Abstract
Background The lack of precise estimates on transmission risk hampers rational decisions on closure of educational institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Methods Secondary attack rates (SARs) for schools and day-care centres were calculated using data from state-wide mandatory notification of SARS-CoV-2 index cases in educational institutions and additional information on routine contact tracing and PCR-testing.
Findings From August to December 2020, every sixth of overall 784 independent index cases caused a transmission in educational institutions (risk 0·17, 95% CI 0·14–0·19). In a subgroup, monitoring of 14,594 institutional high-risk contacts (89% PCR-tested) of 441 index cases revealed 196 secondary cases (SAR 1·34%, 1·16–1·54). Transmission was more likely from teachers than from students/children (incidence risk ratio [IRR] 3·17, 1·79–5·59), and from index cases in day-care centres (IRR 3·23, 1·76–5·91) than from those in secondary schools. In 748 index cases, teachers caused four times more secondary cases than children (1·08 vs. 0·25 secondary cases per index, IRR 4·39, 2·67–7·21). This difference was mainly due to common transmission from teacher index cases to teacher contacts (mean secondary cases 0·56 teacher to teacher vs. 0·04 child to teacher, IRR 13·3, 6·6–26·7).
Interpretation In educational institutions, the risk of contacts to a confirmed COVID-19 case for infection is one percent, but varies depending on type of institution and index case. Hygiene measures targeting the day-care setting and teacher-to-teacher transmission are priorities in reducing the burden of infection and may promote on-site education during the pandemic.
Funding No particular funding was received for this study.
Evidence before this study We searched PubMed on Jan 27, 2021, without any language restrictions for all articles in which the title or abstract contained the search terms “COVID 19” or “corona”, and “school”, “education*”, or “daycare”, and “transmission”, and “risk”, “attack rate”, or “SAR”, and screened 175 results for original research or reviews on COVID-19 transmission risk in the educational setting. Following a similar strategy, we also searched Google Scholar, SSRN, medRxiv, and the reference lists of identified literature. We found one recent systematic review that pooled findings from five small-scale cohort studies on COVID-19 transmission risk published until 14th September 2020 on overall 18 index cases and 3,345 contact persons into a combined infection attack rate estimate of 0·08% (95%CI 0·00-0·86). Since then, another three cohort studies on transmission risk in schools and day-care centres have been published from Germany and Italy including 135 index cases and 4,188 contact persons and reporting secondary attack rates between one and three percent.
The aforementioned systematic review found that, stratified by role of the index case, there was a non-significant trend towards higher infection attack rates in staff (0·70%, 0·00-3·56) than in student index cases (0·15%, 0·00-0·93), but recommended further research to confirm this trend. Similarly, a cross-sectional study using data from 30 outbreaks during the first COVID-19 wave in 2020 in the U.K. pointed towards an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 in staff compared to students.
A number of modelling studies from the first wave of COVID-19 provide inconclusive results. While two publications, one from several countries and one from Switzerland, concluded that school closures contributed markedly to the reduction of transmission and mobility, two other studies, one using cross-country data and one from Japan rated school closures among the least effective measures to reduce COVID-19 incidence rates.
Added value of this study By both, the number of index cases and contact persons studied, this cohort study is more than twice larger than the total of all published cohort studies on COVID-19 transmission risk in schools and day-care centres combined. Besides, this is the first study on transmission risk in schools to incorporate a period of drastically changing background incidence in the source population. Based on data that emerged from the current public health practice in Germany, which frequently incorporates routine PCR-testing during active follow-up of asymptomatic high-risk contacts to index cases, this study provides a precise estimate of the true underlying SARS-CoV-2 transmission risk in schools and day-care centres. Thanks to the large sample size, this study allows for a meaningful examination of differences in the risk of transmission with respect to the characteristics of the index case. We found that the individual risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 among high-risk contacts in the educational setting is 1·3%, but that this risk rises to 3·2% when the index case is a teacher and to 2·5% when the index case occurs in a day-care centre. Furthermore, we could show that, on average, teacher index case produced about four times as many secondary cases as student/child index cases. Despite the relatively small proportion of teachers among index cases (20%), our study of transmission pathways revealed that the majority of all secondary cases (54%), and the overwhelming majority of secondary cases in teachers (78%) were caused by teacher index cases.
Implications of all the available evidence In this setting, where preventative measures are in place and COVID-19 incidence rates were rising sharply in the population, we found a low and stable transmission risk in educational institutions, which provides evidence for the effectiveness of current preventative measures to control the spread of COVID-19 in schools. The identification of a substantial transmission risk within the group of teachers, but not between children/students and teachers indicates the need for an additional focus on infection prevention during teachers’ activities outside the classroom, e.g. in staff-meetings and in break rooms. Our findings on substantial variation in transmission risk can be useful for a more tailored risk assessment during the early phase of infection control in schools and day-care centres. Taken together, the presented innovations have potential to safe public health resources (e.g. testing) and ensure sustained education during the pandemic.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No particular funding was received for this 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 collection, analysis and communication of the presented data take place in response to the global COVID-19 pandemic and are mandated by the German Infectious Diseases Protection Act. Ethical approval was waived by the competent ethics committee, Federal State Medical Council (Landesaerztekammer) in Rhineland-Palatinate, Mainz, Germany (application no. 2021-15634-r). Detailed information about the ethics committee can be accessed here: http://www.laek-rlp.de/ausschuesse-kommissionen/ethikkommission/mitgliederderethikkommission.html.
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
Data and analytic code used for this study will be shared with researchers immediately following the publication in a peer-reviewed journal upon request from the corresponding author.
