Summary
Background Countries continue to debate the need for decontamination of cold-chain food packaging to reduce possible SARS-CoV-2 fomite transmission among workers. While laboratory-based studies demonstrate persistence of SARS-CoV-2 on surfaces, the likelihood of fomite-mediated transmission under real-life conditions is uncertain.
Methods Using a quantitative risk assessment model, we simulated in a frozen food packaging facility 1) SARS-CoV-2 fomite-mediated infection risks following worker exposure to contaminated plastic packaging; and 2) reductions in these risks attributed to masking, handwashing, and vaccination.
Findings In a representative facility with no specific interventions, SARS-CoV-2 infection risk to a susceptible worker from contact with contaminated packaging was 2·8 × 10−3 per 1h-period (95%CI: 6·9 × 10−6, 2·4 × 10−2). Implementation of standard infection control measures, handwashing and masks (9·4 × 10−6 risk per 1h-period, 95%CI: 2·3 × 10−8, 8·1 × 10−5), substantially reduced risk (99·7%). Vaccination of the susceptible worker (two doses Pfizer/Moderna, vaccine effectiveness: 86-99%) combined with handwashing and masking reduced risk to less than 1·0 × 10−6. Simulating increased infectiousness/transmissibility of new variants (2-, 10-fold viral shedding) among a fully vaccinated workforce, handwashing and masks continued to mitigate risk (2·0 × 10−6 -1·1 × 10−5 risk per 1h-period). Decontamination of packaging in addition to these interventions reduced infection risks to below the 1·0 × 10−6 risk threshold.
Interpretation Fomite-mediated SARS-CoV-2 infection risks were very low under cold-chain conditions. Handwashing and masking provide significant protection to workers, especially when paired with vaccination.
Funding U.S. Department of Agriculture
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was partially supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) T32 grant (J.S.S. grant 2T32ES012870-16); the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) (J.S.L. 2018-07410; J.S.S. grant 2020-67034-31728); the National Institute General Medical Sciences (B.A.L R01 GM124280); the National Science Foundation (B.A.L. 2032084); the NIH (E.T.S. T32AI138952); and the Emory University Infectious Disease Across Scales Training Program (E.T.S). The views expressed in this study are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the NIH or USDA.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
No identifiable data were used and all data included in the paper are publicly available from peer-reviewed papers. Thus, IRB approval was not needed for this study.
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
Footnotes
Competing interest statement: The authors declare no competing interest.
Data Availability
The code developed and used for this study will be made available through GitHub, with the DOI available upon publication.
