Abstract
Background Air travel plays an import role in the cross-border spread of infectious diseases. During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic many countries introduced strict border testing protocols to monitor the incursion of the virus. However, the high implementation cost and significant inconvenience to passengers has led public health authorities to consider alternative methods of disease surveillance at borders. Aircraft wastewater monitoring has been proposed as one such alternative. In this paper we assess the theoretical limits of aircraft wastewater monitoring and compare its performance to post-arrival border screening approaches.
Methods We use an infectious disease model to simulate an unmitigated SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in a seed country. Seeding of the epidemic into the United Kingdom (UK) is simulated through daily flights between the two countries. We use a probabilistic approach to estimate the time of first detection of the disease in the UK in both aircraft wastewater and respiratory swab screening at the border.
Results For simulations across a broad range of model parameters, our analysis indicates that the median time between the first incursion of a pathogen and its detection in wastewater would be approximately 17 days (IQR: 7 - 28 days), resulting in a median of 25 cumulative cases (IQR: 6 - 84 cases) in the UK at the point of detection. Comparisons to respiratory swab screening suggest that aircraft wastewater monitoring is as effective as screening of 20% of passengers at the border, using a test with 95% sensitivity. For testing regimes with sensitivity of 85% or less, the required coverage to outperform wastewater monitoring increases to 30%. These results demonstrate the potential use cases of aircraft wastewater monitoring and its utility in a wider system of public health surveillance.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any specific funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the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, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Paper in collection COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, The University of Edinburgh, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.