Abstract
Background While social distancing efforts have been successful at slowing the spread of SARS-CoV- 2, these measures cannot be sustained indefinitely. In this paper, we examine how serological testing can reduce the risk of relaxing social distancing measures while also providing a way for test-positive individuals to return to more normal levels of activity.
Methods We use an SEIR-like compartmental model that accounts for serological test status to examine if widespread serological testing can reduce the adverse effects of relaxing social distancing measures, in terms of total deaths and health system burden. In our model, social distancing measures are relaxed to a greater extent for those who test positive compared to those who have not been tested or test negative, allowing a return to work and partial restoration of other social contacts to pre-pandemic levels. All individuals preferentially interact with those who have tested positive, such that seropositive individuals act as immunological ‘shields.’ We consider a range of potential testing capacities and the implications of an imperfect test for this strategy.
Results Although relaxing social distancing interventions increases total deaths, serologic testing as a part of this strategy can reduce population risk. If social distancing restrictions are relaxed by 50% in tandem with monthly serological testing of the general United States (US) population, 174,000 deaths would be averted and 67% of the US population would be released from social distancing after 1 year, as compared to a scenario without serological testing. Sustaining moderate levels of social distancing can help to flatten the epidemic curve, reducing health system burden below the US critical care capacity.
Implications Modeling studies suggest that serological testing can be used to relax social distancing measures preferentially for seropositive individuals, insofar as antibodies can be established as a correlate of protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection. Implementing a strategy of serological testing and shielding can reduce population risk while offsetting the severe social and economic costs of a sustained shutdown.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
BAL and ANMK were supported by the Vaccine Impact Modeling Consortium; BAL and KNN were supported by NIH/NICHD R01 HD097175; BAL, KNN, and ANMK were supported by NIH/NIGMS R01 GM124280; JSW and CZ were supported by Simons Foundation (SCOPE Award ID 329108); JSW and CZ were supported by the Army Research Office (W911NF1910384); JSW and CZ were supported by NIH (1R01AI46592-01); JSW and CZ were supported by National Science Foundation (1806606 and 1829636).
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.
Yes
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Transmission model code and incidence data used are available at the links provided