COVIDStrategyCalculator: A software to assess testing and quarantine strategies for incoming travelers, contact management, and de-isolation

Replacing quarantine of COVID-19 contacts with periodic testing is also effective in mitigating the risk of transmission

The quarantine of identified close contacts has been vital to reducing transmission rates and averting secondary infection risk before symptom onset and by asymptomatic cases. The effectiveness of this contact tracing strategy to mitigate transmission is sensitive to the adherence to quarantines, which may be lower for longer quarantine periods or in vaccinated populations (where perceptions of risk are reduced). This study develops a simulation model to evaluate contact tracing strategies based on the sequential testing of identified contacts after exposure as an alternative to quarantines, in which contacts are isolated only after confirmation by a positive test. The analysis considers different number and types of tests (PCR and lateral flow antigen tests (LFA)) to identify the cost-effective testing policies that minimize the expected infecting days post-exposure considering different levels of testing capacity. This analysis suggests that even a limited number of tests can be effective at reducing secondary infection risk: two LFA tests (with optimal timing) avert infectiousness at a level that is comparable to 14-day quarantine with 80–90% adherence, or equivalently, 7–9 day quarantine with full adherence (depending on the sensitivity of the LFA test). Adding a third test (PCR or LFA) reaches the efficiency of a 14-day quarantine with 90–100% adherence. These results are robust to the exposure dates of the contact, test sensitivity of LFA and alternative models of viral load evolution, which suggests that simple testing rules can be effective for improving contact tracing in settings where strict quarantine adherence is difficult to implement.

[SARS-CoV-2 transmission routes and implications for self- and non-self-protection]

Die weltweite Ausbreitung des Coronavirus SARS-CoV‑2 hat Gesundheits‑, Wirtschafts- und Gesellschaftssysteme massiv in Mitleidenschaft gezogen. Obwohl mittlerweile effektive Impfstoffe zur Verfügung stehen, ist es wahrscheinlich, dass der Erreger endemisch wird und uns noch über Jahre begleitet. Um andere und sich selbst möglichst effektiv vor einer SARS-CoV-2-Infektion zu schützen, ist ein Verständnis der Übertragungswege von größter Wichtigkeit.

In dieser Übersichtsarbeit erläutern wir Übertragungswege im Hinblick auf den Fremd- und Eigenschutz. Darüber hinaus gehen wir auf die Charakteristika der SARS-CoV-2-Übertragung auf Populationsebene ein. Diese Arbeit soll helfen, folgende Fragen anhand der verfügbaren Literatur zu beantworten: Wann und wie lange ist eine infizierte Person kontagiös (ansteckungsfähig)? Wie wird das Virus ausgeschieden? Wie wird das Virus aufgenommen? Wie verbreitet sich das Virus in der Gesellschaft?

Die Mensch-zu-Mensch-Übertragung von SARS-CoV‑2 wird in starkem Maße durch die biologischen Erregereigenschaften, einschließlich der Infektions‑, Replikations- und Ausscheidungskinetik, bestimmt. SARS-CoV‑2 wird hauptsächlich über humane Aerosole übertragen, die von infizierten Personen ausgeschieden werden, auch wenn Erkrankungssymptome (noch) nicht vorliegen. Hieraus resultiert ein relevanter Anteil prä- bzw. asymptomatischer Transmissionen. In geschlossenen Räumen erfolgen Übertragungen besonders effektiv. Die meisten infizierten Personen rufen eine geringe Zahl von Sekundärfällen hervor, während wenige Fälle (sog. Superspreader) zu vielen Folgeinfektionen führen – auf Populationsebene spricht man hier von einer „Überdispersion“. Die besonderen Merkmale von SARS-CoV‑2 (asymptomatische Aerosolübertragung und Überdispersion) machen die Pandemie schwer kontrollierbar.

Trends in respiratory virus circulation following COVID-19-targeted nonpharmaceutical interventions in Germany, January - September 2020: Analysis of national surveillance data

BACKGROUND

During the initial COVID-19 response, Germany's Federal Government implemented several nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) that were instrumental in suppressing early exponential spread of SARS-CoV-2. NPI effect on the transmission of other respiratory viruses has not been examined at the national level thus far.

METHODS

Upper respiratory tract specimens from 3580 patients with acute respiratory infection (ARI), collected within the nationwide German ARI Sentinel, underwent RT-PCR diagnostics for multiple respiratory viruses. The observation period (weeks 1-38 of 2020) included the time before, during and after a far-reaching contact ban. Detection rates for different viruses were compared to 2017-2019 sentinel data (15350 samples; week 1-38, 11823 samples).

FINDINGS

The March 2020 contact ban, which was followed by a mask mandate, was associated with an unprecedented and sustained decline of multiple respiratory viruses. Among these, rhinovirus was the single agent that resurged to levels equalling those of previous years. Rhinovirus rebound was first observed in children, after schools and daycares had reopened. By contrast, other nonenveloped viruses (i.e. gastroenteritis viruses reported at the national level) suppressed after the shutdown did not rebound.

INTERPRETATION

Contact restrictions with a subsequent mask mandate in spring may substantially reduce respiratory virus circulation. This reduction appears sustained for most viruses, indicating that the activity of influenza and other respiratory viruses during the subsequent winter season might be low,whereas rhinovirus resurgence, potentially driven by transmission in educational institutions in a setting of waning population immunity, might signal predominance of rhinovirus-related ARIs.

FUNDING

Robert Koch-Institute and German Ministry of Health.

An intra-host SARS-CoV-2 dynamics model to assess testing and quarantine strategies for incoming travelers, contact management, and de-isolation

Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) remain decisive tools to contain SARS-CoV-2. Strategies that combine NPIs with testing may improve efficacy and shorten quarantine durations. We developed a stochastic within-host model of SARS-CoV-2 that captures temporal changes in test sensitivities, incubation periods, and infectious periods. We used the model to simulate relative transmission risk for (1) isolation of symptomatic individuals, (2) contact person management, and (3) quarantine of incoming travelers. We estimated that testing travelers at entry reduces transmission risks to 21.3% ([20.7, 23.9], by PCR) and 27.9% ([27.1, 31.1], by rapid diagnostic test [RDT]), compared with unrestricted entry. We calculated that 4 (PCR) or 5 (RDT) days of pre-test quarantine are non-inferior to 10 days of quarantine for incoming travelers and that 8 (PCR) or 10 (RDT) days of pre-test quarantine are non-inferior to 14 days of post-exposure quarantine. De-isolation of infected individuals 13 days after symptom onset may reduce the transmission risk to <0.2% (<0.01, 6.0).