Environmental surveillance of surface contamination is an unexplored tool for understanding transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in community settings. We conducted longitudinal swab sampling of high-touch non-porous surfaces in a Massachusetts town during a COVID-19 outbreak from April to June 2020. Twenty-nine of 348 (8.3%) surface samples were positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA, including crosswalk buttons, trash can handles, and door handles of essential business entrances (grocery store, liquor store, bank, and gas station). The estimated risk of infection from touching a contaminated surface was low (less than 5 in 10,000) by quantitative microbial risk assessment, suggesting fomites play a minimal role in SARS-CoV-2 community transmission. The weekly percentage of positive samples (out of n = 33 unique surfaces per week) best predicted variation in city-level COVID-19 cases with a 7-day lead time. Environmental surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 RNA on high-touch surfaces may be a useful tool to provide early warning of COVID-19 case trends.

SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic, is perceived to be primarily transmitted via person-to-person contact through droplets produced while talking, coughing, and sneezing. Transmission may also occur through other routes, including contaminated surfaces; nevertheless, the role that surfaces have on the spread of the disease remains contested. Here, we use the Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment framework to examine the risks of community transmission of SARS-CoV-2 through surfaces and to evaluate the effectiveness of hand and surface disinfection as potential interventions. Using conservative assumptions on input parameters of the model (e.g., dose−response relationship, ratio of genome copies to infective virus), the average of the median risks for single hand-to-surface contact followed by hand-to-face contact range from 1.6 × 10 −4 to 5.6 × 10 −9 for modeled prevalence rates of 0.2%−5%. For observed prevalence rates (0.2%, 1%), this corresponds to a low risk of infection (<10 −6 ). Hand disinfection substantially reduces risks of transmission independently of the disease's prevalence and contact frequency. In contrast, the effectiveness of surface disinfection is highly dependent on the prevalence and the frequency of contacts. The work supports the current perception that contaminated surfaces are not a primary mode of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and affirms the benefits of making hand disinfectants widely available.

Understanding virus transfer between liquid and skin is necessary to estimate transmission during water-related activities. Here, we modeled virus transfer from liquid-to-skin and skin-to-liquid. We performed human subject studies using three bacteriophages as pathogenic virus surrogates: nonenveloped MS2 and Qβ and enveloped Φ6. Our study shows that transfer from liquid-to-skin is describable by a single model based on (1) virus concentration and (2) volume of liquid remaining on skin. Contact times (0.1-30 min), and virus species had little-to-no influence on virus transfer. Likewise, liquid conditions (pH 6-9, ionic strength 10-550 mM) had no influence on transfer as shown for MS2. The model accounts for both, virus adsorbed onto the skin, and virus in the liquid retained on skin. In comparison, virus transfer from skin-to-liquid was influenced by the wetness of the skin and by liquid type (water, saliva). 90 ± 19% of the virus inoculated on the skin are transferred to the water when the skin remains wet compared to 30 ± 17% when the skin is dry. The transfer from skin-to-liquid was 41% higher when the recipient liquid was water as compared with saliva. This study quantifies virus transfer between liquid and skin and guides risk assessments of water-related activities.

Environmental surveillance of surface contamination is an unexplored tool for understanding transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in community settings. We conducted longitudinal swab sampling of high-touch non-porous surfaces in a Massachusetts town during a COVID-19 outbreak from April to June 2020. Twenty-nine of 348 (8.3 %) surface samples were positive for SARS-CoV-2, including crosswalk buttons, trash can handles, and door handles of essential business entrances (grocery store, liquor store, bank, and gas station). The estimated risk of infection from touching a contaminated surface was low (less than 5 in 10,000), suggesting fomites play a minimal role in SARS-CoV-2 community transmission. The weekly percentage of positive samples (out of n=33 unique surfaces per week) best predicted variation in city-level COVID-19 cases using a 7-day lead time. Environmental surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 RNA on high-touch surfaces could be a useful tool to provide early warning of COVID-19 case trends.

Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Indicator 6.2.1 requires household handwashing facilities to have soap and water, but there are no guidelines for handwashing water quality. In contrast, drinking water quality guidelines are defined: water must be “free from contamination” to be defined as “safely managed” (SDG Indicator 6.1.1). We modeled the hypothesized mechanism of infection due to contaminated handwashing water to inform risk-based guidelines for microbial quality of handwashing water. We defined two scenarios that should not occur: (1) if handwashing caused fecal contamination, indicated using Escherichia coli, on a person’s hands to increase rather than decrease and (2) if hand-to-mouth contacts following handwashing caused an infection risk greater than an acceptable threshold. We found water containing <1000 E. coli colony-forming units (CFU) per 100 mL removes E. coli from hands with>99.9% probability. However, for the annual probability of infection to be <1:1000, handwashing water must contain <2 × 10–6 focus-forming units of rotavirus, <1 × 10–4 CFU of Vibrio cholerae, and <9 × 10–6 Cryptosporidium oocysts per 100 mL. Our model suggests that handwashing with nonpotable water will generally reduce fecal contamination on hands but may be unable to lower the annual probability of infection risks from hand-to-mouth contacts below 1:1000.

SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic, is perceived to be primarily transmitted via person-to-person contact, through droplets produced while talking, coughing, and sneezing. Transmission may also occur through other routes, including contaminated surfaces; nevertheless, the role that surfaces have on the spread of the disease remains contested. Here we use the Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment framework to examine the risks of community transmission of SARS-CoV-2 through contaminated surfaces and to evaluate the effectiveness of hand and surface disinfection as potential interventions. The risks posed by contacting surfaces in communities are low (average of the median risks 1.6×10−4 - 5.6×10−9) for community infection prevalence rates ranging from 0.2-5%. Hand disinfection substantially reduces relative risks of transmission independently of the disease’s prevalence and the frequency of contact, even with low (25% of people) or moderate (50% of people) compliance. In contrast, the effectiveness of surface disinfection is highly dependent on the prevalence and the frequency of contacts. The work supports the current perception that contaminated surfaces are not a primary mode of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and affirms the benefits of making hand disinfectants widely available.

Bacterial pathogens and pathogen indicators suspended in stormwater are removed to a greater extent in biochar-augmented sand biofilters than sand biofilters; the processes governing the removal are distinct.

Infectious disease transmission is frequently mediated by the environment, where people's movements through and interactions with the environment dictate risks of infection and/or illness. Capturing these interactions, and quantifying their importance, offers important insights into effective interventions. In this study, we capture high time-resolution activity data for twenty-five Vietnamese farmers during collection and land application of human excreta for agriculture. Although human excreta use improves productivity, the use increases risks of enteric infections for both farmers and end users. In our study, the activity data are integrated with environmental microbial sampling data into a stochastic-mechanistic simulation of E. coli contamination on hands and E. coli ingested. Results from the study include frequent and variable contact rates for farmers' hands (from 34 to 1344 objects contacted per hour per hand), including highly variable hand-to-mouth contact rates (from 0 to 9 contacts per hour per hand). The frequency of hand-to-mouth contacts was substantially lower than the widely-used frequency previously reported for U.S. Office Workers. Environmental microbial contamination data highlighted ubiquitous E. coli contamination in the environment, including excreta, hands, toilet pit, handheld tools, soils, surfaces, and water. Results from the simulation suggest dynamic changes in E. coli contamination on hands, and wide variation in hand contamination and E. coli ingested amongst the farmers studied. Sensitivity analysis suggests that E. coli contamination on hands and ingested doses are most influenced by contamination of handheld tools, excreta, and the toilet pit as well as by frequency of hand-to-mouth contacts. The study findings are especially relevant given the context: no farmers reported adequate storage time of human excreta, and personal protective mask availability did not prevent hand-to-mouth contacts. Integrating high time-resolution activity data into exposure assessments highlights variation in exposures amongst farmers, and offers greater insight into effective interventions and their potential impacts.