BACKGROUND: During the first SARS-CoV-2 pandemic phase, the sudden closure of schools was one of the main measures to minimize the spread of the virus. In the second phase, several safety procedures were implemented to avoid school closure. To evaluate if the school is a safe place, students and staff of two school complexes of Rome were monitored to evaluate the efficacy of prevention measures inside the school buildings. METHODS: Oral secretions specimens were collected from 1262 subjects for a total of 3431 samples, collected over a 3 months period. Detection of Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 was performed by real-time PCR. Target genes were represented by E gene, RdRP/S gene and N gene. RESULTS: Among the 3431 samples analyzed, just 16 sample resulted as positive or low positive: 1 sample in the first month, 12 samples in the second month and 3 in the third month. In each period of evaluation, all positive children attended different classes. CONCLUSIONS: Even if the school has the potential for spreading viruses, our preliminary results show the efficacy of the implementations undertaken in this setting to minimize virus diffusion. Our evidence suggests that school does not act as an amplifier for transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and can be really considered a safe place for students.
BACKGROUND: During the first SARS-CoV-2 pandemic phase, the sudden closure of schools was one of the main measures to minimize the spread of the virus. In the second phase, several safety procedures were implemented to avoid school closure. To evaluate if the school is a safe place, students and staff of two school complexes of Rome were monitored to evaluate the efficacy of prevention measures inside the school buildings. METHODS: Oral secretions specimens were collected from 1262 subjects for a total of 3431 samples, collected over a 3 months period. Detection of CoronavirusSARS-CoV-2 was performed by real-time PCR. Target genes were represented by E gene, RdRP/S gene and N gene. RESULTS: Among the 3431 samples analyzed, just 16 sample resulted as positive or low positive: 1 sample in the first month, 12 samples in the second month and 3 in the third month. In each period of evaluation, all positive children attended different classes. CONCLUSIONS: Even if the school has the potential for spreading viruses, our preliminary results show the efficacy of the implementations undertaken in this setting to minimize virus diffusion. Our evidence suggests that school does not act as an amplifier for transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and can be really considered a safe place for students.
Entities:
Keywords:
COVID; Prevention measures; SARS-CoV-2; School
Authors: Saverio Caini; Chiara Martinoli; Carlo La Vecchia; Sara Raimondi; Federica Bellerba; Oriana D'Ecclesiis; Clementina Sasso; Alessandra Basso; Giulio Cammarata; Sara Gandini Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-04-28 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Marco Roversi; Umberto Raucci; Giuseppe Pontrelli; Stefania Ranno; Michela Ambrosi; Antonio Torelli; Mara Pisani; Luana Coltella; Livia Piccioni; Luna Colagrossi; Marilena Agosta; Barbara Scialanga; Antonino Reale; Carlo Federico Perno; Paolo Rossi; Alberto Villani Journal: Pediatr Res Date: 2021-06-11 Impact factor: 3.953
Authors: Russell Viner; Claire Waddington; Oliver Mytton; Robert Booy; Joana Cruz; Joseph Ward; Shamez Ladhani; Jasmina Panovska-Griffiths; Chris Bonell; G J Melendez-Torres Journal: J Infect Date: 2021-12-22 Impact factor: 38.637