To assess the household secondary infection risk (SIR) of B.1.1.7 (Alpha) and non-Alpha lineages of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among children.During January to April 2021, we prospectively followed households with a SARS-CoV-2 infection. We collected questionnaires, serial nasopharyngeal swabs for reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction testing and whole genome sequencing, and serial blood samples for serology testing. We calculated SIRs by primary case age (pediatric vs adult), household contact age, and viral lineage. We evaluated risk factors associated with transmission and described symptom profiles among children.Among 36 households with pediatric primary cases, 21 (58%) had secondary infections. Among 91 households with adult primary cases, 51 (56%) had secondary infections. SIRs among pediatric and adult primary cases were 45% and 54%, respectively (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.41-1.54). SIRs among pediatric primary cases with Alpha and non-Alpha lineage were 55% and 46%, respectively (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.51-4.53). SIRs among pediatric and adult household contacts were 55% and 49%, respectively (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.68-1.50). Among pediatric contacts, no significant differences in the odds of acquiring infection by demographic or household characteristics were observed.Household transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from children and adult primary cases to household members was frequent. The risk of secondary infection was similar among child and adult household contacts. Among children, household transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and the risk of secondary infection was not influenced by lineage. Continued mitigation strategies (eg, masking, physical distancing, vaccination) are needed to protect at-risk groups regardless of virus lineage circulating in communities.
Objectives: Although many people who are incarcerated have risk factors for hepatitis A virus (HAV) infection, the proportion of hepatitis A cases among people with a recent incarceration is unknown. We examined the relationship between recent incarceration and HAV infection during community-based, person-to-person outbreaks to inform public health recommendations. Methods: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention surveyed health departments in 33 jurisdictions reporting person-to-person HAV outbreaks during 2016-2020 on the number of outbreak-associated cases, HAV-infected people recently incarcerated, and HAV-associated hospitalizations and deaths. Results: Twenty-five health departments reported 18 327 outbreak-associated hepatitis A cases during January 11, 2016–January 24, 2020. In total, 2093 (11.4%) HAV-infected people had been recently incarcerated. Of those with complete data, 1402 of 1462 (95.9%) had been held in a local jail, and 1513 of 1896 (79.8.%) disclosed hepatitis A risk factors. Eighteen jurisdictions reported incarceration timing relative to the exposure period. Of 9707 cases in these jurisdictions, 991 (10.2%) were among recently incarcerated people; 451 of 688 (65.6%) people with complete data had been incarcerated during all (n = 55) or part (n = 396) of their exposure period. Conclusions: Correctional facilities are important settings for reaching people with risk factors for HAV infection and can also be venues where transmission occurs. Providing HAV vaccination to incarcerated people, particularly people housed in jails, can be an effective component of community-wide outbreak response.
Objectives Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, which causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is spread primarily through exposure to respiratory droplets from close contact with an infected person. To inform prevention measures, we conducted a case-control study among Colorado adults to assess the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection from community exposures. Methods Cases were symptomatic Colorado adults (aged ≥18 years) with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) reported to Colorado’s COVID-19 surveillance system. From March 16 to December 23, 2021, cases were randomly selected from surveillance data ≤12 days after their specimen collection date. Cases were matched on age, zip code (urban areas) or region (rural/frontier areas), and specimen collection date with controls randomly selected among persons with a reported negative SARS-CoV-2 test result. Data on close contact and community exposures were obtained from surveillance and a survey administered online. Results The most common exposure locations among all cases and controls were place of employment, social events, or gatherings and the most frequently reported exposure relationship was co-worker or friend. Cases were more likely than controls to work outside the home (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.09–1.28) in industries and occupations related to accommodation and food services, retail sales, and construction. Cases were also more likely than controls to report contact with a non-household member with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 (aOR 1.16, 95% CI: 1.06–1.27). Conclusions Understanding the settings and activities associated with a higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection is essential for informing prevention measures aimed at reducing the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory diseases. These findings emphasize the risk of community exposure to infected persons and the need for workplace precautions in preventing ongoing transmission.
As of March 31, 2023, more than 30,000 monkeypox (mpox) cases had been reported in the United States in an outbreak that has disproportionately affected gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender persons (1). JYNNEOS vaccine (Modified Vaccinia Ankara vaccine, Bavarian Nordic) was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2019 for the prevention of smallpox and mpox via subcutaneous injection as a 2-dose series (0.5 mL per dose, administered 4 weeks apart) (2). To expand vaccine access, an Emergency Use Authorization was issued by FDA on August 9, 2022, for dose-sparing intradermal injection of JYNNEOS as a 2-dose series (0.1 mL per dose, administered 4 weeks apart) (3). Vaccination was available to persons with known or presumed exposure to a person with mpox (postexposure prophylaxis [PEP]), as well as persons at increased risk for mpox or who might benefit from vaccination (preexposure mpox prophylaxis [PrEP]) (4). Because information on JYNNEOS vaccine effectiveness (VE) is limited, a matched case-control study was conducted in 12 U.S. jurisdictions,† including nine Emerging Infections Program sites and three Epidemiology and Laboratory Capacity sites,§ to evaluate VE against mpox among MSM and transgender adults aged 18-49 years. During August 19, 2022-March 31, 2023, a total of 309 case-patients were matched to 608 control patients. Adjusted VE was 75.2% (95% CI = 61.2% to 84.2%) for partial vaccination (1 dose) and 85.9% (95% CI = 73.8% to 92.4%) for full vaccination (2 doses). Adjusted VE for full vaccination by subcutaneous, intradermal, and heterologous routes of administration was 88.9% (95% CI = 56.0% to 97.2%), 80.3% (95% CI = 22.9% to 95.0%), and 86.9% (95% CI = 69.1% to 94.5%), respectively. Adjusted VE for full vaccination among immunocompromised participants was 70.2% (95% CI = -37.9% to 93.6%) and among immunocompetent participants was 87.8% (95% CI = 57.5% to 96.5%). JYNNEOS is effective at reducing the risk for mpox. Because duration of protection of 1 versus 2 doses remains unknown, persons at increased risk for mpox exposure should receive the 2-dose series as recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP),¶ regardless of administration route or immunocompromise status.
In Spring 2021, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) B.1.1.7 (Alpha) became the predominant variant in the United States. Research suggests that Alpha has increased transmissibility compared with non-Alpha lineages. We estimated household secondary infection risk (SIR), assessed characteristics associated with transmission, and compared symptoms of persons with Alpha and non-Alpha infections.We followed households with SARS-CoV-2 infection for 2 weeks in San Diego County and metropolitan Denver, January to April 2021. We collected epidemiologic information and biospecimens for serology, reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), and whole-genome sequencing. We stratified SIR and symptoms by lineage and identified characteristics associated with transmission using generalized estimating equations.We investigated 127 households with 322 household contacts; 72 households (56.7%) had member(s) with secondary infections. SIRs were not significantly higher for Alpha (61.0% [95% confidence interval, 52.4-69.0%]) than non-Alpha (55.6% [44.7-65.9%], P = .49). In households with Alpha, persons who identified as Asian or Hispanic/Latino had significantly higher SIRs than those who identified as White (P = .01 and .03, respectively). Close contact (eg, kissing, hugging) with primary cases was associated with increased transmission for all lineages. Persons with Alpha infection were more likely to report constitutional symptoms than persons with non-Alpha (86.9% vs 76.8%, P = .05).Household SIRs were similar for Alpha and non-Alpha. Comparable SIRs may be due to saturation of transmission risk in households due to extensive close contact, or true lack of difference in transmission rates. Avoiding close contact within households may reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission for all lineages among household members.
SARS-CoV-2 infections among vaccinated nursing home residents increased after the Omicron variant emerged. Data on booster dose effectiveness in this population are limited. During July 2021-March 2022, nursing home outbreaks in 11 US jurisdictions involving >3 infections within 14 days among residents who had received at least the primary COVID-19 vaccine(s) were monitored. Among 2,188 nursing homes, 1,247 outbreaks were reported in the periods of Delta (n = 356, 29%), mixed Delta/Omicron (n = 354, 28%), and Omicron (n = 536, 43%) predominance. During the Omicron-predominant period, the risk for infection within 14 days of an outbreak start was lower among boosted residents than among residents who had received the primary vaccine series alone (risk ratio [RR] 0.25, 95% CI 0.19-0.33). Once infected, boosted residents were at lower risk for all-cause hospitalization (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.40-0.49) and death (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.34-0.59) than primary vaccine-only residents.
Importance As self-collected home antigen tests become widely available, a better understanding of their performance during the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection is needed. Objective To evaluate the diagnostic performance of home antigen tests compared with reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and viral culture by days from illness onset, as well as user acceptability. Design, Setting, and Participants This prospective cohort study was conducted from January to May 2021 in San Diego County, California, and metropolitan Denver, Colorado. The convenience sample included adults and children with RT-PCR–confirmed infection who used self-collected home antigen tests for 15 days and underwent at least 1 nasopharyngeal swab for RT-PCR, viral culture, and sequencing. Exposures SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was the daily sensitivity of home antigen tests to detect RT-PCR–confirmed cases. Secondary outcomes included the daily percentage of antigen test, RT-PCR, and viral culture results that were positive, and antigen test sensitivity compared with same-day RT-PCR and cultures. Antigen test use errors and acceptability were assessed for a subset of participants. Results This study enrolled 225 persons with RT-PCR–confirmed infection (median [range] age, 29 [1-83] years; 117 female participants [52%]; 10 [4%] Asian, 6 [3%] Black or African American, 50 [22%] Hispanic or Latino, 3 [1%] Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, 145 [64%] White, and 11 [5%] multiracial individuals) who completed 3044 antigen tests and 642 nasopharyngeal swabs. Antigen test sensitivity was 50% (95% CI, 45%-55%) during the infectious period, 64% (95% CI, 56%-70%) compared with same-day RT-PCR, and 84% (95% CI, 75%-90%) compared with same-day cultures. Antigen test sensitivity peaked 4 days after illness onset at 77% (95% CI, 69%-83%). Antigen test sensitivity improved with a second antigen test 1 to 2 days later, particularly early in the infection. Six days after illness onset, antigen test result positivity was 61% (95% CI, 53%-68%). Almost all (216 [96%]) surveyed individuals reported that they would be more likely to get tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection if home antigen tests were available over the counter. Conclusions and Relevance The results of this cohort study of home antigen tests suggest that sensitivity for SARS-CoV-2 was moderate compared with RT-PCR and high compared with viral culture. The results also suggest that symptomatic individuals with an initial negative home antigen test result for SARS-CoV-2 infection should test again 1 to 2 days later because test sensitivity peaked several days after illness onset and improved with repeated testing.
The risk for transmission of highly pathogenic avian influenza A(H5N1) virus from dairy cows to humans is currently low; however, personal protective equipment (PPE) use during work activities on dairy farms has not been well described. PPE use can protect farmworkers when they are working with highly pathogenic avian influenza A(H5N1)-infected cows. The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) and the Colorado Department of Agriculture (CDA) offered PPE to all Colorado farms before or during an A(H5N1) outbreak in cows in 2024. CDPHE surveyed 83 dairy workers from three farms with a confirmed bovine A(H5N1) outbreak. Frequently reported farm worker activities included milking cows or working in the milking parlor (51%), cleaning cow manure (49%), and transporting cows (46%). Frequently reported PPE items available to workers before A(H5N1) outbreaks included gloves (88%), eye protection (e.g., safety glasses or goggles) (76%), rubber boots or boot covers (71%), and head covers (69%). N95 respirator use was low among workers who were exposed to ill cows after detection of A(H5N1) virus (26%). PPE use while working with ill cows increased a mean of 28% after detection of A(H5N1) virus on surveyed farms; use of eye protection while milking cows increased the most (40%). Public health PPE distribution, education, and collaboration with CDA might have increased PPE use on dairy farms with A(H5N1) virus-infected cows and mitigated risk for farmworkers acquiring A(H5N1) virus.
Persons who work in close contact with dairy cattle and poultry that are infected with highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) A(H5N1) virus are at increased risk for infection. In July 2024, the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment responded to two poultry facilities with HPAI A(H5N1) virus detections in poultry. Across the two facilities, 663 workers assisting with poultry depopulation (i.e., euthanasia) received screening for illness; 109 (16.4%) reported symptoms and consented to testing. Among those who received testing, nine (8.3%) received a positive influenza A(H5) virus test result, and 19 (17.4%) received a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result. All nine workers who received positive influenza A(H5) test results had conjunctivitis, experienced mild illness, and received oseltamivir. This poultry exposure-associated cluster of human cases of influenza A(H5) is the first reported in the United States. The identification of these cases highlights the ongoing risk to persons who work in close contact with infected animals. Early response to each facility using multidisciplinary, multilingual teams facilitated case-finding, worker screening, and treatment. As the prevalence of HPAI A(H5N1) virus clade 2.3.4.4b genotype B3.13 increases, U.S. public health agencies should prepare to rapidly investigate and respond to illness in agricultural workers, including workers with limited access to health care.
