Abstract
Objective In September 2020, records of 15,861 SARS-CoV-2 cases failed to upload from the Second Generation Laboratory Surveillance System (SGSS) to the Contact Tracing Advisory Service (CTAS) tool, resulting in a delay in the contact tracing of these cases. This study used CTAS data to determine the impact of this delay on health outcomes: transmission events, hospitalisations, and mortality. Previously, a modelling study had suggested a substantial impact.
Design Observational study
Setting England.
Population Individuals testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 and their reported contacts.
Main outcome measures Secondary attack rates (SARs), hospitalisations, and deaths amongst primary and secondary contacts were calculated, compared to all other concurrent, unaffected cases. SGSS records affected by the event were matched to CTAS records and successive contacts and cases were identified.
Results The initiation of contact tracing was delayed by 3 days on average in the primary cases in the delay group (6 days) compared to the control group (3 days). This was associated with lower completion of contact tracing of primary cases in the delay group: 80% (95%CI: 79-81%) in the delay group and 83% (95%CI: 83-84%) in the control group. There was some evidence to suggest an increase in transmission to non-household contacts amongst those affected by the delay. The SAR for non-household contacts was higher amongst secondary contacts in the delay group than the control group (delay group: 7.9%, 95%CI:6.4% to 9.2%; control group: 5.9%, 95%CI: 5.3% to 6.6%). There was no evidence of a difference between the delay and control groups in the odds of hospitalisation (crude odds ratio: 1.1 (95%CI: 0.9 to 1.2) or death (crude odds ratio: 0.7 (0.1 to 4.0)) amongst secondary contacts.
Conclusions The delay in contact tracing had a limited impact on population health outcomes.
Strengths and limitations of the study
Shows empirical data on the health impact of an event leading to a delay in contact tracing so can test hypotheses generated by models of the potential impact of a delay in contact tracing
Estimates the extent of further transmission and odds of increased mortality or hospitalisation in up to the third generation of cases affected by the event
The event acts as a natural experiment to describe the possible impact of contact tracing, comparing a group affected by chance by delayed contact tracing to a control group who experienced no delay
Contact tracing was not completed for all individuals, so the study might not capture all affected contacts or transmissions
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors. LF, LP, AC, MH, and IO acknowledge support from the NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Behavioural Science and Evaluation at University of Bristol. PS was funded by the NIHR Programme Grants for Applied Research programme (grant RP-PG-0616-20008). SS was funded by UKRI (grant MC_UU_00002/10) and UKHSA. For the purpose of open access, the author has applied a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising.
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:
The Research Ethics and Governance Group (REGG) of Public Health England (PHE) (now UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA)) gave ethical approval for this work. R&D reference: R&D 431.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
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
The data that support this study were collected as part of a public health response and are considered sensitive and not made publicly available. Reasonable requests for access to anonymised data and data dictionary will be considered by the authors on request.
