Effectiveness of 3 Versus 6 ft of Physical Distancing for Controlling Spread of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Among Primary and Secondary Students and Staff : A Retrospective, Statewide Cohort Study
Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2021..
BACKGROUND: National and international guidelines differ about the optimal physical distancing between students for prevention of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission; studies directly comparing the impact of ≥3 versus ≥6 ft of physical distancing policies in school settings are lacking. Thus, our objective was to compare incident cases of SARS-CoV-2 in students and staff in Massachusetts public schools among districts with different physical distancing requirements. State guidance mandates masking for all school staff and for students in grades 2 and higher; the majority of districts required universal masking.
METHODS: Community incidence rates of SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV-2 cases among students in grades K-12 and staff participating in-person learning, and district infection control plans were linked. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for students and staff members in traditional public school districts with ≥3 versus ≥6 ft of physical distancing were estimated using log-binomial regression; models adjusted for community incidence are also reported.
RESULTS: Among 251 eligible school districts, 537 336 students and 99 390 staff attended in-person instruction during the 16-week study period, representing 6 400 175 student learning weeks and 1 342 574 staff learning weeks. Student case rates were similar in the 242 districts with ≥3 versus ≥6 ft of physical distancing between students (IRR, 0.891; 95% confidence interval, .594-1.335); results were similar after adjustment for community incidence (adjusted IRR, 0.904; .616-1.325). Cases among school staff in districts with ≥3 versus ≥6 ft of physical distancing were also similar (IRR, 1.015, 95% confidence interval, .754-1.365).
CONCLUSIONS: Lower physical distancing requirements can be adopted in school settings with masking mandates without negatively affecting student or staff safety.
| Errataetall: |
CommentIn: Clin Infect Dis. 2021 Nov 16;73(10):1879-1881. - PMID 33782681 |
|---|---|
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2021 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2021 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:73 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America - 73(2021), 10 vom: 16. Nov., Seite 1871-1878 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
van den Berg, Polly [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Adaptation |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 22.11.2021 Date Revised 26.08.2022 published: Print CommentIn: Clin Infect Dis. 2021 Nov 16;73(10):1879-1881. - PMID 33782681 Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1093/cid/ciab230 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM322613469 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM322613469 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231225182419.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231225s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1093/cid/ciab230 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1075.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM322613469 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)33704422 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a van den Berg, Polly |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Effectiveness of 3 Versus 6 ft of Physical Distancing for Controlling Spread of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Among Primary and Secondary Students and Staff |b A Retrospective, Statewide Cohort Study |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2021 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 22.11.2021 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 26.08.2022 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print | ||
| 500 | |a CommentIn: Clin Infect Dis. 2021 Nov 16;73(10):1879-1881. - PMID 33782681 | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2021. | ||
| 520 | |a BACKGROUND: National and international guidelines differ about the optimal physical distancing between students for prevention of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission; studies directly comparing the impact of ≥3 versus ≥6 ft of physical distancing policies in school settings are lacking. Thus, our objective was to compare incident cases of SARS-CoV-2 in students and staff in Massachusetts public schools among districts with different physical distancing requirements. State guidance mandates masking for all school staff and for students in grades 2 and higher; the majority of districts required universal masking | ||
| 520 | |a METHODS: Community incidence rates of SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV-2 cases among students in grades K-12 and staff participating in-person learning, and district infection control plans were linked. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for students and staff members in traditional public school districts with ≥3 versus ≥6 ft of physical distancing were estimated using log-binomial regression; models adjusted for community incidence are also reported | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: Among 251 eligible school districts, 537 336 students and 99 390 staff attended in-person instruction during the 16-week study period, representing 6 400 175 student learning weeks and 1 342 574 staff learning weeks. Student case rates were similar in the 242 districts with ≥3 versus ≥6 ft of physical distancing between students (IRR, 0.891; 95% confidence interval, .594-1.335); results were similar after adjustment for community incidence (adjusted IRR, 0.904; .616-1.325). Cases among school staff in districts with ≥3 versus ≥6 ft of physical distancing were also similar (IRR, 1.015, 95% confidence interval, .754-1.365) | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSIONS: Lower physical distancing requirements can be adopted in school settings with masking mandates without negatively affecting student or staff safety | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't | |
| 650 | 4 | |a COVID-19 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a adaptation | |
| 650 | 4 | |a infection control | |
| 650 | 4 | |a physical distancing | |
| 650 | 4 | |a schools | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Schechter-Perkins, Elissa M |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Jack, Rebecca S |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Epshtein, Isabella |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Nelson, Richard |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Oster, Emily |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Branch-Elliman, Westyn |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America |d 1992 |g 73(2021), 10 vom: 16. Nov., Seite 1871-1878 |w (DE-627)NLM012603007 |x 1537-6591 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:73 |g year:2021 |g number:10 |g day:16 |g month:11 |g pages:1871-1878 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciab230 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 73 |j 2021 |e 10 |b 16 |c 11 |h 1871-1878 | ||