ABSTRACT
Non-pharmaceutical interventions minimize social contacts, hence the spread of SARS-CoV-2. We quantified two-day contact patterns among US employees from 2020-2021 during the COVID-19 pandemic. Contacts were defined as face-to-face conversations, involving physical touch or proximity to another individual and were collected using electronic diaries. Mean (standard deviation) contacts reported by 1,456 participants were 2.5 (2.5), 8.2 (7.1), 9.2 (7.1) and 10.1 (9.5) across round 1 (April-June 2020), 2 (November 2020-January 2021), 3 (June-August 2021), and 4 (November-December 2021), respectively. Between round 1 and 2, we report a 3-fold increase in the mean number of contacts reported per participant with no major increases from round 2-4. We modeled SARS-CoV-2 transmission at home, work, and community. The model revealed reduced relative transmission in all settings in round 1. Subsequently, transmission increased at home and in the community but remained very low in work settings. Contact data are important to parameterize models of infection transmission and control.
ABSTRACT
2.ImportanceDevising control strategies against diseases such as COVID-19 require understanding of contextual social mixing and contact patterns. There has been no standardized multi-site social contact study conducted in workplace settings in the United States that can be used to broadly inform pandemic preparedness policy in these settings. ObjectiveThe study aimed to characterize the patterns of social contacts and mixing across workplace environments, including on-site or when teleworking. DesignThis was a cross-sectional non-probability survey that used standardized social contact diaries to collect data. Employees were requested to record their physical and non-physical contacts in a diary over two consecutive days, documented at the end of each day. Employees from each company were enrolled through email and electronic diaries sent as individual links. Data were collected from April to June 2020. SettingTwo multinational consulting companies and one university administrative department, all located in Georgia, USA. ParticipantsEmployees opted into the study by accepting the invitation on a link sent via email. Main OutcomeThe outcome was median number of contacts per person per day. This was stratified by day of data collection, age, sex, race and ethnicity. ResultsOf 3,835 employees approached, 357 (9.3%) completed the first day of contact diary of which 304 completed both days of contact diary. There was a median of 2 contacts (IQR: 1-4, range: 0-21) per respondent on both day one and two. The majority (55%) of contacts involved conversation only, occurred at home (64%), and cumulatively lasted more than 4 hours (38%). Most contacts were repeated, and within same age groups, though participants aged 30-59 years reported substantial inter-generational mixing with children. ConclusionParticipating employees in 3 surveyed workplaces reported few contacts, similar to studies from the UK and China when shelter-in-place orders were in effect during the pandemic. Many contacts were repeated which may limit the spread of infection. Future rounds are planned to assess changes in contact patterns when employees resume work in the office after the lockdown due to COVID-19 pandemic.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundCOVID-19 outbreak is spreading globally. Although the risk of infection in the US is currently low, it is important to understand the public perception of risk and trust in sources of information to better inform public health messaging. In this study, we surveyed the adult US population to understand their risk perceptions about the COVID-19 outbreak. Methods and FindingsWe used an online platform to survey 718 adults in the US in early February 2020 using a questionnaire that we developed. Our sample was fairly similar to the general adult US population in terms of age, gender, race, ethnicity and education. We found that 69% of the respondents wanted the scientific/public health leadership (either the CDC Director or NIH Director) to lead the US response to COVID-19 outbreak as compared to 14% who wanted the political leadership (either the president or the Congress) to lead the response. Risk perception was low (median score of 5 out of 10) with the respondents trusting health professionals and health officials for information on COVID-19. Majority of the respondents were in favor of strict infection prevention policies to control the outbreak. ConclusionGiven our results, the public health/scientific leadership should be at the forefront of the COVID-19 response to promote trust.
