Search

Many educational institutions have partially or fully closed all operations to cope with the challenges of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. In this paper, we explore strategies that such institutions can adopt to conduct safe reopening and resume operations during the pandemic. The research is motivated by the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's (UIUC's) SHIELD program, which is a set of policies and strategies, including rapid saliva-based COVID-19 screening, for ensuring safety of students, faculty and staff to conduct in-person operations, at least partially. Specifically, we study how rapid bulk testing, contact tracing and preventative measures such as mask wearing, sanitization, and enforcement of social distancing can allow institutions to manage the epidemic spread. This work combines the power of analytical epidemic modeling, data analysis and agent-based simulations to derive policy insights. We develop an analytical model that takes into account the asymptomatic transmission of COVID-19, the effect of isolation via testing (both in bulk and through contact tracing) and the rate of contacts among people within and outside the institution. Next, we use data from the UIUC SHIELD program and 85 other universities to estimate parameters that describe the analytical model. Using the estimated parameters, we finally conduct agent-based simulations with various model parameters to evaluate testing and reopening strategies. The parameter estimates from UIUC and other universities show similar trends. For example, infection rates at various institutions grow rapidly in certain months and this growth correlates positively with infection rates in counties where the universities are located. Infection rates are also shown to be negatively correlated with testing rates at the institutions. Through agent-based simulations, we demonstrate that the key to designing an effective reopening strategy is a combination of rapid bulk testing and effective preventative measures such as mask wearing and social distancing. Multiple other factors help to reduce infection load, such as efficient contact tracing, reduced delay between testing and result revelation, tests with less false negatives and targeted testing of high-risk class among others. This paper contributes to the nascent literature on combating the COVID-19 pandemic and is especially relevant for educational institutions and similarly large organizations. We contribute by providing an analytical model that can be used to estimate key parameters from data, which in turn can be used to simulate the effect of different strategies for reopening. We quantify the relative effect of different strategies such as bulk testing, contact tracing, reduced infectivity and contact rates in the context of educational institutions. Specifically, we show that for the estimated average base infectivity of 0.025 ( R 0 = 1.82 ), a daily number of tests to population ratio T/N of 0.2, i.e., once a week testing for all individuals, is a good indicative threshold. However, this test to population ratio is sensitive to external infectivities, internal and external mobilities, delay in getting results after testing, and measures related to mask wearing and sanitization, which affect the base infection rate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since March of 2020, billions of people worldwide have been asked to limit their social contacts in an effort to contain the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. However, little research has been carried out to date on the impact of such social distancing measures on the social isolation levels of the population. In this paper, we study the impact of the pandemic on the social isolation of the Spanish population, by means of 32,359 answers to a citizen survey collected over a period of 7 months. We uncover (1) a significant increase in the prevalence of social isolation in the population, reaching almost 26%; (2) gender and age differences, with the largest prevalence of isolation among middle-aged individuals; (3) a strong relationship between economic impact and social isolation; and (4) differences in social isolation, depending on the number of COVID-19 protection measures and on the perception of coronavirus infection risk by our participants. Our research sheds quantitative light on the sociological impact of the pandemic, and enables us to identify key factors in the interplay between the deployment of non-pharmaceutical interventions to contain the spread of an infectious disease and a population's levels of social isolation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public access automated external defibrillators (AEDs) represent emergency medical devices that may be used by untrained lay-persons in a life-critical event. As such their usability must be confirmed through simulation testing. In 2020 the novel coronavirus caused a global pandemic. In order to reduce the spread of the virus, many restrictions such as social distancing and travel bans were enforced. Usability testing of AEDs is typically conducted in-person, but due to these restrictions, other usability solutions must be investigated. Two studies were conducted, each with 18 participants: (1) an in-person usability study of an AED conducted in an office space, and (2) a synchronous remote usability study of the same AED conducted using video conferencing software. Key metrics associated with AED use, such as time to turn on, time to place pads and time to deliver a shock, were assessed in both studies. There was no difference in time taken to turn the AED on in the in-person study compared to the remote study, but the time to place electrode pads and to deliver a shock were significantly lower in the in-person study than in the remote study. Overall, the results of this study indicate that remote user testing of public access defibrillators may be appropriate in formative usability studies for determining understanding of the user interface. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social distancing during a pandemic might be influenced by different attitudes: people may decide to reduce the risk and protect themselves from viral contagion, or they can opt to maintain their habits and be more exposed to the infection. To better understand the underlying motivating attitudes, we asked participants to indicate in an online platform the interpersonal distance from different social targets with professional/social behaviors considered more or less exposed to the virus. We selected five different social targets: a cohabitant, a friend working in a hospital, a friend landed from an international flight, a friend who is back from a cycling ride, or a stranger. In order to measure the realistic and the symbolic perceived threat, we administered the Brief 10-item COVID-19 threat scale. Moreover, in order to measure the risk attitude in different domains, the participants were also asked to fill in the Domain-Specific Risk-Taking DOSPERT scale. Results reveal a general preference for an increased distance from a stranger and the friends who are considered to be more exposed to the virus: the friend working in a hospital or landed from an international flight. Moreover, the interpersonal distance from friends is influenced by the perception of Realistic Threat measured through the Integrated Covid Threat Scale and the Health/Safety Risk Perception/Assumption as measured by the DOSPERT scale. Our results show the flexible and context-dependent nature of our representation of other people: as the social categories are not unchangeable fixed entities, the bodily (e.g., spatial) attitudes towards them are an object of continuous attunement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In previous work, Giuntella et al. (Proc Natl Acad Sci 118:e2016632118, 2021), we documented large disruptions to physical activity, sleep, time use and mental health among young adults at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in Spring 2020. This study explores the trends 1 year into COVID-19, as vaccines began to roll out, COVID-19 deaths declined, and social distancing measures eased in the United States. We combine biometric and survey data from multiple cohorts of college students spanning Spring 2019 through Spring 2021 (N = 1179). Our results show persistent impacts of the pandemic on physical activity and mental health. One year into the pandemic, daily steps averaged about 6300 per day compared to about 9800 per day prior to the pandemic, a 35% decline. Almost half of participants were at risk of clinical depression compared to a little over one-third prior to the pandemic, a 36% increase. The impacts on screen time, social interactions and sleep duration at the onset of COVID-19 largely dissipated over the course of the pandemic, though screen time remained significantly higher than pre-pandemic levels. In contrast to the sharp changes in lifestyle and mental health documented as the pandemic emerged in March 2020, we do not find evidence of behavioral changes or improvements in mental well-being over the course of Spring 2021 as the pandemic eased. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]