ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND In 2020, U.S schools closed due to SARS-CoV-2 but their role in transmission was unknown. In fall 2020, national guidance for reopening omitted testing or screening recommendations. We report the experience of 2 large independent K-12 schools (School-A and School-B) that implemented an array of SARS-CoV-2 mitigation strategies that included periodic universal testing.
METHODS SARS-CoV-2 was identified through periodic universal PCR testing, self-reporting of tests conducted outside school, and contact tracing. Schools implemented behavioral and structural mitigation measures, including mandatory masks, classroom disinfecting, and social distancing.
RESULTS Over the fall semester, School-A identified 112 cases in 2320 students and staff; School-B identified 25 cases (2.0%) in 1200 students and staff. Most cases were asymptomatic and none required hospitalization. Of 69 traceable introductions, 63(91%) were not associated with school-based transmission, 59 cases (54%) occurred in the 2 weeks post-Thanksgiving. In 6/7 clusters, clear noncompliance with mitigation protocols was found. The largest outbreak had 28 identified cases and was traced to an off-campus party. There was no transmission from students to staff.
CONCLUSIONS Although school-age children can contract and transmit SARS-CoV-2, rates of COVID-19 infection related to in-person education were significantly lower than those in the surrounding community. However, social activities among students outside of school undermined those measures and should be discouraged, perhaps with behavioral contracts, to ensure the safety of school communities. In addition, introduction risks were highest following extended school breaks. These risks may be mitigated with voluntary quarantines and surveillance testing prior to re-opening.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This evaluation was not supported by any funders
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:
This was a program evaluation assessment of an in school program which was implemented by the schools. The authors had no access to personal information of PHI.
It has been reviewed by the Johns Hopkins IRB and has been determined to be Non Human Subjects Research (IRB#00278507). The text from the letter:
The JHM IRB has determined that the above-referenced new application does not constitute human subjects research under the DHHS or FDA regulations.
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
We will provide the data to any interested party
