Diogo Fernandes da Silva1, João Vasco Santos1,2,3, Filipa Santos Martins1. 1. Public Health Unit, Agrupamento de Centros de Saúde Grande Porto VIII-Espinho/Gaia, ARS Norte, Porto, Portugal. 2. Department of Community Medicine, Information and Health Decision Sciences (MEDCIDS), Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal. 3. Centre for Health Technology and Services Research (CINTESIS), Porto, Portugal.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Information on the effectiveness of COVID-19 contact tracing is lacking. We proposed 2 measures for evaluating the effectiveness of contact tracing and applied them in a public health unit in northern Portugal. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included the contacts of people with COVID-19 diagnosed July 1-September 15, 2020. We examined 2 measures: (1) number needed to quarantine (NNQ), as the number of quarantine person-days needed to prevent 1 potential infectious person-day; and (2) proportion of prevented infectious days by quarantine (PPID), as the number of potential infectious days prevented by quarantine divided by all infectious days. We assessed these measures by sociodemographic characteristics, types of contacts, and intervention timings (ie, time between diagnosis or symptom onset and intervention). We considered 3 scenarios for infectiousness periods: 10 days before to 10 days after symptom onset, 3 days before to 3 days after symptom onset, and 2 days before to 10 days after symptom onset. RESULTS: We found an NNQ of 19.8-41.8 person-days and a PPID of 19.7%-38.2%, depending on the infectiousness period scenario. Effectiveness was higher among cohabitants and symptomatic contacts than among social or asymptomatic contacts. NNQ and PPID changed by intervention timings: the effectiveness of contact tracing decreased with time from diagnosis to quarantine of contacts and with time from symptom onset of the index case to contacts' quarantine. CONCLUSIONS: These proposed measures of contact tracing effectiveness of communicable diseases can be important for decision making and prioritizing contact tracing when resources are scarce. They are also useful measures for communication with the general population, policy makers, and clinicians because they are easy to understand and use to assess the impact of health interventions.
OBJECTIVES: Information on the effectiveness of COVID-19 contact tracing is lacking. We proposed 2 measures for evaluating the effectiveness of contact tracing and applied them in a public health unit in northern Portugal. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included the contacts of people with COVID-19 diagnosed July 1-September 15, 2020. We examined 2 measures: (1) number needed to quarantine (NNQ), as the number of quarantine person-days needed to prevent 1 potential infectious person-day; and (2) proportion of prevented infectious days by quarantine (PPID), as the number of potential infectious days prevented by quarantine divided by all infectious days. We assessed these measures by sociodemographic characteristics, types of contacts, and intervention timings (ie, time between diagnosis or symptom onset and intervention). We considered 3 scenarios for infectiousness periods: 10 days before to 10 days after symptom onset, 3 days before to 3 days after symptom onset, and 2 days before to 10 days after symptom onset. RESULTS: We found an NNQ of 19.8-41.8 person-days and a PPID of 19.7%-38.2%, depending on the infectiousness period scenario. Effectiveness was higher among cohabitants and symptomatic contacts than among social or asymptomatic contacts. NNQ and PPID changed by intervention timings: the effectiveness of contact tracing decreased with time from diagnosis to quarantine of contacts and with time from symptom onset of the index case to contacts' quarantine. CONCLUSIONS: These proposed measures of contact tracing effectiveness of communicable diseases can be important for decision making and prioritizing contact tracing when resources are scarce. They are also useful measures for communication with the general population, policy makers, and clinicians because they are easy to understand and use to assess the impact of health interventions.
Entities:
Keywords:
COVID-19; Portugal; contact tracing; effectiveness; number needed to quarantine; public health
Authors: Elizabeth N Lewis; Marie R Griffin; Peter G Szilagyi; Yuwei Zhu; Kathryn M Edwards; Katherine A Poehling Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2007-09 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Qun Li; Xuhua Guan; Peng Wu; Xiaoye Wang; Lei Zhou; Yeqing Tong; Ruiqi Ren; Kathy S M Leung; Eric H Y Lau; Jessica Y Wong; Xuesen Xing; Nijuan Xiang; Yang Wu; Chao Li; Qi Chen; Dan Li; Tian Liu; Jing Zhao; Man Liu; Wenxiao Tu; Chuding Chen; Lianmei Jin; Rui Yang; Qi Wang; Suhua Zhou; Rui Wang; Hui Liu; Yinbo Luo; Yuan Liu; Ge Shao; Huan Li; Zhongfa Tao; Yang Yang; Zhiqiang Deng; Boxi Liu; Zhitao Ma; Yanping Zhang; Guoqing Shi; Tommy T Y Lam; Joseph T Wu; George F Gao; Benjamin J Cowling; Bo Yang; Gabriel M Leung; Zijian Feng Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2020-01-29 Impact factor: 176.079
Authors: Ranawaka A P M Perera; Eugene Tso; Owen T Y Tsang; Dominic N C Tsang; Kitty Fung; Yonna W Y Leung; Alex W H Chin; Daniel K W Chu; Samuel M S Cheng; Leo L M Poon; Vivien W M Chuang; Malik Peiris Journal: Emerg Infect Dis Date: 2020-08-04 Impact factor: 6.883