Risk factors associated with occurrence of COVID-19 among household persons exposed to patients with confirmed COVID-19 in Qingdao Municipal, China

Xin, Hualei; Jiang, Fachun; Xue, Anke; Liang, Jiwei; Zhang, Jingfei; Yang, Feng; Han, Yang

doi:10.22541/au.159111431.19682060

Cited by 8 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…After a household member is confirmed to be infected with SARS-CoV-2, household or family contacts are identified, followed for a short duration of time (e.g., two weeks), and tested if eligible for testing according to national testing guidelines to ascertain secondary infections. Index cases were identified by passive surveillance, 21 , 28 , 29 , 31 , 38 – 40 , 43 , 44 , 49 – 51 active surveillance of key populations (e.g., travelers from areas with active SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and individuals detected by neighborhood fever screenings), 25 , 27 , 34 both active and passive surveillance, 14 , 15 , 17 – 20 , 22 , 24 , 26 , 30 , 32 , 33 , 35 , 36 , 41 , 46 , 48 , 52 , 53 or regional seroprevalence surveys. 42 , 45 We did not include case reports or cluster investigations that focused on individual households or families in an effort to reduce publication bias.…”

Section: Review Of Transmissibility Of Sars-cov-2 In Households and Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many studies only included household contacts, 14 , 26 , 28 , 29 , 31 , 35 , 37 , 38 , 40 , 41 , 43 , 49 , 50 , 53 but others included family members, 15 , 20 , 21 , 23 , 27 , 30 or other close contacts, 16 – 19 , 22 , 24 , 25 , 32 – 34 , 36 , 39 , 42 , 44 , 46 – 48 , 52 including individuals outside the household. Of the latter studies of close contacts, many reported SARs among household contacts, 17 , 18 , 22 , 24 , 25 , 32 – 34 , 36 , 39 , 42 , 44 , 46 – 48 , 52 or all family members.…”

Section: Review Of Transmissibility Of Sars-cov-2 In Households and Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most studies involved tracing contacts and monitoring them for 14, 14 , 16 – 18 , 22 , 24 , 28 – 34 , 37 – 39 , 44 , 47 , 48 , 50 , 52 or 21 days. 19 , 26 Monitoring methods included phone calls, 21 , 34 , 39 , 44 text messages, 39 , 44 or direct observation by healthcare workers.…”

Section: Review Of Transmissibility Of Sars-cov-2 In Households and Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many studies, particularly those in China, reported in-home quarantine of contacts during the observation period after index cases were confirmed. 14 , 17 – 19 , 22 , 24 , 29 – 34 , 36 , 37 , 44 , 46 , 47 , 50 – 52 …”

Section: Review Of Transmissibility Of Sars-cov-2 In Households and Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Case ascertainment was primarily done via RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal samples. 14 , 17 , 18 , 21 – 23 , 26 – 33 , 35 – 37 , 40 , 44 , 46 – 53 However, several studies also reported whole-genome sequencing, 27 , 28 , 32 , 47 nucleic acid tests, 19 , 25 , 27 and antibody tests. 42 , 45 Two studies identified index cases via RT-PCR, but only collected symptom information about household contacts from telephone interviews with index cases.…”

Section: Review Of Transmissibility Of Sars-cov-2 In Households and Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Household transmission of SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review and meta-analysis of secondary attack rate

Madewell

Yang

Longini

et al. 2020

Preprint

386

513

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is spread by direct, indirect, or close contact with infected people via infected respiratory droplets or saliva. Crowded indoor environments with sustained close contact and conversations are a particularly high-risk setting. Methods: We performed a meta-analysis through July 29, 2020 of SARS-CoV-2 household secondary attack rate (SAR), disaggregating by several covariates (contact type, symptom status, adult/child contacts, contact sex, relationship to index case, index case sex, number of contacts in household, coronavirus). Findings: We identified 40 relevant published studies that report household secondary transmission. The estimated overall household SAR was 18.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 15.4%-22.2%), which is higher than previously observed SARs for SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV. We observed that household SARs were significantly higher from symptomatic index cases than asymptomatic index cases, to adult contacts than children contacts, to spouses than other family contacts, and in households with one contact than households with three or more contacts. Interpretation: To prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2, people are being asked to stay at home worldwide. With suspected or confirmed infections referred to isolate at home, household transmission will continue to be a significant source of transmission.

show abstract

Section: Review Of Transmissibility Of Sars-cov-2 In Households and Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Review Of Transmissibility Of Sars-cov-2 In Households and Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Review Of Transmissibility Of Sars-cov-2 In Households and Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Review Of Transmissibility Of Sars-cov-2 In Households and Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Review Of Transmissibility Of Sars-cov-2 In Households and Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Household transmission of SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review and meta-analysis of secondary attack rate

Madewell

Yang

Longini

et al. 2020

Preprint

386

513

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Factors Associated With Household Transmission of SARS-CoV-2

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IMPORTANCE A previous systematic review and meta-analysis of household transmission of SARS-CoV-2 that summarized 54 published studies through October 19, 2020, found an overall secondary attack rate (SAR) of 16.6% (95% CI, 14.0%-19.3%). However, the understanding of household secondary attack rates for SARS-CoV-2 is still evolving, and updated analysis is needed.OBJECTIVE To use newly published data to further the understanding of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the household.

show abstract

Factors Associated with Timely Test Seeking, Test Turnaround, and Public Reporting of COVID-19: a retrospective analysis in Ontario, Canada

Joh¹,

Buchan

Daneman

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Minimizing delays in disease identification and reporting improves the timeliness of surveillance data, and can reduce transmission of COVID-19. Our study investigates factors associated with timely testing and reporting of COVID-19 during the first pandemic wave in one province of Canada. Methods We identified all persons with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection residing in private households across the largest province of Canada, Ontario from the date of the first confirmed case in Ontario (January 25) to July 19, 2020. Our primary outcomes consisted of: (1) specimen collection within 1 day of symptom onset (test seeking), (2) test result reported to local public health within 1 day of specimen collection (test turnaround), and (3) entry of case data into the provincial database within 1 day of reporting test results (reporting). We examined 14 covariates including eight case characteristics, and six neighborhood characteristics. In addition to descriptive measures, logistic regression models were fitted. Unadjusted models included the covariate alone, while adjusted models included age, gender, month, and region. Findings Among 27,198 COVID-19 cases from January 25 2020 to July 19 2020, 28.7% had timely test seeking, 40.2% had timely test turnaround, and 75.5% had timely reporting. Male gender had lower odds of timely test seeking (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.79 [95% CI: 0.74-0.85]) compared to females. Healthcare worker status (aOR 2.77 [95% CI: 2.52-3.05] compared to non-healthcare workers), and age ≥80 years (aOR 1.59 [95% CI: 1.33-1.91] compared to 40-59 year olds) were associated with timely test seeking. Specimen collection on Fridays and Saturdays (aOR 0.88 [95% CI: 0.79-0.98], aOR 0.83 [95% CI: 0.74-0.92] respectively, compared to Wednesdays) had lower odds of timely test turnaround. Urban areas (aOR 1.55 [95% CI: 1.41-1.70] compared to rural areas) were associated with timely test turnaround. Urban areas (aOR 0.79 [95% CI: 0.70-0.89] compared to rural areas) were less likely to have timely reporting. Interpretation Individual, neighborhood, and administrative factors are associated with timely testing and reporting of SARS-CoV-2 infections. These findings present considerations for developing targeted strategies to minimize delays and improve timely testing and reporting of SARS-CoV-2 infections.

show abstract

Risk factors associated with occurrence of COVID-19 among household persons exposed to patients with confirmed COVID-19 in Qingdao Municipal, China

Cited by 8 publications

References 0 publications

Household transmission of SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review and meta-analysis of secondary attack rate

Household transmission of SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review and meta-analysis of secondary attack rate

Factors Associated With Household Transmission of SARS-CoV-2

Factors Associated with Timely Test Seeking, Test Turnaround, and Public Reporting of COVID-19: a retrospective analysis in Ontario, Canada

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About