Implementation of a pooled surveillance testing program for asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections in K-12 schools and universities.
Asymptomatic infections
K-12 schools
Pooled surveillance testing
SARS-CoV-2
Journal
EClinicalMedicine
ISSN: 2589-5370
Titre abrégé: EClinicalMedicine
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101733727
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2021
Aug 2021
Historique:
received:
22
04
2021
revised:
21
06
2021
accepted:
29
06
2021
entrez:
26
7
2021
pubmed:
27
7
2021
medline:
27
7
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The negative impact of continued school closures during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic warrants the establishment of cost-effective strategies for surveillance and screening to safely reopen and monitor for potential in-school transmission. Here, we present a novel approach to increase the availability of repetitive and routine COVID-19 testing that may ultimately reduce the overall viral burden in the community. We implemented a testing program using the SalivaClear࣪ pooled surveillance method that included students, faculty and staff from K-12 schools (student age range 5-18 years) and universities (student age range >18 years) across the country (Mirimus Clinical Labs, Brooklyn, NY). The data analysis was performed using descriptive statistics, kappa agreement, and outlier detection analysis. From August 27, 2020 until January 13, 2021, 253,406 saliva specimens were self-collected from students, faculty and staff from 93 K-12 schools and 18 universities. Pool sizes of up to 24 samples were tested over a 20-week period. Pooled testing did not significantly alter the sensitivity of the molecular assay in terms of both qualitative (100% detection rate on both pooled and individual samples) and quantitative (comparable cycle threshold (Ct) values between pooled and individual samples) measures. The detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva was comparable to the nasopharyngeal swab. Pooling samples substantially reduced the costs associated with PCR testing and allowed schools to rapidly assess transmission and adjust prevention protocols as necessary. In one instance, in-school transmission of the virus was determined within the main office and led to review and revision of heating, ventilating and air-conditioning systems. By establishing low-cost, weekly testing of students and faculty, pooled saliva analysis for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 enabled schools to determine whether transmission had occurred, make data-driven decisions, and adjust safety protocols. We provide strong evidence that pooled testing may be a fundamental component to the reopening of schools by minimizing the risk of in-school transmission among students and faculty. Skoll Foundation generously provided funding to Mobilizing Foundation and Mirimus for these studies.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The negative impact of continued school closures during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic warrants the establishment of cost-effective strategies for surveillance and screening to safely reopen and monitor for potential in-school transmission. Here, we present a novel approach to increase the availability of repetitive and routine COVID-19 testing that may ultimately reduce the overall viral burden in the community.
METHODS
METHODS
We implemented a testing program using the SalivaClear࣪ pooled surveillance method that included students, faculty and staff from K-12 schools (student age range 5-18 years) and universities (student age range >18 years) across the country (Mirimus Clinical Labs, Brooklyn, NY). The data analysis was performed using descriptive statistics, kappa agreement, and outlier detection analysis.
FINDINGS
RESULTS
From August 27, 2020 until January 13, 2021, 253,406 saliva specimens were self-collected from students, faculty and staff from 93 K-12 schools and 18 universities. Pool sizes of up to 24 samples were tested over a 20-week period. Pooled testing did not significantly alter the sensitivity of the molecular assay in terms of both qualitative (100% detection rate on both pooled and individual samples) and quantitative (comparable cycle threshold (Ct) values between pooled and individual samples) measures. The detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva was comparable to the nasopharyngeal swab. Pooling samples substantially reduced the costs associated with PCR testing and allowed schools to rapidly assess transmission and adjust prevention protocols as necessary. In one instance, in-school transmission of the virus was determined within the main office and led to review and revision of heating, ventilating and air-conditioning systems.
INTERPRETATION
CONCLUSIONS
By establishing low-cost, weekly testing of students and faculty, pooled saliva analysis for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 enabled schools to determine whether transmission had occurred, make data-driven decisions, and adjust safety protocols. We provide strong evidence that pooled testing may be a fundamental component to the reopening of schools by minimizing the risk of in-school transmission among students and faculty.
FUNDING
BACKGROUND
Skoll Foundation generously provided funding to Mobilizing Foundation and Mirimus for these studies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34308321
doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101028
pii: S2589-5370(21)00308-4
pmc: PMC8286123
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
101028Subventions
Organisme : NCATS NIH HHS
ID : UL1 TR001863
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2021 The Author(s).
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
None.
Références
Int J Infect Dis. 2021 Apr;105:83-90
pubmed: 33581365
J Occup Environ Med. 2021 Jul 1;63(7):541-547
pubmed: 33596026
J Infect Chemother. 2021 Jan;27(1):126-129
pubmed: 33060046
J Infect. 2020 Jul;81(1):e45-e50
pubmed: 32298676
World Med Health Policy. 2020 Aug 20;:
pubmed: 32904951
Clin Pract Epidemiol Ment Health. 2020 Aug 18;16:189-191
pubmed: 32944059
CMAJ. 2020 Oct 5;192(40):E1146-E1155
pubmed: 32907820
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020 Jun 19;69(24):759-765
pubmed: 32555134
Lancet Infect Dis. 2020 Jun;20(6):655-656
pubmed: 32171389
Mol Oral Microbiol. 2020 Aug;35(4):141-145
pubmed: 32367576
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020 Apr 17;69(15):458-464
pubmed: 32298251
N Engl J Med. 2020 Sep 24;383(13):1283-1286
pubmed: 32857487
Proc Biol Sci. 2006 Oct 7;273(1600):2541-50
pubmed: 16959647
Cell. 2021 Mar 4;184(5):1127-1132
pubmed: 33581746
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020 Sep;26(9):1248-1253
pubmed: 32585353
Lancet Infect Dis. 2020 Nov;20(11):1231-1232
pubmed: 32530425
J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Oct 21;58(11):
pubmed: 32817233
J Clin Virol. 2020 Nov;132:104619
pubmed: 32920431
Nature. 2020 May;581(7809):465-469
pubmed: 32235945
Int J Infect Dis. 2020 Nov;100:112-116
pubmed: 32891737
J Med Virol. 2021 Mar;93(3):1506-1511
pubmed: 32841429
Clin Infect Dis. 2020 Sep 25;:
pubmed: 32976596
J Clin Virol. 2020 Oct;131:104570
pubmed: 32805524
PLoS One. 2021 Jun 10;16(6):e0253007
pubmed: 34111196
Int J Infect Dis. 2021 Feb;103:243-245
pubmed: 33321208
Lancet. 1999 Jan 30;353(9150):359-63
pubmed: 9950441
Lancet. 1993 Jul 10;342(8863):87-90
pubmed: 8100916
Lab Med. 2021 Jan 4;52(1):e15-e16
pubmed: 33206195
PLoS One. 2021 Feb 23;16(2):e0243183
pubmed: 33621263
Med (N Y). 2021 Mar 12;2(3):263-280.e6
pubmed: 33521748
J Clin Microbiol. 2021 Feb 18;59(3):
pubmed: 33262219
Nat Biotechnol. 2020 Oct;38(10):1164-1167
pubmed: 32948856