Impacts of Covid-19 School Closures on School Food Service Revenue: Analysis of Public Local Education Agencies in Maryland.

BACKGROUND: The public health policies and school closures in response to the Covid-19 pandemic have created disruptions in school meal programs. Research is needed to understand the changes in school food service revenue before and during the initial Covid-19-related school shutdowns. METHODS: A longitudinal cohort study examining federal and state reimbursements as well as sales revenues for all public local education agencies (LEAs) in Maryland from school years (SY) 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 was conducted. Monthly changes in federal and state reimbursements for Child Nutrition Programs, including the National School Lunch Program (NSLP), School Breakfast Program (SBP), Summer Food Service Program (SFSP), and Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) were examined. RESULTS: In the SY 2018-2019, the total revenues from federal and state reimbursements for SBP, NSLP, SFSP, and at-risk CACFP were $272.9 million; in comparison, for the SY 2019-2020, the total revenues were $241.8 million (11.4% reduction from SY 2018-2019). On average, the school shutdown (during March to June 2020) was associated with a $450,385 (p-value < .01) reduction in federal and state reimbursements per LEA-month (41% reduction). CONCLUSIONS: The school shutdown during the Covid-19 pandemic was associated with a statistically significant reduction in school food service revenues across Maryland's public LEAs.

The cost-effectiveness of standalone HEPA filtration units for the prevention of airborne SARS CoV-2 transmission.

OBJECTIVE: Airborne infection from aerosolized SARS-CoV-2 poses an economic challenge for businesses without existing heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems. The Environmental Protection Agency notes that standalone units may be used in areas without existing HVAC systems, but the cost and effectiveness of standalone units has not been evaluated. STUDY DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis with Monte Carlo simulation and aerosol transmission modeling. METHODS: We built a probabilistic decision-analytic model in a Monte Carlo simulation that examines aerosol transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in an indoor space. As a base case study, we built a model that simulated a poorly ventilated indoor 1000 square foot restaurant and the range of Covid-19 prevalence of actively infectious cases (best-case: 0.1%, base-case: 2%, and worst-case: 3%) and vaccination rates (best-case: 90%, base-case: 70%, and worst-case: 0%) in New York City. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of improving ventilation rate to 12 air changes per hour (ACH), the equivalent of hospital-grade filtration systems used in emergency departments. We also provide a customizable online tool that allows the user to change model parameters. RESULTS: All 3 scenarios resulted in a net cost-savings and infections averted. For the base-case scenario, improving ventilation to 12 ACH was associated with 54 [95% Credible Interval (CrI): 29-86] aerosol infections averted over 1 year, producing an estimated cost savings of $152,701 (95% CrI: $80,663, $249,501) and 1.35 (95% CrI: 0.72, 2.24) quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. CONCLUSIONS: It is cost-effective to improve indoor ventilation in small businesses in older buildings that lack HVAC systems during the pandemic.

Willingness-to-pay tuition and risk-taking proclivities among public health students.

Objective: To quantify students' risk tolerance for in-person classes and willingness-to-pay for online-only instruction during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants: 46 Columbia University public health graduate students. Methods: We developed a survey tool with a "standard gamble" exercise administered online by an interactive chat bot with full anonymity by students. Students were asked to trade between the risk of infection with COVID-19 and: (1) attending classes in-person, and (2) attending community parties. We also assessed willingness-to-pay for online-only tuition. Results: Students accepted a 23% (standard error [SE]: 4%) risk of infection to attend classes in-person and 15% of them expressed willingness to attend community parties even if the COVID-19 prevalence were high. Students were willing-to-pay only 48% (SE: 3%) of the regular, in-person tuition fees for online instruction. Conclusions: Public health students with a strong knowledge of COVID-19 transmission were willing to accept a significant risk of infection for in-person instruction.Trial registration:NA.

Population Decline in COPD Admissions During the COVID-19 Pandemic Associated with Lower Burden of Community Respiratory Viral Infections.

BACKGROUND: The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to widespread implementation of public health measures, such as stay-at-home orders, social distancing, and masking mandates. In addition to decreasing spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, these measures also impact the transmission of seasonal viral pathogens, which are common triggers of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations. Whether reduced viral prevalence mediates reduction in COPD exacerbation rates is unknown. METHODS: We performed retrospective analysis of data from a large, multicenter health care system to assess admission trends associated with community viral prevalence and with initiation of COVID-19 pandemic control measures. We applied difference-in-differences analysis to compare season-matched weekly frequency of hospital admissions for COPD prior to and after implementation of public health measures for COVID-19. Community viral prevalence was estimated using regional Centers for Disease Control and Prevention test positivity data and correlated to COPD admissions. RESULTS: Data involving 4422 COPD admissions demonstrated a season-matched 53% decline in COPD admissions during the COVID-19 pandemic, which correlated to community viral burden (r = 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.67-0.78) and represented a 36% greater decline over admission frequencies observed in other medical conditions less affected by respiratory viral infections (incidence rate ratio 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.57-0.71, P < .001). The post-COVID-19 decline in COPD admissions was most pronounced in patients with fewer comorbidities and without recurrent admissions. CONCLUSION: The implementation of public health measures during the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with decreased COPD admissions. These changes are plausibly explained by reduced prevalence of seasonal respiratory viruses.

The cost-effectiveness of common strategies for the prevention of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in universities.

BACKGROUND: Most universities that re-open in the United States (US) for in-person instruction have implemented the Centers for Disease Prevention and Control (CDC) guidelines. The value of additional interventions to prevent the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is unclear. We calculated the cost-effectiveness and cases averted of each intervention in combination with implementing the CDC guidelines. METHODS: We built a decision-analytic model to examine the cost-effectiveness of interventions to re-open universities. The interventions included implementing the CDC guidelines alone and in combination with 1) a symptom-checking mobile application, 2) university-provided standardized, high filtration masks, 3) thermal cameras for temperature screening, 4) one-time entry ('gateway') polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing, and 5) weekly PCR testing. We also modeled a package of interventions ('package intervention') that combines the CDC guidelines with using the symptom-checking mobile application, standardized masks, gateway PCR testing, and weekly PCR testing. The direct and indirect costs were calculated in 2020 US dollars. We also provided an online interface that allows the user to change model parameters. RESULTS: All interventions averted cases of COVID-19. When the prevalence of actively infectious cases reached 0.1%, providing standardized, high filtration masks saved money and improved health relative to implementing the CDC guidelines alone and in combination with using the symptom-checking mobile application, thermal cameras, and gateway testing. Compared with standardized masks, weekly PCR testing cost $9.27 million (95% Credible Interval [CrI]: cost-saving-$77.36 million)/QALY gained. Compared with weekly PCR testing, the 'package' intervention cost $137,877 (95% CrI: $3,108-$19.11 million)/QALY gained. At both a prevalence of 1% and 2%, the 'package' intervention saved money and improved health compared to all the other interventions. CONCLUSIONS: All interventions were effective at averting infection from COVID-19. However, when the prevalence of actively infectious cases in the community was low, only standardized, high filtration masks clearly provided value.