skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


  • NSF Public Access
  • Search Results
  • Estimate of undetected severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in acute-care hospital settings using an individual-based microsimulation model
Title: Estimate of undetected severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in acute-care hospital settings using an individual-based microsimulation model
Abstract Objective: Current guidance states that asymptomatic screening for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) prior to admission to an acute-care setting is at the facility’s discretion. This study’s objective was to estimate the number of undetected cases of SARS-CoV-2 admitted as inpatients under 4 testing approaches and varying assumptions. Design and setting: Individual-based microsimulation of 104 North Carolina acute-care hospitals Patients: All simulated inpatient admissions to acute-care hospitals from December 15, 2021, to January 13, 2022 [ie, during the SARS-COV-2 ο (omicron) variant surge]. Interventions: We simulated (1) only testing symptomatic patients, (2) 1-stage antigen testing with no confirmatory polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test, (3) 1-stage antigen testing with a confirmatory PCR for negative results, and (4) serial antigen screening (ie, repeat antigen test 2 days after a negative result). Results: Over 1 month, there were 77,980 admissions: 13.7% for COVID-19, 4.3% with but not for COVID-19, and 82.0% for non–COVID-19 indications without current infection. Without asymptomatic screening, 1,089 (credible interval [CI], 946–1,253) total SARS-CoV-2 infections (7.72%) went undetected. With 1-stage antigen screening, 734 (CI, 638–845) asymptomatic infections (67.4%) were detected, with 1,277 false positives. With combined antigen and PCR screening, 1,007 (CI, 875–1,159) asymptomatic infections (92.5%) were detected, with 5,578 false positives. A serial antigen testing policy detected 973 (CI, 845–1,120) asymptomatic infections (89.4%), with 2,529 false positives. Conclusions: Serial antigen testing identified >85% of asymptomatic infections and resulted in fewer false positives with less cost per identified infection compared to combined antigen plus PCR testing.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
2110109
PAR ID:
10401860
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology
ISSN:
0899-823X
Page Range / eLocation ID:
1 to 10
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; et al (, Open Forum Infectious Diseases)
    Abstract BackgroundThe severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Omicron variant has spread globally. However, the contribution of community versus household transmission to the overall risk of infection remains unclear. MethodsBetween November 2021 and March 2022, we conducted an active case-finding study in an urban informal settlement with biweekly visits across 1174 households with 3364 residents. Individuals displaying coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)–related symptoms were identified, interviewed along with household contacts, and defined as index and secondary cases based on reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and symptom onset. ResultsIn 61 households, we detected a total of 94 RT-PCR–positive cases. Of 69 sequenced samples, 67 cases (97.1%) were attributed to the Omicron BA.1* variant. Among 35 of their households, the secondary attack rate was 50.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 37.0%–63.0%). Women (relative risk [RR], 1.6 [95% CI, .9–2.7]), older individuals (median difference, 15 [95% CI, 2–21] years), and those reporting symptoms (RR, 1.73 [95% CI, 1.0–3.0]) had a significantly increased risk for SARS-CoV-2 secondary infection. Genomic analysis revealed substantial acquisition of viruses from the community even among households with other SARS-CoV-2 infections. After excluding community acquisition, we estimated a household secondary attack rate of 24.2% (95% CI, 11.9%–40.9%). ConclusionsThese findings underscore the ongoing risk of community acquisition of SARS-CoV-2 among households with current infections. The observed high attack rate necessitates swift booster vaccination, rapid testing availability, and therapeutic options to mitigate the severe outcomes of COVID-19. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; ; ; (, BMC Public Health)
    Abstract Contact tracing forms a crucial part of the public-health toolbox in mitigating and understanding emergent pathogens and nascent disease outbreaks. Contact tracing in the United States was conducted during the pre-Omicron phase of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. This tracing relied on voluntary reporting and responses, often using rapid antigen tests due to lack of accessibility to PCR tests. These limitations, combined with SARS-CoV-2’s propensity for asymptomatic transmission, raise the question “how reliable was contact tracing for COVID-19 in the United States”? We answered this question using a Markov model to examine the efficiency with which transmission could be detected based on the design and response rates of contact tracing studies in the United States. Our results suggest that contact tracing protocols in the U.S. are unlikely to have identified more than 1.65% (95% uncertainty interval: 1.62-1.68%) of transmission events with PCR testing and 1.00% (95% uncertainty interval 0.98-1.02%) with rapid antigen testing. When considering a more robust contact tracing scenario, based on compliance rates in East Asia with PCR testing, this increases to 62.7% (95% uncertainty interval: 62.6-62.8%). We did not assume presence of asymptomatic transmission or superspreading, making our estimates upper bounds on the actual percentages traced. These findings highlight the limitations in interpretability for studies of SARS-CoV-2 disease spread based on U.S. contact tracing and underscore the vulnerability of the population to future disease outbreaks, for SARS-CoV-2 and other pathogens. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; et al (, Journal of Travel Medicine)
    null (Ed.)
    Abstract Background Wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE) for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can be an important source of information for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) management during and after the pandemic. Currently, governments and transportation industries around the world are developing strategies to minimize SARS-CoV-2 transmission associated with resuming activity. This study investigated the possible use of SARS-CoV-2 RNA wastewater surveillance from airline and cruise ship sanitation systems and its potential use as a COVID-19 public health management tool. Methods Aircraft and cruise ship wastewater samples (n = 21) were tested for SARS-CoV-2 using two virus concentration methods, adsorption–extraction by electronegative membrane (n = 13) and ultrafiltration by Amicon (n = 8), and five assays using reverse-transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) and RT-droplet digital PCR (RT-ddPCR). Representative qPCR amplicons from positive samples were sequenced to confirm assay specificity. Results SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in samples from both aircraft and cruise ship wastewater; however concentrations were near the assay limit of detection. The analysis of multiple replicate samples and use of multiple RT-qPCR and/or RT-ddPCR assays increased detection sensitivity and minimized false-negative results. Representative qPCR amplicons were confirmed for the correct PCR product by sequencing. However, differences in sensitivity were observed among molecular assays and concentration methods. Conclusions The study indicates that surveillance of wastewater from large transport vessels with their own sanitation systems has potential as a complementary data source to prioritize clinical testing and contact tracing among disembarking passengers. Importantly, sampling methods and molecular assays must be further optimized to maximize detection sensitivity. The potential for false negatives by both wastewater testing and clinical swab testing suggests that the two strategies could be employed together to maximize the probability of detecting SARS-CoV-2 infections amongst passengers. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (, PLOS Medicine)
    Low, Nicola (Ed.)
    Background While booster vaccinations clearly reduce the risk of severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and death, the impact of boosters on Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections has not been fully characterized: Doing so requires understanding their impact on asymptomatic and mildly symptomatic infections that often go unreported but nevertheless play an important role in spreading SARS-CoV-2. We sought to estimate the impact of COVID-19 booster doses on SARS-CoV-2 infections in a vaccinated population of young adults during an Omicron BA.1-predominant period. Methods and findings We implemented a cohort study of young adults in a college environment (Cornell University’s Ithaca campus) from a period when Omicron BA.1 was the predominant SARS-CoV-2 variant on campus (December 5 to December 31, 2021). Participants included 15,800 university students who completed initial vaccination series with vaccines approved by the World Health Organization for emergency use, were enrolled in mandatory at-least-weekly surveillance polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing, and had no positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test within 90 days before the start of the study period. Robust multivariable Poisson regression with the main outcome of a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test was performed to compare those who completed their initial vaccination series and a booster dose to those without a booster dose. A total of 1,926 unique SARS-CoV-2 infections were identified in the study population. Controlling for sex, student group membership, date of completion of initial vaccination series, initial vaccine type, and temporal effect during the study period, our analysis estimates that receiving a booster dose further reduces the rate of having a PCR-detected SARS-CoV-2 infection relative to an initial vaccination series by 56% (95% confidence interval [42%, 67%], P < 0.001). While most individuals had recent booster administration before or during the study period (a limitation of our study), this result is robust to the assumed delay over which a booster dose becomes effective (varied from 1 day to 14 days). The mandatory active surveillance approach used in this study, under which 86% of the person-days in the study occurred, reduces the likelihood of outcome misclassification. Key limitations of our methodology are that we did not have an a priori protocol or statistical analysis plan because the analysis was initially done for institutional research purposes, and some analysis choices were made after observing the data. Conclusions We observed that boosters are effective, relative to completion of initial vaccination series, in further reducing the rate of SARS-CoV-2 infections in a college student population during a period when Omicron BA.1 was predominant; booster vaccinations for this age group may play an important role in reducing incidence of COVID-19. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; et al (, Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology)
    null (Ed.)
    Abstract Among 353 healthcare personnel in a longitudinal cohort in 4 hospitals in Atlanta, Georgia (May–June 2020), 23 (6.5%) had severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies. Spending >50% of a typical shift at the bedside (OR, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.2–10.5) and black race (OR, 8.4; 95% CI, 2.7–27.4) were associated with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email