Weighing policymaking: A narrative review of school closures as COVID-19 pandemic-mitigation strategies

Measures implemented in the school setting to contain the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

More than 767 million coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) cases and 6.9 million deaths with COVID-19 have been recorded as of August 2023. Several public health and social measures were implemented in schools to contain the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and prevent onward transmission. We built upon methods from a previous Cochrane review to capture current empirical evidence relating to the effectiveness of school measures to limit SARS-CoV-2 transmission.

OBJECTIVES

To provide an updated assessment of the evidence on the effectiveness of measures implemented in the school setting to keep schools open safely during the COVID-19 pandemic.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, Educational Resources Information Center, World Health Organization (WHO) COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease database, and the US Department of Veterans Affairs Evidence Synthesis Program COVID-19 Evidence Reviews on 18 February 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligible studies focused on measures implemented in the school setting to contain the COVID-19 pandemic, among students (aged 4 to 18 years) or individuals relating to the school, or both. We categorized studies that reported quantitative measures of intervention effectiveness, and studies that assessed the performance of surveillance measures as either 'main' or 'supporting' studies based on design and approach to handling key confounders. We were interested in transmission-related outcomes and intended or unintended consequences.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors screened titles, abstracts and full texts. We extracted minimal data for supporting studies. For main studies, one review author extracted comprehensive data and assessed risk of bias, which a second author checked. We narratively synthesized findings for each intervention-comparator-outcome category (body of evidence). Two review authors assessed certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

The 15 main studies consisted of measures to reduce contacts (4 studies), make contacts safer (7 studies), surveillance and response measures (6 studies; 1 assessed transmission outcomes, 5 assessed performance of surveillance measures), and multicomponent measures (1 study). These main studies assessed outcomes in the school population (12), general population (2), and adults living with a school-attending child (1). Settings included K-12 (kindergarten to grade 12; 9 studies), secondary (3 studies), and K-8 (kindergarten to grade 8; 1 study) schools. Two studies did not clearly report settings. Studies measured transmission-related outcomes (10), performance of surveillance measures (5), and intended and unintended consequences (4). The 15 main studies were based in the WHO Regions of the Americas (12), and the WHO European Region (3). Comparators were more versus less intense measures, single versus multicomponent measures, and measures versus no measures. We organized results into relevant bodies of evidence, or groups of studies relating to the same 'intervention-comparator-outcome' categories. Across all bodies of evidence, certainty of evidence ratings limit our confidence in findings. Where we describe an effect as 'beneficial', the direction of the point estimate of the effect favours the intervention; a 'harmful' effect does not favour the intervention and 'null' shows no effect either way. Measures to reduce contact (4 studies) We grouped studies into 21 bodies of evidence: moderate- (10 bodies), low- (3 bodies), or very low-certainty evidence (8 bodies). The evidence was very low to moderate certainty for beneficial effects of remote versus in-person or hybrid teaching on transmission in the general population. For students and staff, mostly harmful effects were observed when more students participated in remote teaching. Moderate-certainty evidence showed that in the general population there was probably no effect on deaths and a beneficial effect on hospitalizations for remote versus in-person teaching, but no effect for remote versus hybrid teaching. The effects of hybrid teaching, a combination of in-person and remote teaching, were mixed. Very low-certainty evidence showed that there may have been a harmful effect on risk of infection among adults living with a school student for closing playgrounds and cafeterias, a null effect for keeping the same teacher, and a beneficial effect for cancelling extracurricular activities, keeping the same students together and restricting entry for parents and caregivers. Measures to make contact safer (7 studies) We grouped studies into eight bodies of evidence: moderate- (5 bodies), and low-certainty evidence (3 bodies). Low-certainty evidence showed that there may have been a beneficial effect of mask mandates on transmission-related outcomes. Moderate-certainty evidence showed full mandates were probably more beneficial than partial or no mandates. Evidence of a beneficial effect of physical distancing on risk of infection among staff and students was mixed. Moderate-certainty evidence showed that ventilation measures probably reduce cases among staff and students. One study (very low-certainty evidence) found that there may be a beneficial effect of not sharing supplies and increasing desk space on risk of infection for adults living with a school student, but showed there may be a harmful effect of desk shields. Surveillance and response measures (6 studies) We grouped studies into seven bodies of evidence: moderate- (3 bodies), low- (1 body), and very low-certainty evidence (3 bodies). Daily testing strategies to replace or reduce quarantine probably helped to reduce missed school days and decrease the proportion of asymptomatic school contacts testing positive (moderate-certainty evidence). For studies that assessed the performance of surveillance measures, the proportion of cases detected by rapid antigen detection testing ranged from 28.6% to 95.8%, positive predictive value ranged from 24.0% to 100.0% (very low-certainty evidence). There was probably no onward transmission from contacts of a positive case (moderate-certainty evidence) and replacing or shortening quarantine with testing may have reduced missed school days (low-certainty evidence). Multicomponent measures (1 study) Combining multiple measures may have led to a reduction in risk of infection among adults living with a student (very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A range of measures can have a beneficial effect on transmission-related outcomes, healthcare utilization and school attendance. We rated the current findings at a higher level of certainty than the original review. Further high-quality research into school measures to control SARS-CoV-2 in a wider variety of contexts is needed to develop a more evidence-based understanding of how to keep schools open safely during COVID-19 or a similar public health emergency.

Case-Control Study on the Routes of Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 after the Third Pandemic Wave in Tuscany, Central Italy

The emergence of hyper-transmissible SARS-CoV-2 variants that rapidly became prevalent throughout the world in 2022 made it clear that extensive vaccination campaigns cannot represent the sole measure to stop COVID-19. However, the effectiveness of control and mitigation strategies, such as the closure of non-essential businesses and services, is debated. To assess the individual behaviours mostly associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, a questionnaire-based case-control study was carried out in Tuscany, Central Italy, from May to October 2021. At the testing sites, individuals were invited to answer an online questionnaire after being notified regarding the test result. The questionnaire collected information about test result, general characteristics of the respondents, and behaviours and places attended in the week prior to the test/symptoms onset. We analysed 440 questionnaires. Behavioural differences between positive and negative subjects were assessed through logistic regression models, adjusting for a fixed set of confounders. A ridge regression model was also specified. Attending nightclubs, open-air bars or restaurants and crowded clubs, outdoor sporting events, crowded public transportation, and working in healthcare were associated with an increased infection risk. A negative association with infection, besides face mask use, was observed for attending open-air shows and sporting events in indoor spaces, visiting and hosting friends, attending courses in indoor spaces, performing sport activities (both indoor and outdoor), attending private parties, religious ceremonies, libraries, and indoor restaurants. These results might suggest that during the study period people maintained a particularly responsible and prudent approach when engaging in everyday activities to avoid spreading the virus.

Development of a high-speed bioaerosol elimination system for treatment of indoor air

We developed a high-speed filterless airflow multistage photocatalytic elbow aerosol removal system for the treatment of bioaerosols such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Human-generated bioaerosols that diffuse into indoor spaces are 1-10 μm in size, and their selective and rapid treatment can reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. A high-speed airflow is necessary to treat large volumes of indoor air over a short period. The proposed system can be used to eliminate viruses in aerosols by forcibly depositing aerosols in a high-speed airflow onto a photocatalyst placed inside the system through inertial force and turbulent diffusion. Because the main component of the deposited bioaerosol is water, it evaporates after colliding with the photocatalyst, and the nonvolatile virus remains on the photocatalytic channel wall. The residual virus on the photocatalytic channel wall is mineralized via photocatalytic oxidation with UVA-LED irradiation in the channel. When this system was operated in a 4.5 m³ aerosol chamber, over 99.8% aerosols in the size range of 1-10 μm were removed within 15 min. The system continued delivering such performance with the continuous introduction of aerosols. Because this system exhibits excellent aerosol removal ability at a flow velocity of 5 m/s or higher, it is more suitable than other reactive air purification systems for treating large-volume spaces.

Graduating during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Digital Media Practices and Learning Spaces among Pupils Taking Their School-Leaving Exams

The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly changed educational and qualification experiences among young people. When the pandemic spread in 2020, schools worldwide were required to switch to remote learning. Through a qualitative multi-method, partly mobile, in-situ research approach, we accompanied pupils in the final year of their secondary education as they prepared for and finalized their school-leaving exams to investigate the following questions: What did pupils’ socio-material-technological learning spaces look like during this period? How did they adapt their digital media practices to cope with learning remotely? How did their situatedness in these learning spaces influence their learning experiences? Building on existing research in the field of digital and children’s geographies as well as learning spaces, through a combined content and narrative analysis, this article situates pupils’ learning spaces and experiences of graduating during the pandemic in the context of family relations, socio-material home spaces, polymediated learning environments and the accessibility of outdoor spaces. We debate the wide spectrum of media practices—ranging from indulgence in digital media, to balanced media use, to attempting to withdraw from using digital media—used by pupils to navigate through inextricably entangled socio-material-technological spaces during the pandemic. The further digitization of education prompted by the pandemic must be used in ways that empower pupils to engage in responsible and active use of digital media, thus allowing them to become mature and resilient digital participants in society.

Sleep Quality, Mental Health and Learning among High School Students after Reopening Schools during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Results of a Cross-Sectional Online Survey

We aimed to assess whether high school students’ sleep quality, mental health and learning changed during the COVID-19 pandemic as adolescents transitioned from learning online back to studying in person. We conducted an anonymous online cross-sectional survey study at three competitive high schools in Vilnius, Lithuania, after they were reopened. Students provided subjective views on their study quality, their health as well as daily life while studying either virtually or in person and completed the Beck depression inventory (BDI), the Generalized anxiety scale-7 (GAD-7) and the Pittsburgh sleep quality index (PSQI). Among 628 (70.4% female) respondents, 268 (42.7%), 342 (54.5%) and 398 (63.4%) are suspected to have depression, an anxiety disorder or poor sleep, respectively. Students reported better study quality (Z = −12.435, p < 0.001) and physical health (Z = −9.176, p < 0.001), but worse sleep quality (Z = −19.489, p < 0.001), shorter sleep duration (Z = −19.509, p < 0.001) and worse self-reported mental health (Z = −2.220, p < 0.05) while learning in person. However, higher scores of in-person study quality and physical health were associated with lower depression and anxiety levels as well as better sleep. Our study suggests that the reopening of schools may exacerbate sleep and mental health-related issues among high school students but also be beneficial for their academic development and levels of physical activity.