Dataset Information

SARS-Cov-2 prevalence, transmission, health-related outcomes and control strategies in homeless shelters: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

People experiencing homelessness (PEH) may be at risk for COVID19. We synthesised evidence on SARS-Cov-2 infection, transmission, outcomes of disease, effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI), and the effectiveness of strategies for infection prevention and control (IPC).

Methods

Systematic review of articles, indexed in electronic databases (EMBASE, WHO-Covid19, Web of Science), institutional websites and the Norwegian Institute of Public Health's live map of COVID-19 evidence, and published from December 1st, 2019, to March 3rd, 2021. Empirical papers of any study design addressing Covid-19 and health(-related) outcomes in PEH or shelters' staff were included. (PROSPERO-2020-CRD42020187033).

Findings

Of 536 publications, 37 studies were included (two modelling, 31 observational, four qualitative studies). Random-effect meta-analysis yields a baseline SARS-Cov-2 prevalence of 2•32% (95% Confidence-Interval, 95%CI=1•30-3•34) in PEH and 1•55% (95%CI=0•79-2•31) in staff. In outbreaks, the pooled prevalence increases to 31•59% (95%CI=20•48-42•71) in PEH and 14•80% (95%CI=10•73-18•87) in staff. Main IPC strategies were universal rapid testing, expansion of non-congregate housing, and in-shelter measures (bed spacing, limited staff rotation, reduction in number of residents).

Interpretation

32% of PEH and 15% staff are infected during outbreaks of SARS-Cov-2 in homeless shelters. Most studies were conducted in the USA. No studies were found quantifying health-related outcomes of NPI. Overview and evaluation of IPC strategies for PEH, a better understanding of disease transmission, and reliable data on PEH within Covid-19 notification systems are needed. Qualitative studies may serve to voice PEH and shelter staff experiences, and guide future evaluations and IPC strategies.

Funding

None.

SUBMITTER: Mohsenpour A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8298932 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 outbreaks have occurred in homeless shelters across the US, highlighting an urgent need to identify the most effective infection control strategy to prevent future outbreaks.MethodsWe developed a microsimulation model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in a homeless shelter and calibrated it to data from cross-sectional polymerase chain reaction (PCR) surveys conducted during COVID-19 outbreaks in five homeless shelters in three US cities from March 28 to April 10, 2020. We estimated the probability of averting a COVID-19 outbreak when an exposed individual is introduced into a representative homeless shelter of 250 residents and 50 staff over 30 days under different infection control strategies, including daily symptom-based screening, twice-weekly PCR testing, and universal mask wearing.ResultsThe proportion of PCR-positive residents and staff at the shelters with observed outbreaks ranged from 2.6 to 51.6%, which translated to the basic reproduction number (R0) estimates of 2.9-6.2. With moderate community incidence (~ 30 confirmed cases/1,000,000 people/day), the estimated probabilities of averting an outbreak in a low-risk (R0 = 1.5), moderate-risk (R0 = 2.9), and high-risk (R0 = 6.2) shelter were respectively 0.35, 0.13, and 0.04 for daily symptom-based screening; 0.53, 0.20, and 0.09 for twice-weekly PCR testing; 0.62, 0.27, and 0.08 for universal masking; and 0.74, 0.42, and 0.19 for these strategies in combination. The probability of averting an outbreak diminished with higher transmissibility (R0) within the simulated shelter and increasing incidence in the local community.ConclusionsIn high-risk homeless shelter environments and locations with high community incidence of COVID-19, even intensive infection control strategies (incorporating daily symptom screening, frequent PCR testing, and universal mask wearing) are unlikely to prevent outbreaks, suggesting a need for non-congregate housing arrangements for people experiencing homelessness. In lower-risk environments, combined interventions should be employed to reduce outbreak risk.

Project description:BackgroundIt is unclear what the best strategy is for detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among residents of homeless shelters and what individual factors are associated with testing positive for the virus. We sought to evaluate factors associated with testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 among residents of homeless shelters and to evaluate positivity rates in shelters where testing was conducted in response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreaks or for surveillance.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective chart audit to obtain repeated cross-sectional data from outreach testing done at homeless shelters between Apr. 1 and July 31, 2020, in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. We compared the SARS-CoV-2 positivity rate for shelters where testing was conducted because of an outbreak (at least 1 known case) with those tested for surveillance (no known cases). A patient-level analysis evaluated differences in demographic, health and behavioural characteristics of residents who did and did not test positive for SARS-CoV-2 at shelters with at least 2 positive cases.ResultsOne thousand nasopharyngeal swabs were done on 872 unique residents at 20 shelter locations. Among the 504 tests done in outbreak settings, 69 (14%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2 and 1 (0.2%) was indeterminate. Among the 496 tests done for surveillance, 11 (2%) were positive and none were indeterminate. Shelter residents who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 were significantly less likely to have a health insurance card (54% v. 72%, p = 0.03) or to have visited another shelter in the last 14 days (0% v. 18%, p < 0.01). There was no association between SARS-CoV-2 positivity and medical history or symptoms.InterpretationOur findings support testing of asymptomatic shelter residents for SARS-CoV-2 when a positive case is identified at the same shelter. Surveillance testing when there are no known positive cases may detect outbreaks, but further research should identify efficient strategies given scarce testing resources.