Optimizing COVID-19 testing strategies on college campuses: evaluation of the health and economic costs
Abstract Colleges and universities in the US struggled to provide safe in-person education throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Testing coupled with isolation is a nimble intervention strategy that can be tailored to mitigate health and economic costs, as the virus and our arsenal of medical countermeasures continue to evolve. We developed a decision-support tool to aid in the design of university-based testing strategies using a mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Applying this framework to a large public university reopening in the fall of 2021 with a 60% student vaccination rate, we find that the optimal strategy, in terms of health and economic costs, is twice weekly antigen testing of all students. This strategy provides a 95% guarantee that, throughout the fall semester, case counts would not exceed the CDC’s original high transmission threshold of 100 cases per 100k persons over 7 days. As the virus and our medical armament continue to evolve, testing will remain a flexible tool for managing risks and keeping campuses open. We have implemented this model as an<jats:underline>online tool</jats:underline>to facilitate the design of testing strategies that adjust for COVID-19 conditions, university-specific parameters, and institutional goals.Author Summary As a part of the COVID-19 response team at a large public university in the US, we performed an analysis that considered together, the potential health and economic costs of different testing policies for the student body. University administrators had to weigh the up-front effort needed to implement wide scale testing against the potential costs of responding to high levels of disease on campus in the Fall of 2021, after vaccines were widely available but vaccination rates among college students were uncertain. The results presented here are applied to this specific instance, but the<jats:underline>online tool</jats:underline>provided can be tailored to university specific parameters, the epidemiological conditions, and the goals of the university. As we confront newly emerging variants of COVID-19 or novel pathogens, consideration of both the health and economic costs of proactive testing may serve as a politically tractable and cost-effective disease mitigation strategy..
Medienart: |
|
---|
Erscheinungsjahr: |
2024 |
---|---|
Erschienen: |
2024 |
Enthalten in: |
bioRxiv.org - (2024) vom: 23. Apr. Zur Gesamtaufnahme - year:2024 |
---|
Sprache: |
Englisch |
---|
Beteiligte Personen: |
Johnson, Kaitlyn E. [VerfasserIn] |
---|
Links: |
---|
Themen: |
---|
doi: |
10.1101/2022.12.04.22283074 |
---|
funding: |
|
---|---|
Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
PPN (Katalog-ID): |
XBI038084074 |
---|
LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | XBI038084074 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20240424105211.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 221207s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1101/2022.12.04.22283074 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)XBI038084074 | ||
035 | |a (biorXiv)10.1101/2022.12.04.22283074 | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
100 | 1 | |a Johnson, Kaitlyn E. |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0001-8011-0012 |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Optimizing COVID-19 testing strategies on college campuses: evaluation of the health and economic costs |
264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
520 | |a Abstract Colleges and universities in the US struggled to provide safe in-person education throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Testing coupled with isolation is a nimble intervention strategy that can be tailored to mitigate health and economic costs, as the virus and our arsenal of medical countermeasures continue to evolve. We developed a decision-support tool to aid in the design of university-based testing strategies using a mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Applying this framework to a large public university reopening in the fall of 2021 with a 60% student vaccination rate, we find that the optimal strategy, in terms of health and economic costs, is twice weekly antigen testing of all students. This strategy provides a 95% guarantee that, throughout the fall semester, case counts would not exceed the CDC’s original high transmission threshold of 100 cases per 100k persons over 7 days. As the virus and our medical armament continue to evolve, testing will remain a flexible tool for managing risks and keeping campuses open. We have implemented this model as an<jats:underline>online tool</jats:underline>to facilitate the design of testing strategies that adjust for COVID-19 conditions, university-specific parameters, and institutional goals.Author Summary As a part of the COVID-19 response team at a large public university in the US, we performed an analysis that considered together, the potential health and economic costs of different testing policies for the student body. University administrators had to weigh the up-front effort needed to implement wide scale testing against the potential costs of responding to high levels of disease on campus in the Fall of 2021, after vaccines were widely available but vaccination rates among college students were uncertain. The results presented here are applied to this specific instance, but the<jats:underline>online tool</jats:underline>provided can be tailored to university specific parameters, the epidemiological conditions, and the goals of the university. As we confront newly emerging variants of COVID-19 or novel pathogens, consideration of both the health and economic costs of proactive testing may serve as a politically tractable and cost-effective disease mitigation strategy. | ||
650 | 4 | |a Biology |7 (dpeaa)DE-84 | |
650 | 4 | |a 570 |7 (dpeaa)DE-84 | |
700 | 1 | |a Pasco, Remy |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0002-9321-6876 |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Woody, Spencer |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0002-2882-3450 |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Lachmann, Michael |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0002-1086-9717 |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Johnson-Leon, Maureen |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Bhavnani, Darlene |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0002-4313-0089 |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Klima, Jessica |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Paltiel, A. David |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0002-4861-3290 |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Fox, Spencer J. |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0003-1969-3778 |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Meyers, Lauren Ancel |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0002-5828-8874 |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t bioRxiv.org |g (2024) vom: 23. Apr. |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g year:2024 |g day:23 |g month:04 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011715 |x 0 |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2022.12.04.22283074 |x 0 |z kostenfrei |3 Volltext |
912 | |a GBV_XBI | ||
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |j 2024 |b 23 |c 04 |