The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Daily testing for contacts of individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection and attendance and SARS-CoV-2 transmission in English secondary schools and colleges: an open-label, cluster-randomised trial

Daily testing for contacts of individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection and attendance and SARS-CoV-2 transmission in English secondary schools and colleges: an open-label, cluster-randomised trial
Daily testing for contacts of individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection and attendance and SARS-CoV-2 transmission in English secondary schools and colleges: an open-label, cluster-randomised trial

Background: School-based COVID-19 contacts in England have been asked to self-isolate at home, missing key educational opportunities. We trialled daily testing of contacts as an alternative to assess whether this resulted in similar control of transmission, while allowing more school attendance. Methods: We did an open-label, cluster-randomised, controlled trial in secondary schools and further education colleges in England. Schools were randomly assigned (1:1) to self-isolation of school-based COVID-19 contacts for 10 days (control) or to voluntary daily lateral flow device (LFD) testing for 7 days with LFD-negative contacts remaining at school (intervention). Randomisation was stratified according to school type and size, presence of a sixth form, presence of residential students, and proportion of students eligible for free school meals. Group assignment was not masked during procedures or analysis. Coprimary outcomes in all students and staff were COVID-19-related school absence and symptomatic PCR-confirmed COVID-19, adjusted for community case rates, to estimate within-school transmission (non-inferiority margin <50% relative increase). Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis using quasi-Poisson regression, also estimating complier average causal effects (CACE). This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN18100261. Findings: Between March 18 and May 4, 2021, 204 schools were taken through the consent process, during which three decided not to participate further. 201 schools were randomly assigned (control group n=99, intervention group n=102) in the 10-week study (April 19–May 10, 2021), which continued until the pre-appointed stop date (June 27, 2021). 76 control group schools and 86 intervention group schools actively participated; additional national data allowed most non-participating schools to be included in analysis of coprimary outcomes. 2432 (42·4%) of 5763 intervention group contacts participated in daily contact testing. There were 657 symptomatic PCR-confirmed infections during 7 782 537 days-at-risk (59·1 per 100 000 per week) in the control group and 740 during 8 379 749 days-at-risk (61·8 per 100 000 per week) in the intervention group (intention-to-treat adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR] 0·96 [95% CI 0·75–1·22]; p=0·72; CACE aIRR 0·86 [0·55–1·34]). Among students and staff, there were 59 422 (1·62%) COVID-19-related absences during 3 659 017 person-school-days in the control group and 51 541 (1·34%) during 3 845 208 person-school-days in the intervention group (intention-to-treat aIRR 0·80 [95% CI 0·54–1·19]; p=0·27; CACE aIRR 0·61 [0·30–1·23]). Interpretation: Daily contact testing of school-based contacts was non-inferior to self-isolation for control of COVID-19 transmission, with similar rates of symptomatic infections among students and staff with both approaches. Infection rates in school-based contacts were low, with very few school contacts testing positive. Daily contact testing should be considered for implementation as a safe alternative to home isolation following school-based exposures. Funding: UK Government Department of Health and Social Care.

Contacts, Lateral Flow Testing, SARS-CoV-2, Schools, Testing, covid-19
0140-6736
1217-1229
Young, Bernadette C.
9fbc0920-5aab-4167-acf7-4c92e6657bbf
Eyre, David
3112045c-5f1a-442e-ba24-1f4221b83ac3
Kendrick, Saroj
da8c8c6f-8d7d-413a-9113-a24e45227b86
White, Chris
f6e29b7f-153b-48f9-84c0-8bf82e85e5d0
Smith, Sylvester
4ea82d7d-8901-4f8c-8873-5c4a18b1b8ab
Beveridge, George
5e2fcf68-c197-4ee6-a486-c60e4492315a
Nonnenmacher, Toby
5add0ce5-b912-48a2-b513-ccf0f5e3d580
Ichofu, Fegor
7706d82d-f8a2-4a58-9cd6-2213eb00d840
Hillier, Joseph
ac1bd9ef-1f9b-4c9a-9195-2e0c778af24f
Oakley, Sarah
e4cf1af1-f48b-466e-bb2d-c52b46922c86
Diamond, Ian
ef97b4a9-6fa4-47f1-90c7-758818b95862
Rourke, Emma
0397fd06-4934-4257-9c79-3ed38780bca7
Dawe, Fiona
3e0cc72f-4770-489d-947e-68ef002efc27
Day, Ieuan
7ec00812-fc9a-4df9-9a92-6d9a59ac8de5
Davies, Lisa
7ba250eb-cb53-4614-b029-6a998b183825
Staite, Paul
3b4536c4-6629-4c6a-8ac5-1ce36d6bb0a6
Lacey, Andrea
c8ba8811-f9bc-4388-877c-c52767fafbf6
McCrae, James
48900e75-eea2-4917-acec-9d8963b023a7
Jones, Ffion
6ac244ac-c3d0-4425-b57a-195b5d45e13f
Kelly, Joseph
0a2483b6-a339-489c-a904-02d36e259a94
Bankiewicz, Urszula
2b0be3c0-6b88-4df3-af7d-6cc4176af212
Tunkel, Sarah
8fec16e0-fb1c-4437-8db9-4e7e96293df9
Ovens, Richard
41dec02f-72e9-4245-aa5f-33e4103a6c66
Chapman, David
bbfeca82-2e65-4070-97b4-01272d5d7121
Bhalla, Vineta
7551db23-45b3-467b-aa90-5b78606f949a
Marks, Peter
e9d1ef2c-bc0f-4f9a-9e1c-8dc79225cf8a
Hicks, Nick
d01227d4-888e-4914-8df3-83da7ec63351
Fowler, Tom
d4d4ae2f-a556-4b97-aa8d-04094224ddb6
Hopkins, Susan
8d271e32-f2bd-4ade-ba99-5b98ef0a007c
Yardley, Lucy
64be42c4-511d-484d-abaa-f8813452a22e
Peto, Tim
fc8dfe08-1ce6-471a-90c6-8b036b52dcad
Young, Bernadette C.
9fbc0920-5aab-4167-acf7-4c92e6657bbf
Eyre, David
3112045c-5f1a-442e-ba24-1f4221b83ac3
Kendrick, Saroj
da8c8c6f-8d7d-413a-9113-a24e45227b86
White, Chris
f6e29b7f-153b-48f9-84c0-8bf82e85e5d0
Smith, Sylvester
4ea82d7d-8901-4f8c-8873-5c4a18b1b8ab
Beveridge, George
5e2fcf68-c197-4ee6-a486-c60e4492315a
Nonnenmacher, Toby
5add0ce5-b912-48a2-b513-ccf0f5e3d580
Ichofu, Fegor
7706d82d-f8a2-4a58-9cd6-2213eb00d840
Hillier, Joseph
ac1bd9ef-1f9b-4c9a-9195-2e0c778af24f
Oakley, Sarah
e4cf1af1-f48b-466e-bb2d-c52b46922c86
Diamond, Ian
ef97b4a9-6fa4-47f1-90c7-758818b95862
Rourke, Emma
0397fd06-4934-4257-9c79-3ed38780bca7
Dawe, Fiona
3e0cc72f-4770-489d-947e-68ef002efc27
Day, Ieuan
7ec00812-fc9a-4df9-9a92-6d9a59ac8de5
Davies, Lisa
7ba250eb-cb53-4614-b029-6a998b183825
Staite, Paul
3b4536c4-6629-4c6a-8ac5-1ce36d6bb0a6
Lacey, Andrea
c8ba8811-f9bc-4388-877c-c52767fafbf6
McCrae, James
48900e75-eea2-4917-acec-9d8963b023a7
Jones, Ffion
6ac244ac-c3d0-4425-b57a-195b5d45e13f
Kelly, Joseph
0a2483b6-a339-489c-a904-02d36e259a94
Bankiewicz, Urszula
2b0be3c0-6b88-4df3-af7d-6cc4176af212
Tunkel, Sarah
8fec16e0-fb1c-4437-8db9-4e7e96293df9
Ovens, Richard
41dec02f-72e9-4245-aa5f-33e4103a6c66
Chapman, David
bbfeca82-2e65-4070-97b4-01272d5d7121
Bhalla, Vineta
7551db23-45b3-467b-aa90-5b78606f949a
Marks, Peter
e9d1ef2c-bc0f-4f9a-9e1c-8dc79225cf8a
Hicks, Nick
d01227d4-888e-4914-8df3-83da7ec63351
Fowler, Tom
d4d4ae2f-a556-4b97-aa8d-04094224ddb6
Hopkins, Susan
8d271e32-f2bd-4ade-ba99-5b98ef0a007c
Yardley, Lucy
64be42c4-511d-484d-abaa-f8813452a22e
Peto, Tim
fc8dfe08-1ce6-471a-90c6-8b036b52dcad

Young, Bernadette C., Eyre, David, Kendrick, Saroj, White, Chris, Smith, Sylvester, Beveridge, George, Nonnenmacher, Toby, Ichofu, Fegor, Hillier, Joseph, Oakley, Sarah, Diamond, Ian, Rourke, Emma, Dawe, Fiona, Day, Ieuan, Davies, Lisa, Staite, Paul, Lacey, Andrea, McCrae, James, Jones, Ffion, Kelly, Joseph, Bankiewicz, Urszula, Tunkel, Sarah, Ovens, Richard, Chapman, David, Bhalla, Vineta, Marks, Peter, Hicks, Nick, Fowler, Tom, Hopkins, Susan, Yardley, Lucy and Peto, Tim (2021) Daily testing for contacts of individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection and attendance and SARS-CoV-2 transmission in English secondary schools and colleges: an open-label, cluster-randomised trial. The Lancet, 398 (10307), 1217-1229. (doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01908-5).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Background: School-based COVID-19 contacts in England have been asked to self-isolate at home, missing key educational opportunities. We trialled daily testing of contacts as an alternative to assess whether this resulted in similar control of transmission, while allowing more school attendance. Methods: We did an open-label, cluster-randomised, controlled trial in secondary schools and further education colleges in England. Schools were randomly assigned (1:1) to self-isolation of school-based COVID-19 contacts for 10 days (control) or to voluntary daily lateral flow device (LFD) testing for 7 days with LFD-negative contacts remaining at school (intervention). Randomisation was stratified according to school type and size, presence of a sixth form, presence of residential students, and proportion of students eligible for free school meals. Group assignment was not masked during procedures or analysis. Coprimary outcomes in all students and staff were COVID-19-related school absence and symptomatic PCR-confirmed COVID-19, adjusted for community case rates, to estimate within-school transmission (non-inferiority margin <50% relative increase). Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis using quasi-Poisson regression, also estimating complier average causal effects (CACE). This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN18100261. Findings: Between March 18 and May 4, 2021, 204 schools were taken through the consent process, during which three decided not to participate further. 201 schools were randomly assigned (control group n=99, intervention group n=102) in the 10-week study (April 19–May 10, 2021), which continued until the pre-appointed stop date (June 27, 2021). 76 control group schools and 86 intervention group schools actively participated; additional national data allowed most non-participating schools to be included in analysis of coprimary outcomes. 2432 (42·4%) of 5763 intervention group contacts participated in daily contact testing. There were 657 symptomatic PCR-confirmed infections during 7 782 537 days-at-risk (59·1 per 100 000 per week) in the control group and 740 during 8 379 749 days-at-risk (61·8 per 100 000 per week) in the intervention group (intention-to-treat adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR] 0·96 [95% CI 0·75–1·22]; p=0·72; CACE aIRR 0·86 [0·55–1·34]). Among students and staff, there were 59 422 (1·62%) COVID-19-related absences during 3 659 017 person-school-days in the control group and 51 541 (1·34%) during 3 845 208 person-school-days in the intervention group (intention-to-treat aIRR 0·80 [95% CI 0·54–1·19]; p=0·27; CACE aIRR 0·61 [0·30–1·23]). Interpretation: Daily contact testing of school-based contacts was non-inferior to self-isolation for control of COVID-19 transmission, with similar rates of symptomatic infections among students and staff with both approaches. Infection rates in school-based contacts were low, with very few school contacts testing positive. Daily contact testing should be considered for implementation as a safe alternative to home isolation following school-based exposures. Funding: UK Government Department of Health and Social Care.

Text
Daily testing for contacts supplement_20210812 - Accepted Manuscript
Download (1MB)
Text
Daily testing for contacts of individuals
Download (104kB)
Text
Daily testing for contacts of individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection and attendance
Download (104kB)
Text
Daily testing for contacts of individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection and attendance supplement
Download (1MB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 19 August 2021
e-pub ahead of print date: 14 September 2021
Published date: 2 October 2021
Additional Information: Funding Information: We acknowledge all the students and staff at participating schools, as well as ten pilot schools, for contributing to the study, and in particular the study workers at each of the schools. We are thankful to the Microbiology Department of Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust for doing PCR testing. Additionally, we acknowledge the support in conducting the study of the Department of Health and Social Care daily contact testing project management team, especially Nichole Solomon, and the Office for National Statistics daily contact testing team. We thank Department for Education colleagues, particularly Sara Cooper, Matt Mawer, and Richard Lumley for their assistance. We thank Sarah Walker for insightful advice. This study was funded by the UK Government Department of Health and Social Care and supported by the UK Government Department for Education and Office for National Statistics. The work was also supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Healthcare Associated Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance at Oxford University in partnership with Public Health England (NIHR200915) and the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, the Department of Health and Social Care, the Department for Education, the Office for National Statistics, or Public Health England. BCY is an NIHR clinical lecturer. BCY, TEAP, and LY received grants from the Department of Health and Social Care to fund this work. DWE is a Robertson Foundation Fellow. LY is an NIHR Senior Investigator and her research programme is partly supported by NIHR Applied Research Collaboration?West, NIHR HPRU for Behavioural Science and Evaluation, and the NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre. Funding Information: We acknowledge all the students and staff at participating schools, as well as ten pilot schools, for contributing to the study, and in particular the study workers at each of the schools. We are thankful to the Microbiology Department of Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust for doing PCR testing. Additionally, we acknowledge the support in conducting the study of the Department of Health and Social Care daily contact testing project management team, especially Nichole Solomon, and the Office for National Statistics daily contact testing team. We thank Department for Education colleagues, particularly Sara Cooper, Matt Mawer, and Richard Lumley for their assistance. We thank Sarah Walker for insightful advice. This study was funded by the UK Government Department of Health and Social Care and supported by the UK Government Department for Education and Office for National Statistics. The work was also supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Healthcare Associated Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance at Oxford University in partnership with Public Health England (NIHR200915) and the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, the Department of Health and Social Care, the Department for Education, the Office for National Statistics, or Public Health England. BCY is an NIHR clinical lecturer. BCY, TEAP, and LY received grants from the Department of Health and Social Care to fund this work. DWE is a Robertson Foundation Fellow. LY is an NIHR Senior Investigator and her research programme is partly supported by NIHR Applied Research Collaboration–West, NIHR HPRU for Behavioural Science and Evaluation, and the NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre. Publisher Copyright: © 2021 Elsevier Ltd
Keywords: Contacts, Lateral Flow Testing, SARS-CoV-2, Schools, Testing, covid-19

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 452184
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/452184
ISSN: 0140-6736
PURE UUID: 7dcdae23-5c6a-4302-b682-44e4e9e2a4c0
ORCID for Lucy Yardley: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-3853-883X

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 29 Nov 2021 17:32
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 02:47

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Bernadette C. Young
Author: David Eyre
Author: Saroj Kendrick
Author: Chris White
Author: Sylvester Smith
Author: George Beveridge
Author: Toby Nonnenmacher
Author: Fegor Ichofu
Author: Joseph Hillier
Author: Sarah Oakley
Author: Ian Diamond
Author: Emma Rourke
Author: Fiona Dawe
Author: Ieuan Day
Author: Lisa Davies
Author: Paul Staite
Author: Andrea Lacey
Author: James McCrae
Author: Ffion Jones
Author: Joseph Kelly
Author: Urszula Bankiewicz
Author: Sarah Tunkel
Author: Richard Ovens
Author: David Chapman
Author: Vineta Bhalla
Author: Peter Marks
Author: Nick Hicks
Author: Tom Fowler
Author: Susan Hopkins
Author: Lucy Yardley ORCID iD
Author: Tim Peto

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×