Use of surveillance data to elucidate household clustering of SARS-CoV-2 in Fulton County, Georgia a major metropolitan area.

BACKGROUND: Households are important for SARS-CoV-2 transmission due to high intensity exposure in enclosed spaces over prolonged durations. We quantified and characterized household clustering of COVID-19 cases in Fulton County, Georgia. METHODS: We used surveillance data to identify all confirmed COVID-19 cases in Fulton County. Household clustered cases were defined as cases with matching residential address. We described the proportion of COVID-19 cases that were clustered, stratified by age over time and explore trends in age of first diagnosed case within households and subsequent household cases. RESULTS: Between June 1, 2020 and October 31, 2021, 31,449(37%) of 106,233 cases were clustered in households. Children were the most likely to be in household clusters than any other age group. Initially, children were rarely (∼ 10%) the first cases diagnosed in the household but increased to almost 1 of 3 in later periods. DISCUSSION: One-third of COVID-19 cases in Fulton County were part of a household cluster. Increasingly children were the first diagnosed case, coinciding with temporal trends in vaccine roll-out among the elderly and the return to in-person schooling in Fall 2021. Limitations include restrictions to cases with a valid address and unit number and that the first diagnosed case may not be the infection source for the household.

Factors influencing the decision to receive seasonal influenza vaccination among US corporate non-healthcare workers.

Influenza causes significant mortality and morbidity in the United States (US). Employees are exposed to influenza at work and can spread it to others. The influenza vaccine is safe, effective, and prevents severe outcomes; however, coverage among US adults (50.2%) is below Healthy People 2030 target of 70%. These highlights need for more effective vaccination promotion interventions. Understanding predictors of vaccination acceptance could inform vaccine promotion messages, improve coverage, and reduce illness-related work absences. We aimed to identify factors influencing influenza vaccination among US non-healthcare workers. Using mixed-methods approach, we evaluated factors influencing influenza vaccination among employees in three US companies during April-June 2020. Survey questions were adapted from the WHO seasonal influenza survey. Most respondents (n = 454) were women (272, 59.9%), 20-39 years old (n = 250, 55.1%); white (n = 254, 56.0%); had a college degree (n = 431, 95.0%); and reported receiving influenza vaccine in preceding influenza season (n = 297, 65.4%). Logistic regression model was statistically significant, X (16, N = 450) = 31.6, p = .01. Education [(OR) = 0.3, 95%CI = 0.1-0.6)] and race (OR = 0.4, 95%CI = 0.2-0.8) were significant predictors of influenza vaccine acceptance among participants. The majority had favorable attitudes toward influenza vaccination and reported that physician recommendation would influence their vaccination decisions. Seven themes were identified in qualitative analysis: "Protecting others" (109, 24.0%), "Protecting self" (105, 23.1%), "Vaccine accessibility" (94, 20.7%), "Education/messaging" (71, 15.6%), "Policies/requirements" (15, 3.3%), "Reminders" (9, 2.0%), and "Incentives" (3, 0.7%). Our findings could facilitate the development of effective influenza vaccination promotion messages and programs for employers, and workplace vaccination programs for other diseases such as COVID-19, by public health authorities.

Influenza causes significant mortality and morbidity in the United States (US).The US working-age group (18­64-year-old) bears a huge burden of influenza annually.Influenza vaccination coverage in the working-age group is low.Physicians and employers can influence vaccine acceptance of working adults.Employers can consider practical steps, e.g., incentivizing, or offering vaccine onsite.

Retrospective cohort study of COVID-19 among children in Fulton County, Georgia, March 2020-June 2021.

OBJECTIVE: To describe case rates, testing rates and percent positivity of COVID-19 among children aged 0-18 years by school-age grouping. DESIGN: We abstracted data from Georgia's State Electronic Notifiable Disease Surveillance System on all 10 437 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases among children aged 0-18 years during 30 March 2020 to 6 June 2021. We examined case rates, testing rates and percent positivity by school-aged groupings, namely: preschool (0-4 years), elementary school (5-10 years), middle school (11-13 years), and high school (14-18 years) and compared these data among school-aged children with those in the adult population (19 years and older). SETTING: Fulton County, Georgia. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: COVID-19 case rates, testing rates and percent positivity. RESULTS: Over time, the proportion of paediatric cases rose substantially from 1.1% (April 2020) to 21.6% (April 2021) of all cases in the county. Age-specific case rates and test rates were consistently highest among high-school aged children. Test positivity was similar across school-age groups, with periods of higher positivity among high-school aged children. CONCLUSIONS: Low COVID-19 testing rates among children, especially early in the pandemic, likely underestimated the true burden of disease in this age group. Despite children having lower measured incidence of COVID-19, we found when broader community incidence increased, incidence also increased among all paediatric age groups. As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to evolve, it remains critical to continue learning about the incidence and transmissibility of COVID-19 in children.

A modeling study to inform screening and testing interventions for the control of SARS-CoV-2 on university campuses.

University administrators face decisions about how to safely return and maintain students, staff and faculty on campus throughout the 2020-21 school year. We developed a susceptible-exposed-infectious-recovered (SEIR) deterministic compartmental transmission model of SARS-CoV-2 among university students, staff, and faculty. Our goals were to inform planning at our own university, Emory University, a medium-sized university with around 15,000 students and 15,000 faculty and staff, and to provide a flexible modeling framework to inform the planning efforts at similar academic institutions. Control strategies of isolation and quarantine are initiated by screening (regardless of symptoms) or testing (of symptomatic individuals). We explored a range of screening and testing frequencies and performed a probabilistic sensitivity analysis. We found that among students, monthly and weekly screening can reduce cumulative incidence by 59% and 87%, respectively, while testing with a 2-, 4- and 7-day delay between onset of infectiousness and testing results in an 84%, 74% and 55% reduction in cumulative incidence. Smaller reductions were observed among staff and faculty. Community-introduction of SARS-CoV-2 onto campus may be controlled with testing, isolation, contract tracing and quarantine. Screening would need to be performed at least weekly to have substantial reductions beyond disease surveillance. This model can also inform resource requirements of diagnostic capacity and isolation/quarantine facilities associated with different strategies.

Rapid Review of Social Contact Patterns During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Physical distancing measures aim to reduce person-to-person contact, a key driver of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission. In response to unprecedented restrictions on human contact during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, studies measured social contact patterns under the implementation of physical distancing measures. This rapid review synthesizes empirical data on the changing social contact patterns during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: We conducted a systematic review using PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Google Scholar following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We descriptively compared the distribution of contacts observed during the pandemic to pre-COVID data across countries to explore changes in contact patterns during physical distancing measures. RESULTS: We identified 12 studies reporting social contact patterns during the COVID-19 pandemic. Eight studies were conducted in European countries and eleven collected data during the initial mitigation period in the spring of 2020 marked by government-declared lockdowns. Some studies collected additional data after relaxation of initial mitigation. Most study settings reported a mean of between 2 and 5 contacts per person per day, a substantial reduction compared to pre-COVID rates, which ranged from 7 to 26 contacts per day. This reduction was pronounced for contacts outside of the home. Consequently, levels of assortative mixing by age substantially declined. After relaxation of initial mitigation, mean contact rates increased but did not return to pre-COVID levels. Increases in contacts post-relaxation were driven by working-age adults. CONCLUSION: Information on changes in contact patterns during physical distancing measures can guide more realistic representations of contact patterns in mathematical models for SARS-CoV-2 transmission.

Social contact patterns among employees in 3 U.S. companies during early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic, April to June 2020.

We measured contact patterns using online diaries for 304 employees of 3 U.S. companies working remotely. The median number of daily contacts was 2 (IQR 1-4); majority were conversation (55 %), occurred at home (64 %) and lasted >4 h (38 %). These data are crucial for modeling outbreak control among the workforces.