Measuring Basic Reproduction Number to Assess Effects of Nonpharmaceutical Interventions on Nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 Transmission

Effect of testing criteria for infectious disease surveillance: The case of COVID-19 in Norway

During the COVID-19 pandemic in Norway, the testing criteria and capacity changed numerous times. In this study, we aim to assess consequences of changes in testing criteria for infectious disease surveillance. We plotted the proportion of positive PCR tests and the total number of PCR tests for different periods of the pandemic in Norway. We fitted regression models for the total number of PCR tests and the probability of positive PCR tests, with time and weekday as explanatory variables. The regression analysis focuses on the time period until 2021, i.e. before Norway started vaccination. There were clear changes in testing criteria and capacity over time. In particular, there was a marked difference in the testing regime before and after the introduction of self-testing, with a drastic increase in the proportion of positive PCR tests after the introduction of self-tests. The probability of a PCR test being positive was higher for weekends and public holidays than for Mondays-Fridays. The probability for a positive PCR test was lowest on Mondays. This implies that there were different testing criteria and/or different test-seeking behaviour on different weekdays. Though the probability of testing positive clearly changed over time, we cannot in general conclude that this occurred as a direct consequence of changes in testing policies. It is natural for the testing criteria to change during a pandemic. Though smaller changes in testing criteria do not seem to have large, abrupt consequences for the disease surveillance, larger changes like the introduction and massive use of self-tests makes the test data less useful for surveillance.

Predicting consequences of COVID-19 control measure de-escalation on nosocomial transmission and mortality: a modelling study in a French rehabilitation hospital

INTRODUCTION

Infection control measures are effective for nosocomial COVID-19 prevention but bear substantial health-economic costs, motivating their "de-escalation" in settings at low risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Yet consequences of de-escalation are difficult to predict, particularly in light of novel variants and heterogeneous population immunity.

AIM

To estimate how infection control measure de-escalation influences nosocomial COVID-19 risk.

METHODS

An individual-based transmission model was used to simulate SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks and control measure de-escalation in a French long-term care hospital with multi-modal control measures in place (testing and isolation, universal masking, single-occupant rooms). Estimates of COVID-19 case fatality rates (CFRs) from reported outbreaks were used to quantify excess COVID-19 mortality due to de-escalation.

RESULTS

In a population fully susceptible to infection, de-escalating both universal masking and single rooms resulted in hospital-wide outbreaks of 114 (95% CI: 103-125) excess infections, compared with five (three to seven) excess infections when de-escalating only universal masking or 15 (11-18) when de-escalating only single rooms. When de-escalating both measures and applying CFRs from the first wave of COVID-19, excess patient mortality ranged from 1.57 (1.41-1.71) to 9.66 (8.73-10.57) excess deaths/1000 patient-days. By contrast, when applying CFRs from subsequent pandemic waves and assuming susceptibility to infection among 40-60% of individuals, excess mortality ranged from 0 (0-0) to 0.92 (0.77-1.07) excess deaths/1000 patient-days.

CONCLUSIONS

The de-escalation of bundled COVID-19 control measures may facilitate widespread nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 transmission. However, excess mortality is probably limited in populations at least moderately immune to infection and given CFRs resembling those estimated during the 'post-vaccine' era.

How have mathematical models contributed to understanding the transmission and control of SARS-CoV-2 in healthcare settings? A systematic search and review

Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, mathematical models have been widely used to inform public health recommendations regarding COVID-19 control in healthcare settings. The objective of this study was to systematically review SARS-CoV-2 transmission models in healthcare settings, and to summarize their contributions to understanding nosocomial COVID-19. A systematic search and review of published articles indexed in PubMed was carried out. Modelling studies describing dynamic inter-individual transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in healthcare settings, published by mid-February 2022 were included. Models have mostly focused on acute-care and long-term-care facilities in high-income countries. Models have quantified outbreak risk, showing great variation across settings and pandemic periods. Regarding surveillance, routine testing rather than symptom-based was highlighted as essential for COVID-19 prevention due to high rates of silent transmission. Surveillance impacts depended critically on testing frequency, diagnostic sensitivity, and turn-around time. Healthcare re-organization also proved to have large epidemiological impacts: beyond obvious benefits of isolating cases and limiting inter-individual contact, more complex strategies (staggered staff scheduling, immune-based cohorting) reduced infection risk. Finally, vaccination impact, while highly effective for limiting COVID-19 burden, varied substantially depending on assumed mechanistic impacts on infection acquisition, symptom onset and transmission. Modelling results form an extensive evidence base that may inform control strategies for future waves of SARS-CoV-2 and other viral respiratory pathogens. We propose new avenues for future models of healthcare-associated outbreaks, with the aim of enhancing their efficiency and contributions to decision-making.

Collateral impacts of pandemic COVID-19 drive the nosocomial spread of antibiotic resistance: A modelling study

BACKGROUND

Circulation of multidrug-resistant bacteria (MRB) in healthcare facilities is a major public health problem. These settings have been greatly impacted by the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, notably due to surges in COVID-19 caseloads and the implementation of infection control measures. We sought to evaluate how such collateral impacts of COVID-19 impacted the nosocomial spread of MRB in an early pandemic context.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We developed a mathematical model in which Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and MRB cocirculate among patients and staff in a theoretical hospital population. Responses to COVID-19 were captured mechanistically via a range of parameters that reflect impacts of SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks on factors relevant for pathogen transmission. COVID-19 responses include both "policy responses" willingly enacted to limit SARS-CoV-2 transmission (e.g., universal masking, patient lockdown, and reinforced hand hygiene) and "caseload responses" unwillingly resulting from surges in COVID-19 caseloads (e.g., abandonment of antibiotic stewardship, disorganization of infection control programmes, and extended length of stay for COVID-19 patients). We conducted 2 main sets of model simulations, in which we quantified impacts of SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks on MRB colonization incidence and antibiotic resistance rates (the share of colonization due to antibiotic-resistant versus antibiotic-sensitive strains). The first set of simulations represents diverse MRB and nosocomial environments, accounting for high levels of heterogeneity across bacterial parameters (e.g., rates of transmission, antibiotic sensitivity, and colonization prevalence among newly admitted patients) and hospital parameters (e.g., rates of interindividual contact, antibiotic exposure, and patient admission/discharge). On average, COVID-19 control policies coincided with MRB prevention, including 28.2% [95% uncertainty interval: 2.5%, 60.2%] fewer incident cases of patient MRB colonization. Conversely, surges in COVID-19 caseloads favoured MRB transmission, resulting in a 13.8% [-3.5%, 77.0%] increase in colonization incidence and a 10.4% [0.2%, 46.9%] increase in antibiotic resistance rates in the absence of concomitant COVID-19 control policies. When COVID-19 policy responses and caseload responses were combined, MRB colonization incidence decreased by 24.2% [-7.8%, 59.3%], while resistance rates increased by 2.9% [-5.4%, 23.2%]. Impacts of COVID-19 responses varied across patients and staff and their respective routes of pathogen acquisition. The second set of simulations was tailored to specific hospital wards and nosocomial bacteria (methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, extended-spectrum beta-lactamase producing Escherichia coli). Consequences of nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks were found to be highly context specific, with impacts depending on the specific ward and bacteria evaluated. In particular, SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks significantly impacted patient MRB colonization only in settings with high underlying risk of bacterial transmission. Yet across settings and species, antibiotic resistance burden was reduced in facilities with timelier implementation of effective COVID-19 control policies.

CONCLUSIONS

Our model suggests that surges in nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 transmission generate selection for the spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Timely implementation of efficient COVID-19 control measures thus has 2-fold benefits, preventing the transmission of both SARS-CoV-2 and MRB, and highlighting antibiotic resistance control as a collateral benefit of pandemic preparedness.