The Impact of COVID-19 Testing on College Campuses

BackgroundAfter moving instruction online for more than a year, many colleges and universities are preparing to reopen and offering fully in-person classes for the Fall 2021 semester. In this paper, we study the impact of weekly testing protocols on college campuses. MethodsAn extended susceptible-infectious-removed (SIR) compartmental model was used to simulate COVID-19 spread on a college campus setting. Seven scenarios were evaluated which considered polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and rapid antigen testing kits available at various levels of supply. The infection attack rate (IAR), the number of infections, and the number of tests utilized by the end of the simulation semester are reported and compared. ResultsWeekly testing significantly reduces the number of infections compared to when testing is not available. The use of PCR tests results in the lowest infection attack rate and the total number of cases; however, using rapid antigen tests with higher coverage is more effective than using PCR tests with lower coverage. ConclusionsThe implementation of COVID-19 testing protocols should be considered and evaluated as using testing allows for identification and isolation of cases which reduces the spread of COVID-19 on college campuses. Even if testing capacity is limited, its partial implementation can be beneficial.

COVID-19 Projections for K12 Schools in Fall 2021: Significant Transmission without Interventions

BackgroundMillions of primary school students across the United States are about to return to in-person learning. Amidst circulation of the highly infectious Delta variant, there is danger that without the appropriate safety precautions, substantial amount of school-based spread of COVID-19 may occur. MethodsWe used an extended Susceptible-Infected-Recovered computational model to estimate the number of new infections during 1 semester among a student population under different assumptions about mask usage, routine testing, and levels of incoming protection. Our analysis considers three levels of incoming protection (30%, 40%, or 50%; denoted as "low", "mid", or "high"). Universal mask usage decreases infectivity by 50%, and weekly testing may occur among 50% of the student population; positive tests prompt quarantine until recovery, with compliance contingent on symptom status. ResultsWithout masking and testing, more than 75% of susceptible students become get infected within three months in all settings. With masking, this values decreases to 50% for "low" incoming protection settings ("mid"=35%, "high"=24%). Testing half the masked population ("testing") further drops infections to 22% (16%, 13%). ConclusionWithout interventions in place, the vast majority of susceptible students will become infected through the semester. Universal masking can reduce student infections by 26-78%, and biweekly testing along with masking reduces infections by another 50%. To prevent new infections in the community, limit school absences, and maintain in-person learning, interventions such as masking and testing must be implemented widely, especially among elementary school settings in which children are not yet eligible for the vaccine.