Abstract
Shelter-in-place policies have been considered effective in mitigating the transmission of the virus SARS-CoV-2. To end such policies, routine testing and self-quarantine of those testing positive for active infection have been proposed, yet it remains unclear how often routine testing would need to be performed among workers returning to workplaces, and how effective this strategy would be to meaningfully prevent continued transmission of the virus. We simulated SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction testing to estimate the frequency of testing needed to avert continued epidemic propagation as shelter-in-place orders are relaxed. We find that testing strategies less frequent than twice weekly (e.g. weekly testing or testing once prior to returning to work) are unlikely to prevent workforce outbreaks. Even given unlimited testing capacity, the impact of frequent testing may not be sufficient to reliably relax shelter-in-place policies without risking continued epidemic propagation, unless other measures are instituted to complement testing and self-isolation.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
E.T.C acknowledges support by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship under Grant No. DGE 1656518. NCL is supported by the University of California, San Francisco. B.Q.H acknowledges support by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship under Grant No. DGE 1656518 and the National Library of Medicine under Training Grant T15 LM 007033. Funding sources had no role in the writing of this correspondence or the decision to submit for publication.
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.
Yes
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All code will be made publicly available, and are also available upon request.
