AIChE Virtual Communities of Practice-Supporting Faculty during the COVID-19 Pandemic

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, chemical engineering departments from around the world shifted their course offerings from in-person to online almost instantaneously. The AIChE Education Division immediately responded to this educational shift by developing five Virtual Communities of Practice (VCPs) that allowed faculty to share experiences and best practices as well as provide a network for emotional support. Community creation, methods and materials shared, and surveys related to the impact of this initiative will be discussed.

Test-to-Stay Implementation in 4 Pre-K-12 School Districts.

OBJECTIVES: Globally, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected how children learn. We evaluated the impact of Test to Stay (TTS) on secondary and tertiary transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and potential impact on in-person learning in 4 school districts in the United States from September 13 to November 19, 2021. METHODS: Implementation of TTS varied across school districts. Data on index cases, school-based close contacts, TTS participation, and testing results were obtained from 4 school districts in diverse geographic regions. Descriptive statistics, secondary and tertiary attack risk, and a theoretical estimate of impact on in-person learning were calculated. RESULTS: Fifty-one schools in 4 school districts reported 374 coronavirus disease COVID-19 index cases and 2520 school-based close contacts eligible for TTS. The proportion participating in TTS ranged from 22% to 79%. By district, the secondary attack risk and tertiary attack risk among TTS participants ranged between 2.2% to 11.1% and 0% to 17.6%, respectively. Nine clusters were identified among secondary cases and 2 among tertiary cases. The theoretical maximum number of days of in-person learning saved by using TTS was 976 to 4650 days across jurisdictions. CONCLUSIONS: TTS preserves in-person learning. Decisions to participate in TTS may have been influenced by ease of access to testing, communication between schools and families, testing logistics, and school resources. Tertiary attack risk determination became more complicated when numbers of close contacts increased. Minimizing exposure through continued layered prevention strategies is imperative. To ensure adequate resources for TTS, community transmission levels should be considered.

Quantitative comparison of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification test and antigen testing algorithms: a decision analysis simulation model.

BACKGROUND: Antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 offer advantages over nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs, such as RT-PCR), including lower cost and rapid return of results, but show reduced sensitivity. Public health organizations recommend different strategies for utilizing NAATs and antigen tests. We sought to create a framework for the quantitative comparison of these recommended strategies based on their expected performance. METHODS: We utilized a decision analysis approach to simulate the expected outcomes of six testing algorithms analogous to strategies recommended by public health organizations. Each algorithm was simulated 50,000 times in a population of 100,000 persons seeking testing. Primary outcomes were number of missed cases, number of false-positive diagnoses, and total test volumes. Outcome medians and 95% uncertainty ranges (URs) were reported. RESULTS: Algorithms that use NAATs to confirm all negative antigen results minimized missed cases but required high NAAT capacity: 92,200 (95% UR: 91,200-93,200) tests (in addition to 100,000 antigen tests) at 10% prevalence. Selective use of NAATs to confirm antigen results when discordant with symptom status (e.g., symptomatic persons with negative antigen results) resulted in the most efficient use of NAATs, with 25 NAATs (95% UR: 13-57) needed to detect one additional case compared to exclusive use of antigen tests. CONCLUSIONS: No single SARS-CoV-2 testing algorithm is likely to be optimal across settings with different levels of prevalence and for all programmatic priorities. This analysis provides a framework for selecting setting-specific strategies to achieve acceptable balances and trade-offs between programmatic priorities and resource constraints.

Relationship of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen and Reverse Transcription PCR Positivity for Viral Cultures.

We assessed the relationship between antigen and reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) test positivity and successful virus isolation. We found that antigen test results were more predictive of virus recovery than RT-PCR results. However, virus was isolated from some antigen-negative and RT-PCR‒positive paired specimens, providing support for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention antigen testing algorithm.

Application of a Serial Antigen-Based Testing Strategy for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 and Student Adherence in a University Setting: Wisconsin, October-November 2020.

BACKGROUND: Serial severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing has been implemented at institutions of higher education (IHEs) and other settings. Testing strategies can include algorithms specifying confirmatory reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing after an antigen test. It is unknown how testing strategies perform detecting SARS-CoV-2, including individual adherence to serial testing requirements. METHODS: Student serial testing adherence was defined as completing ≥80% of weekly tests from October 5, 2020 to November 14, 2020 and evaluated using logistic regression. Medical records were reviewed for all positive antigen test encounters and 10% of daily negative antigen test encounters during October 19-November 30, 2020. Results were used to estimate the proportion of individuals requiring only antigen tests, requiring and completing RT-PCR testing, and associated costs of tests. RESULTS: Two thirds (66.5%; 1166 of 1754) of eligible on-campus students adhered to weekly testing; female students were more adherent (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.07; 95% confidence interval, 1.66-2.59) than male students. Of all antigen test encounters, 11.5% (1409 of 12 305) reported >1 COVID-19 symptoms. Of non-COVID-19-exposed antigen test encounters, 88% (10 386 of 11 769) did not require confirmatory RT-PCR testing. Only 28% (390 of 1387) of testing encounters had an associated recommended confirmatory RT-PCR test performed. We estimated the testing strategy captured 61% (235 of 389) of predicted RT-PCR-positive specimens. CONCLUSIONS: At this IHE, most students voluntarily adhered to serial testing. The majority of antigen test results did not require confirmatory RT-PCR testing, but when required, most students did not obtain it. Including strategies to increase the proportion of individuals obtaining indicated confirmatory testing might improve the testing program's performance.

Epidemiologic Characteristics Associated With Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Antigen-Based Test Results, Real-Time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (rRT-PCR) Cycle Threshold Values, Subgenomic RNA, and Viral Culture Results From University Testing.

BACKGROUND: Real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) and antigen tests are important diagnostics for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Sensitivity of antigen tests has been shown to be lower than that of rRT-PCR; however, data to evaluate epidemiologic characteristics that affect test performance are limited. METHODS: Paired mid-turbinate nasal swabs were collected from university students and staff and tested for SARS-CoV-2 using both Quidel Sofia SARS Antigen Fluorescent Immunoassay (FIA) and rRT-PCR assay. Specimens positive by either rRT-PCR or antigen FIA were placed in viral culture and tested for subgenomic RNA (sgRNA). Logistic regression models were used to evaluate characteristics associated with antigen results, rRT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) values, sgRNA, and viral culture. RESULTS: Antigen FIA sensitivity was 78.9% and 43.8% among symptomatic and asymptomatic participants, respectively. Among rRT-PCR positive participants, negative antigen results were more likely among asymptomatic participants (odds ratio [OR] 4.6, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.3-15.4) and less likely among participants reporting nasal congestion (OR 0.1, 95% CI: .03-.8). rRT-PCR-positive specimens with higher Ct values (OR 0.5, 95% CI: .4-.8) were less likely, and specimens positive for sgRNA (OR 10.2, 95% CI: 1.6-65.0) more likely, to yield positive virus isolation. Antigen testing was >90% positive in specimens with Ct values < 29. Positive predictive value of antigen test for positive viral culture (57.7%) was similar to that of rRT-PCR (59.3%). CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 antigen test advantages include low cost, wide availability and rapid turnaround time, making them important screening tests. The performance of antigen tests may vary with patient characteristics, so performance characteristics should be accounted for when designing testing strategies and interpreting results.

Association of Shared Living Spaces and COVID-19 in University Students, Wisconsin, USA, 2020.

We describe characteristics associated with having coronavirus disease (COVID-19) among students residing on a university campus. Of 2,187 students, 528 (24.1%) received a COVID-19 diagnosis during fall semester 2020. Students sharing a bedroom or suite had approximately twice the odds of contracting COVID-19 as those living alone.

Performance of Repeat BinaxNOW Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Antigen Testing in a Community Setting, Wisconsin, November 2020-December 2020.

Repeating the BinaxNOW antigen test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 using 2 groups of readers within 30 minutes resulted in high concordance (98.9%) in 2110 encounters. Same-day repeat antigen testing did not significantly improve test sensitivity (77.2% to 81.4%) while specificity remained high (99.6%).

Antigen Test Performance Among Children and Adults at a SARS-CoV-2 Community Testing Site.

BACKGROUND: Performance characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests among children are limited despite the need for point-of-care testing in school and childcare settings. We describe children seeking SARS-CoV-2 testing at a community site and compare antigen test performance to real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and viral culture. METHODS: Two anterior nasal specimens were self-collected for BinaxNOW antigen and RT-PCR testing, along with demographics, symptoms, and exposure information from individuals ≥5 years at a community testing site. Viral culture was attempted on residual antigen or RT-PCR-positive specimens. Demographic and clinical characteristics, and the performance of SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests, were compared among children (<18 years) and adults. RESULTS: About 1 in 10 included specimens were from children (225/2110); 16.4% (37/225) were RT-PCR-positive. Cycle threshold values were similar among RT-PCR-positive specimens from children and adults (22.5 vs 21.3, P = .46) and among specimens from symptomatic and asymptomatic children (22.5 vs 23.2, P = .39). Sensitivity of antigen test compared to RT-PCR was 73.0% (27/37) among specimens from children and 80.8% (240/297) among specimens from adults; among specimens from children, specificity was 100% (188/188), positive and negative predictive values were 100% (27/27) and 94.9% (188/198), respectively. Virus was isolated from 51.4% (19/37) of RT-PCR-positive pediatric specimens; all 19 had positive antigen test results. CONCLUSIONS: With lower sensitivity relative to RT-PCR, antigen tests may not diagnose all positive COVID-19 cases; however, antigen testing identified children with live SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Performance of an Antigen-Based Test for Asymptomatic and Symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Testing at Two University Campuses - Wisconsin, September-October 2020.

Antigen-based tests for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), are inexpensive and can return results within 15 minutes (1). Antigen tests have received Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for use in asymptomatic and symptomatic persons within the first 5-12 days after symptom onset (2). These tests have been used at U.S. colleges and universities and other congregate settings (e.g., nursing homes and correctional and detention facilities), where serial testing of asymptomatic persons might facilitate early case identification (3-5). However, test performance data from symptomatic and asymptomatic persons are limited. This investigation evaluated performance of the Sofia SARS Antigen Fluorescent Immunoassay (FIA) (Quidel Corporation) compared with real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for SARS-CoV-2 detection among asymptomatic and symptomatic persons at two universities in Wisconsin. During September 28-October 9, a total of 1,098 paired nasal swabs were tested using the Sofia SARS Antigen FIA and real-time RT-PCR. Virus culture was attempted on all antigen-positive or real-time RT-PCR-positive specimens. Among 871 (79%) paired swabs from asymptomatic participants, the antigen test sensitivity was 41.2%, specificity was 98.4%, and in this population the estimated positive predictive value (PPV) was 33.3%, and negative predictive value (NPV) was 98.8%. Antigen test performance was improved among 227 (21%) paired swabs from participants who reported one or more symptoms at specimen collection (sensitivity = 80.0%; specificity = 98.9%; PPV = 94.1%; NPV = 95.9%). Virus was isolated from 34 (46.6%) of 73 antigen-positive or real-time RT-PCR-positive nasal swab specimens, including two of 18 that were antigen-negative and real-time RT-PCR-positive (false-negatives). The advantages of antigen tests such as low cost and rapid turnaround might allow for rapid identification of infectious persons. However, these advantages need to be balanced against lower sensitivity and lower PPV, especially among asymptomatic persons. Confirmatory testing with an FDA-authorized nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT), such as RT-PCR, should be considered after negative antigen test results in symptomatic persons, and after positive antigen test results in asymptomatic persons (1).