Survival analysis of factors affecting the timing of COVID-19 non-pharmaceutical interventions by U.S. universities

Implementation and effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions, including mask mandates and ventilation, on SARS-CoV-2 transmission (alpha variant) in primary schools in the Netherlands

There has been a lot of discussion about the role of schools in the transmission of severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, where many countries responded with school closures in 2020. Reopening of primary schools in the Netherlands in February 2021 was sustained by various non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) following national recommendations. Our study attempted to assess the degree of regional implementation and effectiveness of these NPIs in South Limburg, Netherlands. We approached 150 primary schools with a structured questionnaire containing items on the implementation of NPIs, including items on ventilation. Based on our registry of cases, we determined the number of COVID-19 cases linked to each school, classifying cases by their source of transmission. We calculated a crude secondary attack rate by dividing the number of cases of within-school transmission by the total number of children and staff members. Two-sample proportion tests were performed to compare these rates between schools stratified by the presence of a ventilation system and mask mandates for staff members. A total of 69 schools responded. Most implemented NPIs were aimed at students, except for masking mandates, which preferentially targeted teachers over students (63% versus 22%). We observed lower crude secondary attack rates in schools with a ventilation system compared to schools without a ventilation system (1.2% versus 2.8%, p<0.01). Mandatory masking for staff members had no effect on the overall crude secondary attack rate (2.0% versus 2.1%, p = 0.03) but decreased the crude secondary attack rate among staff members (2.3% versus 1.7%, p<0.01). Schools varied in their implementation of NPIs, most of which targeted students. Rates of within-school transmission were higher compared to other studies, possibly due to a lack of proper ventilation. Our research may help improve guidance for primary schools in future outbreaks.

Seeing the forest and the trees: Holistic view of social distancing on the spread of COVID-19 in China

The human social and behavioral activities play significant roles in the spread of COVID-19. Social-distancing centered non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) are the best strategies to curb the spread of COVID-19 prior to an effective pharmaceutical or vaccine solution. This study investigates various social-distancing measures' impact on the spread of COVID-19 using advanced global and novel local geospatial techniques. Social distancing measures are acquired through website analysis, document text analysis, and other big data extraction strategies. A spatial panel regression model and a newly proposed geographically weighted panel regression model are applied to investigate the global and local relationships between the spread of COVID-19 and the various social distancing measures. Results from the combined global and local analyses confirm the effectiveness of NPI strategies to curb the spread of COVID-19. While global level strategies allow a nation to implement social distancing measures immediately at the beginning to minimize the impact of the disease, local level strategies fine tune such measures based on different times and places to provide targeted implementation to balance conflicting demands during the pandemic. The local level analysis further suggests that implementing different NPI strategies in different locations might allow us to battle unknown global pandemic more efficiently.

COVID-19 prevention at institutions of higher education, United States, 2020-2021: implementation of nonpharmaceutical interventions

BACKGROUND

In early 2020, following the start of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, institutions of higher education (IHEs) across the United States rapidly pivoted to online learning to reduce the risk of on-campus virus transmission. We explored IHEs' use of this and other nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) during the subsequent pandemic-affected academic year 2020-2021.

METHODS

From December 2020 to June 2021, we collected publicly available data from official webpages of 847 IHEs, including all public (n = 547) and a stratified random sample of private four-year institutions (n = 300). Abstracted data included NPIs deployed during the academic year such as changes to the calendar, learning environment, housing, common areas, and dining; COVID-19 testing; and facemask protocols. We performed weighted analysis to assess congruence with the October 29, 2020, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance for IHEs. For IHEs offering ≥50% of courses in person, we used weighted multivariable linear regression to explore the association between IHE characteristics and the summated number of implemented NPIs.

RESULTS

Overall, 20% of IHEs implemented all CDC-recommended NPIs. The most frequently utilized NPI was learning environment changes (91%), practiced as one or more of the following modalities: distance or hybrid learning opportunities (98%), 6-ft spacing (60%), and reduced class sizes (51%). Additionally, 88% of IHEs specified facemask protocols, 78% physically changed common areas, and 67% offered COVID-19 testing. Among the 33% of IHEs offering ≥50% of courses in person, having < 1000 students was associated with having implemented fewer NPIs than IHEs with ≥1000 students.

CONCLUSIONS

Only 1 in 5 IHEs implemented all CDC recommendations, while a majority implemented a subset, most commonly changes to the classroom, facemask protocols, and COVID-19 testing. IHE enrollment size and location were associated with degree of NPI implementation. Additional research is needed to assess adherence to NPI implementation in IHE settings.