Outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta Variant) in a Youth Camp Associated With Community Spread, Nebraska, June-July 2021.

OBJECTIVES: During June-July 2021, an outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 occurred among attendees of a summer youth camp in Nebraska. We assessed the factors that contributed to onward transmission of disease. METHODS: The Four Corners Health Department conducted an outbreak investigation and recorded both laboratory-confirmed and self-reported cases of SARS-CoV-2 and mitigation measures employed. We generated sequences on positive specimens, created an epidemic curve to assist with outbreak visualization, and examined epidemiologic, genomic, and laboratory outcomes. RESULTS: Evaluation of 3 index cases led to the identification of 25 people with COVID-19 who interacted directly with the camp. Contact tracing revealed an additional 18 cases consistent with onward community transmission. Most (24 of 35, 68.5%) vaccine-eligible community cases were not vaccinated. We sequenced 8 positive specimens; all were identified as the Delta variant. Precamp planning incorporated local health officials who recommended wearing face masks, practicing social distancing, and using attendee cohorts to limit mixing of people involved in various activities. CONCLUSION: Low vaccination levels and poor face mask-wearing habits among attendees resulted in secondary and tertiary spread of SARS-CoV-2 and severe outcomes among young adults. This outbreak of COVID-19 at a youth camp highlights the importance of vaccination and use of other measures to interrupt opportunities for SARS-CoV-2 spread in the community and shows that vaccinated people remain vulnerable to infection when in an environment of high exposure to SARS-CoV-2. Proactive case identification and interruption of chains of transmission can help decrease the number of cases and avoid further severe outcomes.

Characteristics of healthcare personnel who reported concerns related to PPE use during care of COVID-19 patients

Background: Healthcare facilities have experienced many challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, including limited personal protective equipment (PPE) supplies. Healthcare personnel (HCP) rely on PPE, vaccines, and other infection control measures to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infections. We describe PPE concerns reported by HCP who had close contact with COVID-19 patients in the workplace and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Method: The CDC collaborated with Emerging Infections Program (EIP) sites in 10 states to conduct surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 infections in HCP. EIP staff interviewed HCP with positive SARS-CoV-2 viral tests (ie, cases) to collect data on demographics, healthcare roles, exposures, PPE use, and concerns about their PPE use during COVID-19 patient care in the 14 days before the HCP's SARS-CoV-2 positive test. PPE concerns were qualitatively coded as being related to supply (eg, low quality, shortages);use (eg, extended use, reuse, lack of fit test);or facility policy (eg, lack of guidance). We calculated and compared the percentages of cases reporting each concern type during the initial phase of the pandemic (April–May 2020), during the first US peak of daily COVID-19 cases (June–August 2020), and during the second US peak (September 2020–January 2021). We compared percentages using mid-P or Fisher exact tests (α = 0.05). Results: Among 1,998 HCP cases occurring during April 2020–January 2021 who had close contact with COVID-19 patients, 613 (30.7%) reported ≥1 PPE concern (Table 1). The percentage of cases reporting supply or use concerns was higher during the first peak period than the second peak period (supply concerns: 12.5% vs 7.5%;use concerns: 25.5% vs 18.2%;p Conclusions: Although lower percentages of HCP cases overall reported PPE concerns after the first US peak, our results highlight the importance of developing capacity to produce and distribute PPE during times of increased demand. The difference we observed among selected groups of cases may indicate that PPE access and use were more challenging for some, such as nonphysicians and nursing home HCP. These findings underscore the need to ensure that PPE is accessible and used correctly by HCP for whom use is recommended.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None

Risk Factors for SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among US Healthcare Personnel, May-December 2020.

To determine risk factors for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) among US healthcare personnel (HCP), we conducted a case-control analysis. We collected data about activities outside the workplace and COVID-19 patient care activities from HCP with positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) test results (cases) and from HCP with negative test results (controls) in healthcare facilities in 5 US states. We used conditional logistic regression to calculate adjusted matched odds ratios and 95% CIs for exposures. Among 345 cases and 622 controls, factors associated with risk were having close contact with persons with COVID-19 outside the workplace, having close contact with COVID-19 patients in the workplace, and assisting COVID-19 patients with activities of daily living. Protecting HCP from COVID-19 may require interventions that reduce their exposures outside the workplace and improve their ability to more safely assist COVID-19 patients with activities of daily living.

Assessment of a Program for SARS-CoV-2 Screening and Environmental Monitoring in an Urban Public School District.

Importance: Scalable programs for school-based SARS-CoV-2 testing and surveillance are needed to guide in-person learning practices and inform risk assessments in kindergarten through 12th grade settings. Objectives: To characterize SARS-CoV-2 infections in staff and students in an urban public school setting and evaluate test-based strategies to support ongoing risk assessment and mitigation for kindergarten through 12th grade in-person learning. Design, Setting, and Participants: This pilot quality improvement program engaged 3 schools in Omaha, Nebraska, for weekly saliva polymerase chain reaction testing of staff and students participating in in-person learning over a 5-week period from November 9 to December 11, 2020. Wastewater, air, and surface samples were collected weekly and tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA to evaluate surrogacy for case detection and interrogate transmission risk of in-building activities. Main Outcomes and Measures: SARS-CoV-2 detection in saliva and environmental samples and risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results: A total of 2885 supervised, self-collected saliva samples were tested from 458 asymptomatic staff members (mean [SD] age, 42.9 [12.4] years; 303 women [66.2%]; 25 Black or African American [5.5%], 83 Hispanic [18.1%], 312 White [68.1%], and 35 other or not provided [7.6%]) and 315 students (mean age, 14.2 [0.7] years; 151 female students [48%]; 20 Black or African American [6.3%], 201 Hispanic [63.8%], 75 White [23.8%], and 19 other race or not provided [6.0%]). A total of 46 cases of SARS-CoV-2 (22 students and 24 staff members) were detected, representing an increase in cumulative case detection rates from 1.2% (12 of 1000) to 7.0% (70 of 1000) among students and from 2.1% (21 of 1000) to 5.3% (53 of 1000) among staff compared with conventional reporting mechanisms during the pilot period. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in wastewater samples from all pilot schools as well as in air samples collected from 2 choir rooms. Sequencing of 21 viral genomes in saliva specimens demonstrated minimal clustering associated with 1 school. Geographical analysis of SARS-CoV-2 cases reported district-wide demonstrated higher community risk in zip codes proximal to the pilot schools. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study of staff and students in 3 urban public schools in Omaha, Nebraska, weekly screening of asymptomatic staff and students by saliva polymerase chain reaction testing was associated with increased SARS-CoV-2 case detection, exceeding infection rates reported at the county level. Experiences differed among schools, and virus sequencing and geographical analyses suggested a dynamic interplay of school-based and community-derived transmission risk. Collectively, these findings provide insight into the performance and community value of test-based SARS-CoV-2 screening and surveillance strategies in the kindergarten through 12th grade educational setting.

Antibacterial use in the age of SARS-CoV-2.

BACKGROUND: Balancing the use of antibacterial therapy against selection for resistance in this pandemic era has introduced both questions and guidelines. In this project, we explored how prescription of empirical antibacterial therapy differs between those with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine whether COVID-19 status and other factors play a role in the prescription of antibacterial therapy in an inpatient setting at a large referral academic medical centre. Further analysis was conducted to determine whether these factors differ between those testing positive and negative for SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: Of 405 patients in the cohort, 175 received antibacterial therapy and 296 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. A positive SARS-CoV-2 test carried an OR of 0.3 (95% CI: 0.19, 0.49) for receiving antibacterial treatment in the first 48 h after admission (P < 0.0001) adjusting for age and procalcitonin results. Patients were 1% and 3% less likely to receive antibacterials for every year increase in age in the overall group and among those testing negative for SARS-CoV-2, respectively. Younger age was found to impact use of antibacterial therapy in both the overall analysis as well as the SARS-CoV-2 negative subgroup (P = 0.03 and P = 0.01). High procalcitonin values were found to be associated with increased antibacterial therapy use in both the overall and stratified analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Antibacterial therapy prescription differs by COVID-19 disease status, and procalcitonin results are most highly associated with antibacterial use across strata.