Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 29(2): 426-430, 2023 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2198458

ABSTRACT

We combined field-based data with mathematical modeling to estimate the effectiveness of smartphone-enabled COVID-19 exposure notification in Pennsylvania, USA. We estimated that digital notifications potentially averted 7-69 cases/1,000 notifications during November 8, 2020-January 2, 2021. Greater use and increased compliance could increase the effectiveness of digital notifications.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Disease Notification , Pennsylvania/epidemiology , Models, Theoretical
2.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(3): e224042, 2022 03 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1763161

ABSTRACT

Importance: Evidence of the impact of COVID-19 case investigation and contact tracing (CICT) programs is lacking, but policy makers need this evidence to assess the value of such programs. Objective: To estimate COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations averted nationwide by US states' CICT programs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This decision analytical model study used combined data from US CICT programs (eg, proportion of cases interviewed, contacts notified or monitored, and days to case and contact notification) with incidence data to model outcomes of CICT over a 60-day period (November 25, 2020, to January 23, 2021). The study estimated a range of outcomes by varying assumed compliance with isolation and quarantine recommendations. Fifty-nine state and territorial health departments that received federal funding supporting COVID-19 pandemic response activities were eligible for inclusion. Data analysis was performed from July to September 2021. Exposure: Public health case investigation and contact tracing. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were numbers of cases and hospitalizations averted and the percentage of cases averted among cases not prevented by vaccination and other nonpharmaceutical interventions. Results: In total, 22 states and 1 territory reported all measures necessary for the analysis. These 23 jurisdictions covered 42.5% of the US population (approximately 140 million persons), spanned all 4 US Census regions, and reported data that reflected all 59 federally funded CICT programs. This study estimated that 1.11 million cases and 27 231 hospitalizations were averted by CICT programs under a scenario where 80% of interviewed cases and monitored contacts and 30% of notified contacts fully complied with isolation and quarantine guidance, eliminating their contributions to future transmission. As many as 1.36 million cases and 33 527 hospitalizations could have been prevented if all interviewed cases and monitored contacts had entered into and fully complied with isolation and quarantine guidelines upon being interviewed or notified. Across both scenarios and all jurisdictions, CICT averted an estimated median of 21.2% (range, 1.3%-65.8%) of the cases not prevented by vaccination and other nonpharmaceutical interventions. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that CICT programs likely had a substantial role in curtailing the pandemic in most jurisdictions during the 2020 to 2021 winter peak. Differences in outcomes across jurisdictions indicate an opportunity to further improve CICT effectiveness. These estimates demonstrate the potential benefits from sustaining and improving these programs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza, Human , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Contact Tracing , Hospitalization , Humans , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control
3.
J Public Health Manag Pract ; 28(1): 16-24, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526222

ABSTRACT

CONTEXT: The implementation of case investigation and contact tracing (CICT) for controlling COVID-19 (caused by SARS-CoV-2 virus) has proven challenging due to varying levels of public acceptance and initially constrained resources, especially enough trained staff. Evaluating the impacts of CICT will aid efforts to improve such programs. OBJECTIVES: Estimate the number of COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations averted by CICT and identify CICT processes that could improve overall effectiveness. DESIGN: We used data on the proportion of cases interviewed, contacts notified or monitored, and days from testing to case and contact notification from 14 jurisdictions to model the impact of CICT on cumulative case counts and hospitalizations over a 60-day period. Using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's COVIDTracer Advanced tool, we estimated a range of impacts by assuming either contacts would quarantine only if monitored or would do so upon notification of potential exposure. We also varied the observed program metrics to assess their relative influence. RESULTS: Performance by jurisdictions varied widely. Jurisdictions isolated between 12% and 86% of cases (including contacts that became cases) within 6 to 10 days after infection. We estimated that CICT-related reductions in transmission ranged from 0.4% to 32%. For every 100 remaining cases after other nonpharmaceutical interventions were implemented, CICT averted between 4 and 97 additional cases. Reducing time to case isolation by 1 day increased averted case estimates by up to 15 percentage points. Increasing the proportion of cases interviewed or contacts notified by 20 percentage points each resulted in at most 3 or 6 percentage point improvements in averted cases. CONCLUSIONS: We estimated that CICT reduced the number of COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations among all jurisdictions studied. Reducing time to isolation produced the greatest improvements in impact of CICT.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Contact Tracing , Hospitalization , Humans , Quarantine , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
4.
Value Health ; 24(8): 1150-1157, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1274352

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Immunization programs in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) are faced with an ever-growing number of vaccines of public health importance recommended by the World Health Organization, while also financing a greater proportion of the program through domestic resources. More than ever, national immunization programs must be equipped to contextualize global guidance and make choices that are best suited to their setting. The CAPACITI decision-support tool has been developed in collaboration with national immunization program decision makers in LMICs to structure and document an evidence-based, context-specific process for prioritizing or selecting among multiple vaccination products, services, or strategies. METHODS: The CAPACITI decision-support tool is based on multi-criteria decision analysis, as a structured way to incorporate multiple sources of evidence and stakeholder perspectives. The tool has been developed iteratively in consultation with 12 countries across Africa, Asia, and the Americas. RESULTS: The tool is flexible to existing country processes and can follow any type of multi-criteria decision analysis or a hybrid approach. It is structured into 5 sections: decision question, criteria for decision making, evidence assessment, appraisal, and recommendation. The Excel-based tool guides the user through the steps and document discussions in a transparent manner, with an emphasis on stakeholder engagement and country ownership. CONCLUSIONS: Pilot countries valued the CAPACITI decision-support tool as a means to consider multiple criteria and stakeholder perspectives and to evaluate trade-offs and the impact of data quality. With use, it is expected that LMICs will tailor steps to their context and streamline the tool for decision making.


Subject(s)
Decision Support Techniques , Health Policy , Health Priorities , Immunization Programs/economics , Technology Assessment, Biomedical , Vaccines/economics , Africa , Asia , Developing Countries , Humans , Public Health , Stakeholder Participation , State Medicine/economics , Vaccination/economics , World Health Organization
5.
J Public Health Manag Pract ; 28(1): 25-35, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1211449

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Schools are an integral part of the community; however, congregate settings facilitate transmission of SARS-CoV-2, presenting a challenge to school administrators to provide a safe, in-school environment for students and staff. METHODS: We adapted the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's COVIDTracer Advanced tool to model the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in a school of 596 individuals. We estimate possible reductions in cases and hospitalizations among this population using a scenario-based analysis that accounts for (a) the risk of importation of infection from the community; (b) adherence to key Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-recommended mitigation strategies: mask wearing, cleaning and disinfection, hand hygiene, and social distancing; and (c) the effectiveness of contact tracing interventions at limiting onward transmission. RESULTS: Low impact and effectiveness of mitigation strategies (net effectiveness: 27%) result in approximately 40% of exposed staff and students becoming COVID-19 cases. When the net effectiveness of mitigation strategies was 69% or greater, in-school transmission was mostly prevented, yet importation of cases from the surrounding community could result in nearly 20% of the school's population becoming infected within 180 days. The combined effects of mitigation strategies and contact tracing were able to prevent most onward transmission. Hospitalizations were low among children and adults (<0.5% of the school population) across all scenarios examined. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our model, layering mitigation strategies and contact tracing can limit the number of cases that may occur from transmission in schools. Schools in communities with substantial levels of community spread will need to be more vigilant to ensure adherence of mitigation strategies to minimize transmission. Our results show that for school administrators, teachers, and parents to provide the safest environment, it is important to utilize multiple mitigation strategies and contract tracing that reduce SARS CoV-2 transmission by at least 69%. This will require training, reinforcement, and vigilance to ensure that the highest level of adherence is maintained over the entire school term.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Child , Contact Tracing , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Schools , Students , United States
6.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 69(50): 1917-1921, 2020 Dec 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1016446

ABSTRACT

As school districts across the United States consider how to safely operate during the 2020-21 academic year, CDC recommends mitigation strategies that schools can adopt to reduce the risk for transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (1). To identify the resources and costs needed to implement school-based mitigation strategies and provide schools and jurisdictions with information to aid resource allocation, a microcosting methodology was employed to estimate costs in three categories: materials and consumables, additional custodial staff members, and potential additional transportation. National average estimates, using the national pre-kindergarten through grade 12 (preK-12) public enrollment of 50,685,567 students, range between a mean of $55 (materials and consumables only) to $442 (all three categories) per student. State-by-state estimates of additional funds needed as a percentage of fiscal year 2018 student expenditures (2) range from an additional 0.3% (materials and consumables only) to 7.1% (all three categories); however, only seven states had a maximum estimate above 4.2%. These estimates, although not exhaustive, highlight the level of resources needed to ensure that schools reopen and remain open in the safest possible manner and offer administrators at schools and school districts and other decision-makers the cost information necessary to budget and prioritize school resources during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Resources/economics , Schools/economics , Adolescent , COVID-19/epidemiology , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Child , Child, Preschool , Costs and Cost Analysis , Humans , Schools/statistics & numerical data , United States/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL