Lessons learned from the investigation of a COVID-19 cluster in Creil, France: effectiveness of targeting symptomatic cases and conducting contact tracing around them.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
This study presents the methods and results of the investigation into a SARS-CoV-2 outbreak in a professional community. Due to the limited testing capacity available in France at the time, we elaborated a testing strategy according to pre-test probability.Methods
The investigation design combined active case finding and contact tracing around each confirmed case with testing of at-risk contact persons who had any evocative symptoms (n = 88). One month later, we performed serology testing to test and screen symptomatic and asymptomatic cases again (n = 79).Results
Twenty-four patients were confirmed (14 with RT-PCR and 10 with serology). The attack rate was 29% (24/83). Median age was 40 (24 to 59), and the sex ratio was 15/12. Only three cases were asymptomatic (= no symptoms at all, 13%, 95% CI, 3-32). Nineteen symptomatic cases (79%, 95% CI, 63-95) presented a respiratory infection, two of which were severe. All the RT-PCR confirmed cases acquired protective antibodies. Median incubation was 4 days (from 1 to 13 days), and the median serial interval was 3 days (0 to 15). We identified pre-symptomatic transmission in 40% of this cluster, but no transmission from asymptomatic to symptomatic cases.Conclusion
We report the effective use of targeted testing according to pre-test probability, specifically prioritizing symptomatic COVID-19 diagnosis and contact tracing. The asymptomatic rate raises questions about the real role of asymptomatic infected people in transmission. Conversely, pre-symptomatic contamination occurred frequently in this cluster, highlighting the need to identify, test, and quarantine asymptomatic at-risk contact persons (= contact tracing). The local lockdown imposed helped reduce transmission during the investigation period.
SUBMITTER: de Laval F
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8133048 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background: Contact tracing is a core element of the public health response to emerging infectious diseases including COVID-19. Better understanding the implementation context of contact tracing for pandemics, including individual- and systems-level predictors of success, is critical to preparing for future epidemics. Methods: We carried out a prospective implementation study of an emergency volunteer contact tracing program established in New Haven, Connecticut between April 4 and May 19, 2020. We assessed the yield and timeliness of case and contact outreach in reference to CDC benchmarks, and identified individual and programmatic predictors of successful implementation using multivariable regression models. We synthesized our findings using the RE-AIM implementation framework. Results: Case investigators interviewed only 826 (48%) of 1,705 cases and were unable to reach 545 (32%) because of incomplete information and 334 (20%) who missed or declined repeated outreach calls. Contact notifiers reached just 687 (28%) of 2,437 reported contacts, and were unable to reach 1,597 (66%) with incomplete information and 153 (6%) who missed or declined repeated outreach calls. The median time-to-case-interview was 5 days and time-to-contact-notification 8 days. However, among notified contacts with complete time data, 457 (71%) were reached within 6 days of exposure. The least likely groups to be interviewed were elderly (adjusted relative risk, aRR 0.74, 95% CI 0.61-0.89, p = 0.012, vs. young adult) and Black/African-American cases (aRR 0.88, 95% CI 0.80-0.97, pairwise p = 0.01, vs. Hispanic/Latinx). However, ties between cases and their contacts strongly influenced contact notification success (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) 0.60). Surging caseloads and high volunteer turnover (case investigator n = 144, median time from sign-up to retirement from program was 4 weeks) required the program to supplement the volunteer workforce with paid public health nurses. Conclusions: An emergency volunteer-run contact tracing program fell short of CDC benchmarks for time and yield, largely due to difficulty collecting the information required for outreach to cases and contacts. To improve uptake, contact tracing programs must professionalize the workforce; better integrate testing and tracing services; capitalize on positive social influences between cases and contacts; and address racial and age-related disparities through enhanced community engagement.
| S-EPMC8417826 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The current health-care environment is demanding evidence-based medicine that relies on clinical trials as the basis for decisions. Clinician investigators are more often finding that they are personally responsible for coordinating large, multisite trials. We present strategies for successful implementation and management of multisite clinical trials and knowledge gained through an international, multisite randomized clinical trial. Topics include team composition, regulatory requirements, study organization and governance, communication strategies, recruitment and retention efforts, budget, technology transfer, and publication.
| S-EPMC3935288 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundContact tracing is one of the key response activities necessary for halting Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) transmission. Key elements of contact tracing include identification of persons who have been in contact with confirmed EVD cases and careful monitoring for EVD symptoms, but the details of implementation likely influence their effectiveness. In November 2015, several months after a major Ebola outbreak was controlled in Liberia, three members of a family were confirmed positive for EVD in the Duport Road area of Monrovia. The cluster provided an opportunity to implement and evaluate modified approaches to contact tracing.MethodsThe approaches employed for improved contact tracing included classification and risk-based management of identified contacts (including facility based isolation of some high risk contacts, provision of support to persons being monitored, and school-based surveillance for some persons with potential exposure but not listed as contacts), use of phone records to help locate missing contacts, and modifications to data management tools. We recorded details about the implementation of these approaches, report the overall outcomes of the contact tracing efforts and the challenges encountered, and provide recommendations for management of future outbreaks.Results165 contacts were identified (with over 150 identified within 48 hours of confirmation of the EVD cases) and all initially missing contacts were located. Contacts were closely monitored and promptly tested if symptomatic; no contacts developed disease. Encountered challenges related to knowledge gaps among contact tracing staff, data management, and coordination of contact tracing activities with efforts to offer Ebola vaccine.ConclusionsThe Duport Road EVD cluster was promptly controlled. Missing contacts were effectively identified, and identified contacts were effectively monitored and rapidly tested. There is a persistent risk of EVD reemergence in Liberia; the experience controlling each cluster can help inform future Ebola control efforts in Liberia and elsewhere.
| S-EPMC5470714 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Simulation-based research has grown substantially over the past two decades; however, relatively few published simulation studies are multicenter in nature. Multicenter research confers many distinct advantages over single-center studies, including larger sample sizes for more generalizable findings, sharing resources amongst collaborative sites, and promoting networking. Well-executed multicenter studies are more likely to improve provider performance and/or have a positive impact on patient outcomes. In this manuscript, we offer a step-by-step guide to conducting multicenter, simulation-based research based upon our collective experience with the International Network for Simulation-based Pediatric Innovation, Research and Education (INSPIRE). Like multicenter clinical research, simulation-based multicenter research can be divided into four distinct phases. Each phase has specific differences when applied to simulation research: (1) Planning phase, to define the research question, systematically review the literature, identify outcome measures, and conduct pilot studies to ensure feasibility and estimate power; (2) Project Development phase, when the primary investigator identifies collaborators, develops the protocol and research operations manual, prepares grant applications, obtains ethical approval and executes subsite contracts, registers the study in a clinical trial registry, forms a manuscript oversight committee, and conducts feasibility testing and data validation at each site; (3) Study Execution phase, involving recruitment and enrollment of subjects, clear communication and decision-making, quality assurance measures and data abstraction, validation, and analysis; and (4) Dissemination phase, where the research team shares results via conference presentations, publications, traditional media, social media, and implements strategies for translating results to practice. With this manuscript, we provide a guide to conducting quantitative multicenter research with a focus on simulation-specific issues.
| S-EPMC5806260 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The lengthy and uncertain translation of research into clinical practice is well documented. Much of the current "gold standard" clinical research is slow, expensive, and lacks perceived relevance for practitioners and decision makers. In contrast, we summarize experiences conducting the My Own Health Report (MOHR) project to collect and address patient reported measures using principles of rapid, relevant pragmatic research. The methods used for rapid design and fielding of the MOHR project to improve attention to health behaviors and mental health are detailed. Within the multisite, pragmatic, implementation-focused MOHR study, we describe the four phases of the research and the key decisions made and actions taken within each. We provide concrete examples of how relevant research can be conducted transparently to rapidly provide information to practitioners. Data were collected and analyzed in 2013. The multisite (seven research centers partnered with 18 clinics) cluster randomized pragmatic delayed intervention trial was conducted in less than 18 months from receipt of funding applications to completion of data collection. Phases that were especially accelerated included funding and review, and recruitment and implementation. Conducting complex studies rapidly and efficiently is a realistic goal. Key lessons learned for prevention research include use of existing research networks; use of web-based assessment/feedback tools that are tailored to fit local needs; engaging relevant stakeholders early on and throughout the process to minimize need for redesign; and making pragmatic decisions that balance internal and external validity concerns rather than waiting for perfect solutions.
| S-EPMC4609529 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Given the severity and suicide risk of patients typically treated by Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) and the absence of guidelines regarding delivery of DBT via telehealth, it is crucial that the DBT treatment community gather and rapidly disseminate information about effective strategies for delivering DBT via telehealth. The current study surveyed DBT providers (N = 200) to understand challenges and lessons learned as they transitioned to conducting DBT via telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic. Open-ended responses to challenges and lessons-learned were coded. Most frequently noted challenges were Therapy-Interfering Behaviors and elements related to the provision of Individual Therapy and Skills Training Group. The majority of providers offered advice for implementing group skills training, avoiding or overcoming therapist burnout, and emphasized continued adherence to treatment principles, even in the context of this new treatment modality. Overall, this qualitative study marks a starting point on identifying best practices delivering DBT via telehealth for which it is anticipated that clinical recommendations in this area will evolve, informed by clinician, researcher, and consumer input.
| S-EPMC8488181 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGiven the rarity of most single-gene Mendelian disorders, concerted efforts of data exchange between clinical and scientific communities are critical to optimize molecular diagnosis and novel disease gene discovery.MethodsWe designed and implemented protocols for the study of cases for which a plausible molecular diagnosis was not achieved in a clinical genomics diagnostic laboratory (i.e. unsolved clinical exomes). Such cases were recruited to a research laboratory for further analyses, in order to potentially: (1) accelerate novel disease gene discovery; (2) increase the molecular diagnostic yield of whole exome sequencing (WES); and (3) gain insight into the genetic mechanisms of disease. Pilot project data included 74 families, consisting mostly of parent-offspring trios. Analyses performed on a research basis employed both WES from additional family members and complementary bioinformatics approaches and protocols.ResultsAnalysis of all possible modes of Mendelian inheritance, focusing on both single nucleotide variants (SNV) and copy number variant (CNV) alleles, yielded a likely contributory variant in 36% (27/74) of cases. If one includes candidate genes with variants identified within a single family, a potential contributory variant was identified in a total of ~51% (38/74) of cases enrolled in this pilot study. The molecular diagnosis was achieved in 30/63 trios (47.6%). Besides this, the analysis workflow yielded evidence for pathogenic variants in disease-associated genes in 4/6 singleton cases (66.6%), 1/1 multiplex family involving three affected siblings, and 3/4 (75%) quartet families. Both the analytical pipeline and the collaborative efforts between the diagnostic and research laboratories provided insights that allowed recent disease gene discoveries (PURA, TANGO2, EMC1, GNB5, ATAD3A, and MIPEP) and increased the number of novel genes, defined in this study as genes identified in more than one family (DHX30 and EBF3).ConclusionAn efficient genomics pipeline in which clinical sequencing in a diagnostic laboratory is followed by the detailed reanalysis of unsolved cases in a research environment, supplemented with WES data from additional family members, and subject to adjuvant bioinformatics analyses including relaxed variant filtering parameters in informatics pipelines, can enhance the molecular diagnostic yield and provide mechanistic insights into Mendelian disorders. Implementing these approaches requires collaborative clinical molecular diagnostic and research efforts.
| S-EPMC5361813 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Despite years of effort, reliable biometric identification of newborns and young children has remained elusive. In this paper, we review the importance of trusted identification methods, the biometric landscape for infants and adults, barriers and success stories, and we discuss specific failure modes particular to young children. We then describe our approach to infant identification using non-contact optical imaging of fingerprints. We detail our technology development history, including Human-Centered Design methods, various iterations of our platform, and how these iterations addressed failure modes in the identification process. We close with a brief description of our clinical trial of newborns and infants at an urban hospital in Mexico and report preliminary results that show high accuracy, with matching rates consistent with acceptable field-performance for reliable biometric identification in large populations.
| S-EPMC6667827 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo describe challenges and lessons learned in conducting a remote behavioral weight loss trial.MethodsThe Personal Diet Study is an ongoing randomized clinical trial which aims to compare two mobile health (mHealth) weight loss approaches, standardized diet vs. personalized feedback, on glycemic response. Over a six-month period, participants attended dietitian-led group meetings via remote videoconferencing and were encouraged to self-monitor dietary intake using a smartphone app. Descriptive statistics were used to report adherence to counseling sessions and self-monitoring. Challenges were tracked during weekly project meetings.ResultsChallenges in connecting to and engaging in the videoconferencing sessions were noted. To address these issues, we provided a step-by-step user manual and video tutorials regarding use of WebEx, encouraged alternative means to join sessions, and sent reminder emails/texts about the WebEx sessions and asking participants to join sessions early. Self-monitoring app-related issue included inability to find specific foods in the app database. To overcome this, the study team incorporated commonly consumed foods as "favorites" in the app database, provided a manual and video tutorials regarding use of the app and checked the self-monitoring app dashboard weekly to identify nonadherent participants and intervened as appropriate. Among 135 participants included in the analysis, the median attendance rate for the 14 remote sessions was 85.7% (IQR: 64.3%-92.9%).ConclusionsExperience and lessons shared in this report may provide critical and timely guidance to other behavioral researchers and interventionists seeking to adapt behavioral counseling programs for remote delivery in the age of COVID-19.
| S-EPMC8491412 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceContact tracing is a multistep process to limit SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Gaps in the process result in missed opportunities to prevent COVID-19.ObjectiveTo quantify proportions of cases and their contacts reached by public health authorities and the amount of time needed to reach them and to compare the risk of a positive COVID-19 test result between contacts and the general public during 4-week assessment periods.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study took place at 13 health departments and 1 Indian Health Service Unit in 11 states and 1 tribal nation. Participants included all individuals with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and their named contacts. Local COVID-19 surveillance data were used to determine the numbers of persons reported to have laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 who were interviewed and named contacts between June and October 2020.Main outcomes and measuresFor contacts, the numbers who were identified, notified of their exposure, and agreed to monitoring were calculated. The median time from index case specimen collection to contact notification was calculated, as were numbers of named contacts subsequently notified of their exposure and monitored. The prevalence of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test among named and tested contacts was compared with that jurisdiction's general population during the same 4 weeks.ResultsThe total number of cases reported was 74 185. Of these, 43 931 (59%) were interviewed, and 24 705 (33%) named any contacts. Among the 74 839 named contacts, 53 314 (71%) were notified of their exposure, and 34 345 (46%) agreed to monitoring. A mean of 0.7 contacts were reached by telephone by public health authorities, and only 0.5 contacts per case were monitored. In general, health departments reporting large case counts during the assessment (≥5000) conducted smaller proportions of case interviews and contact notifications. In 9 locations, the median time from specimen collection to contact notification was 6 days or less. In 6 of 8 locations with population comparison data, positive test prevalence was higher among named contacts than the general population.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study of US local COVID-19 surveillance data, testing named contacts was a high-yield activity for case finding. However, this assessment suggests that contact tracing had suboptimal impact on SARS-CoV-2 transmission, largely because 2 of 3 cases were either not reached for interview or named no contacts when interviewed. These findings are relevant to decisions regarding the allocation of public health resources among the various prevention strategies and for the prioritization of case investigations and contact tracing efforts.
| S-EPMC8176334 | biostudies-literature