Effectiveness of 3 Versus 6 ft of Physical Distancing for Controlling Spread of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Among Primary and Secondary Students and Staff: A Retrospective, Statewide Cohort Study

Author:

van den Berg Polly1ORCID,Schechter-Perkins Elissa M2ORCID,Jack Rebecca S3,Epshtein Isabella4,Nelson Richard56,Oster Emily37,Branch-Elliman Westyn489ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Department of Medicine, Section of Infectious Diseases, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

2. Department of Emergency Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine and Boston Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

3. COVID-19 School Response Dashboard, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

4. VA Boston Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research (CHOIR), Boston, Massachusetts, USA

5. IDEAS Center, Veterans Affairs Salt Lake City Healthcare System, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA

6. Division of Epidemiology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA

7. Brown University Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs, Providence, Rhode Island,USA

8. VA Boston Healthcare System, Department of Medicine, Section of Infectious Diseases, Boston, Massachusetts,USA

9. Harvard Medical School, Department of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts,USA

Abstract

Abstract Background National and international guidelines differ about the optimal physical distancing between students for prevention of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission; studies directly comparing the impact of ≥3 versus ≥6 ft of physical distancing policies in school settings are lacking. Thus, our objective was to compare incident cases of SARS-CoV-2 in students and staff in Massachusetts public schools among districts with different physical distancing requirements. State guidance mandates masking for all school staff and for students in grades 2 and higher; the majority of districts required universal masking. Methods Community incidence rates of SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV-2 cases among students in grades K-12 and staff participating in-person learning, and district infection control plans were linked. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for students and staff members in traditional public school districts with ≥3 versus ≥6 ft of physical distancing were estimated using log-binomial regression; models adjusted for community incidence are also reported. Results Among 251 eligible school districts, 537 336 students and 99 390 staff attended in-person instruction during the 16-week study period, representing 6 400 175 student learning weeks and 1 342 574 staff learning weeks. Student case rates were similar in the 242 districts with ≥3 versus ≥6 ft of physical distancing between students (IRR, 0.891; 95% confidence interval, .594–1.335); results were similar after adjustment for community incidence (adjusted IRR, 0.904; .616–1.325). Cases among school staff in districts with ≥3 versus ≥6 ft of physical distancing were also similar (IRR, 1.015, 95% confidence interval, .754–1.365). Conclusions Lower physical distancing requirements can be adopted in school settings with masking mandates without negatively affecting student or staff safety.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Infectious Diseases,Microbiology (medical)

Cited by 62 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Measures implemented in the school setting to contain the COVID-19 pandemic;Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews;2024-05-02

2. What is the specific role of schools and daycares in COVID-19 transmission? A final report from a living rapid review;The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health;2024-04

3. Vaccine-induced reduction of COVID-19 clusters in school settings in Japan during the epidemic wave caused by B.1.1.529 (Omicron) BA.2, 2022;Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering;2024

4. COVID-19, School Closures, and Outcomes;Journal of Economic Perspectives;2023-11-01

5. Measuring Indoor Air Quality Does Not Prevent COVID-19;NEW SOLUTIONS: A Journal of Environmental and Occupational Health Policy;2023-09-13

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3