Highlights The estimated self-reported rates of anxiety symptoms and depression symptoms among medical staff were 13.3% and 18.4% respectively under COVID-19 epidemic. Up to 23.9% investigated medical staff reported having anxiety or depression symptoms. Psychological interventions for medical staff should be integrated into the strategies for fighting COVID-19.

No abstract

Close contact was first identified as the primary route of transmission for most respiratory infections in the early 20th century. In this review, we synthesize the existing understanding of the mechanisms of close contact transmission. We focus on two issues: the mechanism of transmission in close contact, namely the transmission of the expired particles between two people, and the physical parameters of close contact that affect the exposure of particles from one individual to another, or how the nature of close contact plays a role in transmission. We propose the existence of three sub‐routes of transmission: short‐range airborne, large droplets, and immediate body‐surface contact. We also distinguish a “body contact,” which is defined with an interpersonal distance of zero, from a close contact. We demonstrate herein that the short‐range airborne sub‐route may be most common. The timescales over which data should be collected to assess the transmission risk during close contact events are much shorter than those required for the distant airborne or fomite routes. The current paucity of high‐resolution data over short distances and timescales makes it very difficult to assess the risk of infection in these circumstances.

Fomites transmit infection. A key question is how surface contamination in a building is spread by human touch. Using video cameras, we collected more than 120 000 touch actions from 60 hours of high-resolution data on surface touch across five typical weekdays in a graduate student office. The students touched surfaces with one or both hands during 94.6% of the observed period. On average, each student made five touches per minute, with an average duration of 22 seconds per touch. High-touch and high-risk surfaces and people were identified. 98.8% of the surfaces touched, such as mobile phones and human faces, were private, but public surfaces, such as a water dispenser button, were touched by 68% of the students in the office on average. Compared with females, males spent 3% more time touching surfaces. Right hands always had higher touch frequency than left hands. The surface network in the office was scale-free, whereas the hand network was small-world. The results revealed power law and logistic growth in the number of contaminated surfaces which suggests that fomite transmission can be extremely effective. The time taken for most surfaces to be contaminated after one surface became contaminated was much shorter for public than for private surfaces.