (pre-illness) and at follow-up; the difference for each was calculated as an attributable persistent symptom severity score. A total attributable persistent COVID-19 symptom burden score was calculated by summing the attributable persistent severity scores for all eight symptoms. Outcomes measured at long-term follow-up comprised overall health status (EuroQol visual analogue scale), quality of life (EQ-5D-5L), and psychological distress (Patient Health Questionnaire-4). The association between the total attributable persistent COVID-19 burden score and each outcome was analyzed using multivariable proportional odds regression. RESULTS: Of the 2092 outpatients with COVID-19, 436 (21%) responded to the survey. The median (IQR) attributable persistent COVID-19 symptom burden score was 2 (0, 4); higher scores were associated with lower overall health status (aOR 0.63; 95% CI: 0.57-0.69), lower quality of life (aOR: 0.65; 95%CI: 0.59-0.72), and higher psychological distress (aOR: 1.40; 95%CI, 1.28-1.54) after adjusting for age, race, ethnicity, education, and income. CONCLUSIONS: In participants with mild acute COVID-19, the burden of persistent symptoms was significantly associated with poorer long-term health status, poorer quality of life, and psychological distress.

Effectiveness of mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19 Hospitalization by Age and Chronic Medical Conditions Burden Among Immunocompetent US Adults, March-August 2021.

Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 hospitalization was evaluated among immunocompetent adults (≥18 years) during March-August 2021 using a case-control design. Among 1669 hospitalized COVID-19 cases (11% fully vaccinated) and 1950 RT-PCR-negative controls (54% fully vaccinated), VE was 96% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93%-98%) among patients with no chronic medical conditions and 83% (95% CI, 76%-88%) among patients with ≥ 3 categories of conditions. VE was similar between those aged 18-64 years versus ≥65 years (P > .05). VE against severe COVID-19 was very high among adults without chronic conditions and lessened with increasing comorbidity burden.

Influenza A(H3N2) Outbreak on a University Campus - Michigan, October-November 2021.

On November 10, 2021, the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS) was notified of a rapid increase in influenza A(H3N2) cases by the University Health Service (UHS) at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. Because this outbreak represented some of the first substantial influenza activity during the COVID-19 pandemic, CDC, in collaboration with the university, MDHHS, and local partners conducted an investigation to characterize and help control the outbreak. Beginning August 1, 2021, persons with COVID-19-like* or influenza-like illness evaluated at UHS received testing for SARS-CoV-2, influenza, and respiratory syncytial viruses by rapid multiplex molecular assay.† During October 6-November 19, a total of 745 laboratory-confirmed influenza cases were identified.§ Demographic information, genetic characterization of viruses, and influenza vaccination history data were reviewed. This activity was conducted consistent with applicable federal law and CDC policy.¶.

Coronavirus Disease Contact Tracing Outcomes and Cost, Salt Lake County, Utah, USA, March-May 2020.

Outcomes and costs of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) contact tracing are limited. During March-May 2020, we constructed transmission chains from 184 index cases and 1,499 contacts in Salt Lake County, Utah, USA, to assess outcomes and estimate staff time and salaries. We estimated 1,102 staff hours and $29,234 spent investigating index cases and contacts. Among contacts, 374 (25%) had COVID-19; secondary case detection rate was ≈31% among first-generation contacts, ≈16% among second- and third-generation contacts, and ≈12% among fourth-, fifth-, and sixth-generation contacts. At initial interview, 51% (187/370) of contacts were COVID-19-positive; 35% (98/277) became positive during 14-day quarantine. Median time from symptom onset to investigation was 7 days for index cases and 4 days for first-generation contacts. Contact tracing reduced the number of cases between contact generations and time between symptom onset and investigation but required substantial resources. Our findings can help jurisdictions allocate resources for contact tracing.

Household Transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The evidence base for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is nascent. We sought to characterize SARS-CoV-2 transmission within US households and estimate the household secondary infection rate (SIR) to inform strategies to reduce transmission. METHODS: We recruited patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and their household contacts in Utah and Wisconsin during 22 March 2020-25 April 2020. We interviewed patients and all household contacts to obtain demographics and medical histories. At the initial household visit, 14 days later, and when a household contact became newly symptomatic, we collected respiratory swabs from patients and household contacts for testing by SARS-CoV-2 real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) and sera for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies testing by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). We estimated SIR and odds ratios (ORs) to assess risk factors for secondary infection, defined by a positive rRT-PCR or ELISA test. RESULTS: Thirty-two (55%) of 58 households secondary infection among household contacts. The SIR was 29% (n = 55/188; 95% confidence interval [CI], 23%-36%) overall, 42% among children (aged <18 years) of the COVID-19 patient and 33% among spouses/partners. Household contacts to COVID-19 patients with immunocompromised conditions and household contacts who themselves had diabetes mellitus had increased odds of infection with ORs 15.9 (95% CI, 2.4-106.9) and 7.1 (95% CI: 1.2-42.5), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We found substantial evidence of secondary infections among household contacts. People with COVID-19, particularly those with immunocompromising conditions or those with household contacts with diabetes, should take care to promptly self-isolate to prevent household transmission.

One Health Investigation of SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Seropositivity among Pets in Households with Confirmed Human COVID-19 Cases-Utah and Wisconsin, 2020.

Approximately 67% of U.S. households have pets. Limited data are available on SARS-CoV-2 in pets. We assessed SARS-CoV-2 infection in pets during a COVID-19 household transmission investigation. Pets from households with ≥1 person with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 were eligible for inclusion from April-May 2020. We enrolled 37 dogs and 19 cats from 34 households. All oropharyngeal, nasal, and rectal swabs tested negative by rRT-PCR; one dog's fur swabs (2%) tested positive by rRT-PCR at the first sampling. Among 47 pets with serological results, eight (17%) pets (four dogs, four cats) from 6/30 (20%) households had detectable SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies. In households with a seropositive pet, the proportion of people with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 was greater (median 79%; range: 40-100%) compared to households with no seropositive pet (median 37%; range: 13-100%) (p = 0.01). Thirty-three pets with serologic results had frequent daily contact (≥1 h) with the index patient before the person's COVID-19 diagnosis. Of these 33 pets, 14 (42%) had decreased contact with the index patient after diagnosis and none were seropositive; of the 19 (58%) pets with continued contact, four (21%) were seropositive. Seropositive pets likely acquired infection after contact with people with COVID-19. People with COVID-19 should restrict contact with pets and other animals.

Patterns of Virus Exposure and Presumed Household Transmission among Persons with Coronavirus Disease, United States, January-April 2020.

We characterized common exposures reported by a convenience sample of 202 US patients with coronavirus disease during January-April 2020 and identified factors associated with presumed household transmission. The most commonly reported settings of known exposure were households and healthcare facilities; among case-patients who had known contact with a confirmed case-patient compared with those who did not, healthcare occupations were more common. Among case-patients without known contact, use of public transportation was more common. Within the household, presumed transmission was highest from older (>65 years) index case-patients and from children to parents, independent of index case-patient age. These findings may inform guidance for limiting transmission and emphasize the value of testing to identify community-acquired infections.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 on Surfaces in Households of Persons with COVID-19.

SARS-CoV-2 transmission from contaminated surfaces, or fomites, has been a concern during the COVID-19 pandemic. Households have been important sites of transmission throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, but there is limited information on SARS-CoV-2 contamination of surfaces in these settings. We describe environmental detection of SARS-CoV-2 in households of persons with COVID-19 to better characterize the potential risks of fomite transmission. Ten households with ≥1 person with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and with ≥2 members total were enrolled in Utah, U.S.A. Nasopharyngeal and anterior nasal swabs were collected from members and tested for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. Fifteen surfaces were sampled in each household and tested for presence and viability of SARS-CoV-2. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in 23 (15%) of 150 environmental swab samples, most frequently on nightstands (4/6; 67%), pillows (4/23; 17%), and light switches (3/21; 14%). Viable SARS-CoV-2 was cultured from one sample. All households with SARS-CoV-2-positive surfaces had ≥1 person who first tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 ≤ 6 days prior to environmental sampling. SARS-CoV-2 surface contamination occurred early in the course of infection when respiratory transmission is most likely, notably on surfaces in close, prolonged contact with persons with COVID-19. While fomite transmission might be possible, risk is low.

Factors Associated with Participation in Elementary School-Based SARS-CoV-2 Testing - Salt Lake County, Utah, December 2020-January 2021.

During December 3, 2020-January 31, 2021, CDC, in collaboration with the University of Utah Health and Economic Recovery Outreach Project,* Utah Department of Health (UDOH), Salt Lake County Health Department, and one Salt Lake county school district, offered free, in-school, real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) saliva testing as part of a transmission investigation of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, in elementary school settings. School contacts† of persons with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, including close contacts, were eligible to participate (1). Investigators approached parents or guardians of student contacts by telephone, and during January, using school phone lines to offer in-school specimen collection; the testing procedures were explained in the preferred language of the parent or guardian. Consent for participants was obtained via an electronic form sent by e-mail. Analyses examined participation (i.e., completing in-school specimen collection for SARS-CoV-2 testing) in relation to factors§ that were programmatically important or could influence likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 testing, including race, ethnicity, and SARS-CoV-2 incidence in the community (2). Crude prevalence ratios (PRs) were calculated using univariate log-binomial regression.¶ This activity was reviewed by CDC and was conducted consistent with federal law and CDC policy.*.

Community-Associated Outbreak of COVID-19 in a Correctional Facility - Utah, September 2020-January 2021.

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, is common in congregate settings such as correctional and detention facilities (1-3). On September 17, 2020, a Utah correctional facility (facility A) received a report of laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in a dental health care provider (DHCP) who had treated incarcerated persons at facility A on September 14, 2020 while asymptomatic. On September 21, 2020, the roommate of an incarcerated person who had received dental treatment experienced COVID-19-compatible symptoms*; both were housed in block 1 of facility A (one of 16 occupied blocks across eight residential units). Two days later, the roommate received a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result, becoming the first person with a known-associated case of COVID-19 at facility A. During September 23-24, 2020, screening of 10 incarcerated persons who had received treatment from the DHCP identified another two persons with COVID-19, prompting isolation of all three patients in an unoccupied block at the facility. Within block 1, group activities were stopped to limit interaction among staff members and incarcerated persons and prevent further spread. During September 14-24, 2020, six facility A staff members, one of whom had previous close contact† with one of the patients, also reported symptoms. On September 27, 2020, an outbreak was confirmed after specimens from all remaining incarcerated persons in block 1 were tested; an additional 46 cases of COVID-19 were identified, which were reported to the Salt Lake County Health Department and the Utah Department of Health. On September 30, 2020, CDC, in collaboration with both health departments and the correctional facility, initiated an investigation to identify factors associated with the outbreak and implement control measures. As of January 31, 2021, a total of 1,368 cases among 2,632 incarcerated persons (attack rate = 52%) and 88 cases among 550 staff members (attack rate = 16%) were reported in facility A. Among 33 hospitalized incarcerated persons, 11 died. Quarantine and monitoring of potentially exposed persons and implementation of available prevention measures, including vaccination, are important in preventing introduction and spread of SARS-CoV-2 in correctional facilities and other congregate settings (4).

Low SARS-CoV-2 Transmission in Elementary Schools - Salt Lake County, Utah, December 3, 2020-January 31, 2021.

School closures affected more than 55 million students across the United States when implemented as a strategy to prevent the transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 (1). Reopening schools requires balancing the risks for SARS-CoV-2 infection to students and staff members against the benefits of in-person learning (2). During December 3, 2020-January 31, 2021, CDC investigated SARS-CoV-2 transmission in 20 elementary schools (kindergarten through grade 6) that had reopened in Salt Lake County, Utah. The 7-day cumulative number of new COVID-19 cases in Salt Lake County during this time ranged from 290 to 670 cases per 100,000 persons.† Susceptible§ school contacts¶ (students and staff members exposed to SARS-CoV-2 in school) of 51 index patients** (40 students and 11 staff members) were offered SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing. Among 1,041 susceptible school contacts, 735 (70.6%) were tested, and five of 12 cases identified were classified as school-associated; the secondary attack rate among tested susceptible school contacts was 0.7%. Mask use among students was high (86%), and the median distance between students' seats in classrooms was 3 ft. Despite high community incidence and an inability to maintain ≥6 ft of distance between students at all times, SARS-CoV-2 transmission was low in these elementary schools. The results from this investigation add to the increasing evidence that in-person learning can be achieved with minimal SARS-CoV-2 transmission risk when multiple measures to prevent transmission are implemented (3,4).

Persistent SARS-CoV-2 RNA Shedding Without Evidence of Infectiousness: A Cohort Study of Individuals With COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: To better understand severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) shedding and infectivity, we estimated SARS-CoV-2 RNA shedding duration, described participant characteristics associated with the first negative rRT-PCR test (resolution), and determined if replication-competent viruses was recoverable ≥10 days after symptom onset. METHODS: We collected serial nasopharyngeal specimens from 109 individuals with rRT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 in Utah and Wisconsin. We calculated viral RNA shedding resolution probability using the Kaplan-Meier estimator and evaluated characteristics associated with shedding resolution using Cox proportional hazards regression. We attempted viral culture for 35 rRT-PCR-positive nasopharyngeal specimens collected ≥10 days after symptom onset. RESULTS: The likelihood of viral RNA shedding resolution at 10 days after symptom onset was approximately 3%. Time to shedding resolution was shorter among participants aged <18 years (adjusted hazards ratio [aHR], 3.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6-5.6) and longer among those aged ≥50 years (aHR, 0.50; 95% CI, .3-.9) compared to participants aged 18-49 years. No replication-competent viruses were recovered. CONCLUSIONS: Although most patients were positive for SARS-CoV-2 for ≥10 days after symptom onset, our findings suggest that individuals with mild to moderate COVID-19 are unlikely to be infectious ≥10 days after symptom onset.