RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 COVID-19 screening strategies that permit the safe re-opening of college campuses
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.07.06.20147702
DO 10.1101/2020.07.06.20147702
A1 Paltiel, A. David
A1 Zheng, Amy
A1 Walensky, Rochelle P.
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/07/07/2020.07.06.20147702.abstract
AB Importance The COVID-19 pandemic poses an existential threat to many US residential colleges: either they open their doors to students in September or they risk serious financial consequences.Objective To define SARS-CoV-2 screening performance standards that would permit the safe return of students to campus for the Fall 2020 semester.Design Decision and cost-effectiveness analysis linked to a compartmental epidemic model to evaluate campus screening using tests of varying frequency (daily-weekly), sensitivity (70%-99%), specificity (98%-99.7%), and cost ($10-$50/test). Reproductive numbers Rt = {1.5, 2.5, 3.5} defined three epidemic scenarios, with additional infections imported via exogenous shocks. We generally adhered to US government guidance for parameterization data.Participants A hypothetical cohort of 5000 college-age, uninfected students.Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s) Cumulative tests, infections, and costs; daily isolation dormitory census; incremental cost-effectiveness; and budget impact. All measured over an 80-day, abbreviated semester.Results With Rt = 2.5, daily screening with a 70% sensitive, 98% specific test produces 85 cumulative student infections and isolation dormitory daily census averaging 108 (88% false positives). Screening every 2 (7) days nets 135 (3662) cumulative infections and daily isolation census 66 (252) with 73% (4%) false positives. Across all scenarios, test frequency exerts more influence on outcomes than test sensitivity. Cost-effectiveness analysis selects screening every {2, 1, 7} days with a 70% sensitive test as the preferred strategy for Rt = {2.5, 3.5, 1.5}, implying a screening cost of {$470, $920, $120} per student per semester.Conclusions & Relevance Rapid, inexpensive and frequently conducted screening – even if only 70% sensitive – would be cost-effective and produce a modest number of COVID-19 infections. While the optimal screening frequency hinges on the success of behavioral interventions to reduce the base severity of transmission (Rt), this could permit the safe return of student to campus.Question What SARS-CoV-2 screening and isolation program will keep U.S. residential college students safe and permit the reopening of campuses?Findings Frequent screening (every 2 or 3 days) of all students with a low-sensitivity, high-specificity test will control outbreaks with manageable isolation dormitory utilization at a justifiable cost.Meaning Campuses can safely reopen in the Fall 2020 but success hinges on frequent screening and uncompromising, continuous attention to basic prevention and behavioral interventions to reduce the baseline severity of transmission.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was supported by awards from the National Institute on Drug Abuse (R37 DA015612) of the National Institutes of Health and the Massachusetts General Hospital Executive Committee on Research (Steve and Deborah Gorlin Research Scholars Award to RPW). The funding sources had no role in any of the following: design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health or the Massachusetts General Hospital Executive Committee on Research.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Institutional Review Boards of both the Massachusetts General Hospital (protocol number 2020P000967) and the Yale School of Medicine (protocol ID 2000028589).All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesAll data used in this analysis were obtained from published, publicly available sources, which we have cited in the manuscript.