Feasibility of SARS-CoV-2 Surveillance Testing Among Children and Childcare Workers at German Day Care Centers: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.
Journal
JAMA network open
ISSN: 2574-3805
Titre abrégé: JAMA Netw Open
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101729235
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 01 2022
04 01 2022
Historique:
entrez:
4
1
2022
pubmed:
5
1
2022
medline:
14
1
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Closure of day care centers has been implemented globally to contain the COVID-19 pandemic but has negative effects on children's health and psychosocial well-being. To investigate the feasibility of surveillance among children and childcare workers and to model the efficacy of surveillance on viral spread prevention. This nonrandomized controlled trial was conducted at 9 day care centers in Wuerzburg, Germany, from October 2020 to March 2021. Participants included children attending day care, childcare workers, and household members. Participating day care centers were assigned to different surveillance modules in a nonrandomized feasibility study. A mathematical model for SARS-CoV-2 spread in day care centers was developed to identify optimal surveillance. Modules 1, 2, and 3 involved continuous surveillance of asymptomatic children and childcare workers by SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction testing of either midturbinate nasal swabs twice weekly (module 1) or once weekly (module 2) or self-sampled saliva samples twice weekly (module 3). Module 4 involved symptom-based, on-demand testing of children, childcare workers, and their household members by oropharyngeal swabs. All participants underwent SARS-CoV-2 antibody status testing before and after the sampling period. Questionnaires on attitudes and perception of the pandemic were administered in weeks 1, 6, and 12. Mathematical modeling was used to estimate SARS-CoV-2 spread in day care centers. The primary outcomes were acceptance of the respective surveillance protocols (feasibility study) and the estimated number of secondary infections (mathematical modeling). Of 954 eligible individuals (772 children and 182 childcare workers), 592 (62%), including 442 children (median [IQR] age, 3 [2-4] years; 214 [48.6%] female) and 150 childcare workers (median [IQR] age, 29 [25-44] years; 129 [90.8%] female) participated in the surveillance. In total, 4755 tests for SARS-CoV-2 detected 2 infections (1 childcare worker and 1 adult household member). Acceptance for continuous surveillance was highest for biweekly saliva testing (150 of 221 eligible individuals [67.9%; 95% CI, 61.5%-73.7%]) compared with biweekly (51 of 117 individuals [43.6%; 95% CI, 35.0%-52.6%]) and weekly (44 of 128 individuals [34.4%; 95% CI, 26.7%-43.0%]) midturbinate swabbing (P < .001). Dropout rates were higher for midturbinate swabbing (biweekly, 11 of 62 participants [18%]; once weekly, 11 of 55 participants [20%]) than for saliva testing (6 of 156 participants [4%]). Mathematical modeling based on study and literature data identified biweekly testing of at least 50% of children and childcare workers as minimal requirements to limit secondary infections. In this nonrandomized controlled trial, surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 in 9 German day care centers was feasible and well accepted. Mathematical modeling estimated that testing can minimize the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in day care centers. These findings enable setup of surveillance programs to maintain institutional childcare. German Registry for Clinical Trials Identifier: DRKS00023721.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34982157
pii: 2787578
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.42057
pmc: PMC8728621
doi:
Types de publication
Controlled Clinical Trial
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e2142057Investigateurs
Anastasia Besenfelder
(A)
Lena Buechner
(L)
Kathrin Frei
(K)
Theresa Höferth
(T)
Thiên-Trí Lam
(TT)
Sabrina Mündlein
(S)
Christoph Schoen
(C)
Alexandra Schubert-Unkmeir
(A)
Lars Wallstabe
(L)
Kerstin Knies
(K)
Rebecca Richter
(R)
Abdullah Almamy
(A)
Maxi Bettkober
(M)
Viktoria Engert
(V)
Phillipp Fecher
(P)
Jonas Fischer
(J)
Robin Khan
(R)
Fabian Kleindiek
(F)
Mirja Müller
(M)
Lara Müller-Scholden
(L)
Pauline Nehm
(P)
Jacobe Rapp
(J)
Christina Pfann
(C)
Maria Riedmeier
(M)
George Robinson
(G)
Sarah Schnee
(S)
Anna-Lena Sieg
(AL)
Max Siegl
(M)
Fumi Sugihara
(F)
Anne Thieme
(A)
Gvantsa Uturgaidze
(G)
Brigitte Wehner
(B)
Références
JAMA Pediatr. 2021 Jun 1;175(6):586-593
pubmed: 33480966
Science. 2020 Dec 11;370(6522):1339-1343
pubmed: 33159009
Front Immunol. 2018 Apr 04;9:667
pubmed: 29670632
Front Microbiol. 2015 Jun 19;6:608
pubmed: 26150807
J Pediatr Psychol. 2020 Nov 1;45(10):1114-1123
pubmed: 33068403
Nature. 2008 Apr 10;452(7188):750-4
pubmed: 18401408
Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2020 Sep;4(9):653-661
pubmed: 32593339
Trends Neurosci Educ. 2021 Mar;22:100151
pubmed: 33845978
J Med Virol. 2021 Mar;93(3):1828-1831
pubmed: 33230857
Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2020 May;4(5):397-404
pubmed: 32272089
Med Decis Making. 2021 May;41(4):419-429
pubmed: 33733933
Pediatrics. 2021 Jan;147(1):
pubmed: 33055228
PLoS Comput Biol. 2014 Feb 20;10(2):e1003479
pubmed: 24586131
PLoS One. 2021 Feb 25;16(2):e0238268
pubmed: 33630842
Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2021 Mar 9;:
pubmed: 33751230
Am J Epidemiol. 2016 Nov 1;184(9):644-651
pubmed: 27744384
JAMA. 2013 Nov 27;310(20):2191-4
pubmed: 24141714
JAMA Pediatr. 2021 Feb 1;175(2):143-156
pubmed: 32975552
Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2020 Nov;4(11):807-816
pubmed: 32758454
Nat Commun. 2021 Jun 11;12(1):3560
pubmed: 34117244
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Nov 03;17(21):
pubmed: 33153155
Clin Infect Dis. 2021 Nov 2;73(9):e3036-e3041
pubmed: 33388748
Science. 2021 Jul 9;373(6551):
pubmed: 34035154
J Infect Public Health. 2018 Sep - Oct;11(5):657-661
pubmed: 29396256
GMS Hyg Infect Control. 2020 Oct 09;15:Doc24
pubmed: 33214989
JAMA Pediatr. 2020 Oct 1;174(10):921-922
pubmed: 32401277
Lancet Infect Dis. 2021 Feb;21(2):193-202
pubmed: 33729915
Front Immunol. 2018 Mar 21;9:560
pubmed: 29619027