Quantifying within-school SARS-CoV-2 transmission and the impact of lateral flow testing in secondary schools in England

Abstract

Background To control within-school SARS-CoV-2 transmission in England, secondary school pupils have been encouraged to participate in twice weekly mass testing via lateral flow device tests (LFTs) from 8th March 2021, to complement an isolation of close contacts policy in place since 31st August 2020. Strategies involving the isolation of close contacts can lead to high levels of absences, negatively impacting pupils. Methods We fit a stochastic individual-based model of secondary schools to both community swab testing data and secondary school absences data. By simulating epidemics in secondary schools from 31st August 2020 until 21st May 2021, we quantify within-school transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in secondary schools in England, the impact of twice weekly mass testing on within-school transmission, and the potential impact of alternative strategies to the isolation of close contacts in reducing pupil absences. Findings The within-school reproduction number, R school , has remained below 1 from 31st August 2020 until 21st May 2021. Twice weekly mass testing using LFTs have helped to control within-school transmission in secondary schools in England. A strategy of serial contact testing alongside mass testing substantially reduces absences compared to strategies involving isolating close contacts, with only a marginal increase in within-school transmission. Interpretation Secondary school control strategies involving mass testing have the potential to control within-school transmission while substantially reducing absences compared to an isolation of close contacts policy.

Contribution of Schools to Covid-19 Pandemic: Evidence from Czechia

“…On the other hand, our estimated for schools run with face masks are more robust. Hence, altogether, these results support another emerging idea: that schools run with various mitigating measures, including face masks, have tens of percent lower risk of infection for students [8,9,19], but some of these effects may be weaker for primary schools [9]. Relatively low school-related growth for primary schools in Czechia agrees with other literature [8,20].…”

Self-testing and vaccination against COVID-19 to minimize school closure

“…Several countries implemented safety protocols at school, including the use of masks, hand hygiene, staggered arrival and breaks. Regular testing [9]–[12] was introduced in a few countries as an additional control measure. Vaccination was extended to the 12+ population and recently approved for children in Europe, yet it is unlikely that primary schools will be largely vaccinated during the 2021-2022 winter.…”

Fitting to the UK COVID-19 outbreak, short-term forecasts and estimating the reproductive number

“…The understanding that infection may be partially driven by nosocomial transmission [33,34], while significant mortality is due to infection in care homes [35,36], suggests that additional compart-ments capturing these components could greatly improve model realism if the necessary data were available throughout the course of the epidemic. Similarly, schools, universities and some workplaces pose additional risks, so there is merit in considering how these amplifiers of community infection could be incorporated within the general framework [37][38][39]. Additionally, if in a regime with much lower levels of infection in the community, it may be prudent to adopt a stochastic model formulation at a finer spatial resolution to capture localised outbreak clusters, although the potential heterogeneity in local parameters may preclude accurate prediction at this scale.…”