Abstract
Background Indoor environments are considered a main setting for transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Households in particular present a close-contact environment with high probability of transmission between persons of different ages and with different roles in society.
Methods Complete households with a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 positive case in the Netherlands (March-May 2020) were included. At least three home visits were performed during 4-6 week of follow-up, collecting naso- and oropharyngeal swabs, oral fluid, faeces and blood samples for molecular and serological analyses of all household members. Symptoms were recorded from two weeks before the first visit up to the last visit. Secondary attack rates (SAR) were estimated with logistic regression. A transmission model was used to assess transmission routes in the household.
Results A total of 55 households with 187 household contacts were included. In 17 households no transmission took place, and in 11 households all persons were infected. Estimated SARs were high, ranging from 35% (95%CI: 24%-46%) in children to 51% (95%CI: 39%-63%) in adults. Estimated transmission rates in the household were high, with reduced susceptibility of children compared to adolescents and adults (0.67; 95%CI: 0.40-1.1).
Conclusion Estimated SARs were higher than reported in earlier household studies, presumably owing to a dense sampling protocol. Children were shown to be less susceptible than adults, but the estimated SAR in children was still high. Our results reinforce the role of households as main multiplier of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the population.
Key points We analyze data from a SARS-CoV-2 household study and find higher secondary attack rates than reported earlier. We argue that this is due to a dense sampling strategy that includes sampling at multiple time points and of multiple anatomical sites.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No external funding was received for the current study.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Medical Ethical Review Board of the University Medical Centre Utrecht reviewed and approved the study protocol (NL13529.041.06). All participants above the age of 12 gave written informed consent. Parents or guardians of participating children below the age of 16 gave written informed consent for participation, for children 12-16 both parents and children had to give consent.
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
The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available, as the data contains information that could compromise privacy and consent of participants. Data are however available from the authors upon reasonable request. Details on the transmission model used for analysis will be made available on our digital repository (https://github.com/mvboven/COVID-19-FFX).
