Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
Add filters

Language
Year range
1.
EuropePMC; 2022.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-331701

ABSTRACT

Two years after the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, there is still a need for better ways to assess the risk of transmission in congregate spaces. We deployed active air samplers to monitor the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in real-world settings across communities in the Upper Midwestern states of Wisconsin and Minnesota. Over 29 weeks, we collected 527 air samples from 15 congregate settings and detected 106 SARS-CoV-2 positive samples, demonstrating SARS-CoV-2 can be detected in air collected from daily and weekly sampling intervals. We expanded the utility of air surveillance to test for 40 other respiratory pathogens. Surveillance data revealed differences in timing and location of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza A virus detection in the community. In addition, we obtained SARS-CoV-2 genome sequences from air samples to identify variant lineages. Collectively, this shows air surveillance is a scalable, cost-effective, and high throughput alternative to individual testing for detecting respiratory pathogens in congregate settings.

2.
2021.
Preprint in English | Other preprints | ID: ppcovidwho-294830

ABSTRACT

Background 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 pet cohabitants as a sub-study of an ongoing COVID-19 household transmission investigation. Methods Mammalian pets from households with ≥1 person with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 were eligible for inclusion from April–May 2020. Demographic/exposure information, oropharyngeal, nasal, rectal, and fur swabs, feces, and blood were collected from enrolled pets and tested by rRT-PCR and virus neutralization assays. Findings We enrolled 37 dogs and 19 cats from 34 of 41 eligible 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 animal sampling. Among 47 pets with serological results from 30 households, eight (17%) pets (4 dogs, 4 cats) from 6 (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 hour) with the human index patient before the person’s COVID-19 diagnosis. Of these 33 pets, 14 (42%) had decreased contact with the human index patient after diagnosis and none (0%) were seropositive;of the 19 (58%) pets with continued contact, 4 (21%) were seropositive. Interpretations Seropositive pets likely acquired infection from humans, which may occur more frequently than previously recognized. People with COVID-19 should restrict contact with animals. Funding Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Department of Agriculture

3.
Viruses ; 13(9)2021 09 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1411082

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Pets/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Animals , COVID-19/history , COVID-19/transmission , Cats , Dogs , Family Characteristics , History, 21st Century , Humans , Pets/history , Phylogeny , Population Surveillance , RNA, Viral , SARS-CoV-2/classification , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Utah/epidemiology , Viral Zoonoses/epidemiology , Wisconsin/epidemiology
4.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(Suppl 1): S45-S53, 2021 07 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1315688

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: High-frequency, rapid-turnaround severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing continues to be proposed as a way of efficiently identifying and mitigating transmission in congregate settings. However, 2 SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks occurred among intercollegiate university athletic programs during the fall 2020 semester, despite mandatory directly observed daily antigen testing. METHODS: During the fall 2020 semester, athletes and staff in both programs were tested daily using Quidel's Sofia SARS Antigen Fluorescent Immunoassay, with positive antigen results requiring confirmatory testing with real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction. We used genomic sequencing to investigate transmission dynamics in these 2 outbreaks. RESULTS: In the first outbreak, 32 confirmed cases occurred within a university athletics program after the index patient attended a meeting while infectious, despite a negative antigen test on the day of the meeting. Among isolates sequenced from that outbreak, 24 (92%) of 26 were closely related, suggesting sustained transmission following an initial introduction event. In the second outbreak, 12 confirmed cases occurred among athletes from 2 university programs that faced each other in an athletic competition, despite receipt of negative antigen test results on the day of the competition. Sequences from both teams were closely related and distinct from viruses circulating in the community for team 1, suggesting transmission during intercollegiate competition in the community for team 2. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that antigen testing alone, even when mandated and directly observed, may not be sufficient as an intervention to prevent SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks in congregate settings, and they highlight the importance of vaccination to prevent SARS-CoV-2 outbreak in congregate settings.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Sports , Humans , Immunologic Tests , SARS-CoV-2 , Universities
5.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(Suppl 1): S45-S53, 2021 07 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1225623

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: High-frequency, rapid-turnaround severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing continues to be proposed as a way of efficiently identifying and mitigating transmission in congregate settings. However, 2 SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks occurred among intercollegiate university athletic programs during the fall 2020 semester, despite mandatory directly observed daily antigen testing. METHODS: During the fall 2020 semester, athletes and staff in both programs were tested daily using Quidel's Sofia SARS Antigen Fluorescent Immunoassay, with positive antigen results requiring confirmatory testing with real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction. We used genomic sequencing to investigate transmission dynamics in these 2 outbreaks. RESULTS: In the first outbreak, 32 confirmed cases occurred within a university athletics program after the index patient attended a meeting while infectious, despite a negative antigen test on the day of the meeting. Among isolates sequenced from that outbreak, 24 (92%) of 26 were closely related, suggesting sustained transmission following an initial introduction event. In the second outbreak, 12 confirmed cases occurred among athletes from 2 university programs that faced each other in an athletic competition, despite receipt of negative antigen test results on the day of the competition. Sequences from both teams were closely related and distinct from viruses circulating in the community for team 1, suggesting transmission during intercollegiate competition in the community for team 2. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that antigen testing alone, even when mandated and directly observed, may not be sufficient as an intervention to prevent SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks in congregate settings, and they highlight the importance of vaccination to prevent SARS-CoV-2 outbreak in congregate settings.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Sports , Humans , Immunologic Tests , SARS-CoV-2 , Universities
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL