Maximizing and evaluating the impact of test-trace-isolate programs: A modeling study

Background Test-trace-isolate programs are an essential part of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVIDAU -19): control that offer a more targeted approach than many other nonpharmaceutical interventions. Effective use of such programs requires methods to estimate their current and anticipated impact. Methods and findings We present a mathematical modeling framework to evaluate the expected reductions in the reproductive number, R, from test-trace-isolate programs. This framework is implemented in a publicly available R package and an online application. We evaluated the effects of completeness in case detection and contact tracing and speed of isolation and quarantine using parameters consistent with COVID-19 transmission (R0: 2.5, generation time: 6.5 days). We show that R is most sensitive to changes in the proportion of cases detected in almost all scenarios, and other metrics have a reduced impact when case detection levels are low (<30%). Although test-trace-isolate programs can contribute substantially to reducing R, exceptional performance across all metrics is needed to bring R below one through test-trace-isolate alone, highlighting the need for comprehensive control strategies. Results from this model also indicate that metrics used to evaluate performance of test-trace-isolate, such as the proportion of identified infections among traced contacts, may be misleading. While estimates of the impact of test-trace-isolate are sensitive to assumptions about COVID-19 natural history and adherence to isolation and quarantine, our qualitative findings are robust across numerous sensitivity analyses. Conclusions Effective test-trace-isolate programs first need to be strong in the “test” component, as case detection underlies all other program activities. Even moderately effective test-trace-isolate programs are an important tool for controlling the COVID-19 pandemic and can alleviate the need for more restrictive social distancing measures

Looking forward through the past: identification of 50 priority research questions in palaeoecology

1. Priority question exercises are becoming an increasingly common tool to frame future agendas in conservation and ecological science. They are an effective way to identify research foci that advance the field and that also have high policy and conservation relevance. 2. To date, there has been no coherent synthesis of key questions and priority research areas for palaeoecology, which combines biological, geochemical and molecular techniques in order to reconstruct past ecological and environmental systems on time-scales from decades to millions of years. 3. We adapted a well-established methodology to identify 50 priority research questions in palaeoecology. Using a set of criteria designed to identify realistic and achievable research goals, we selected questions from a pool submitted by the international palaeoecology research community and relevant policy practitioners. 4. The integration of online participation, both before and during the workshop, increased international engagement in question selection. 5. The questions selected are structured around six themes: human–environment interactions in the Anthropocene; biodiversity, conservation and novel ecosystems; biodiversity over long time-scales; ecosystem processes and biogeochemical cycling; comparing, combining and synthesizing information from multiple records; and new developments in palaeoecology. 6. Future opportunities in palaeoecology are related to improved incorporation of uncertainty into reconstructions, an enhanced understanding of ecological and evolutionary dynamics and processes and the continued application of long-term data for better-informed landscape management

Health Care Utilization During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Individuals Born Preterm

Importance: Limited data exist on pediatric health care utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic among children and young adults born preterm. Objective: To investigate differences in health care use related to COVID-19 concerns during the pandemic among children and young adults born preterm vs those born at term. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, questionnaires regarding COVID-19 and health care utilization were completed by 1691 mother-offspring pairs from 42 pediatric cohorts in the National Institutes of Health Environmental Influences on Child Health Outcomes Program. Children and young adults (ages 1-18 years) in these analyses were born between 2003 and 2021. Data were recorded by the August 31, 2021, data-lock date and were analyzed between October 2021 and October 2022. Exposures: Premature birth (<37 weeks' gestation). Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was health care utilization related to COVID-19 concerns (hospitalization, in-person clinic or emergency department visit, phone or telehealth evaluations). Individuals born preterm vs term (≥37 weeks' gestation) and differences among preterm subgroups of individuals (<28 weeks', 28-36 weeks' vs ≥37 weeks' gestation) were assessed. Generalized estimating equations assessed population odds for health care used and related symptoms, controlling for maternal age, education, and psychiatric disorder; offspring history of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) or asthma; and timing and age at COVID-19 questionnaire completion. Results: Data from 1691 children and young adults were analyzed; among 270 individuals born preterm, the mean (SD) age at survey completion was 8.8 (4.4) years, 151 (55.9%) were male, and 193 (71.5%) had a history of BPD or asthma diagnosis. Among 1421 comparison individuals with term birth, the mean (SD) age at survey completion was 8.4 (2.4) years, 749 (52.7%) were male, and 233 (16.4%) had a history of BPD or asthma. Preterm subgroups included 159 individuals (58.5%) born at less than 28 weeks' gestation. In adjusted analyses, individuals born preterm had a significantly higher odds of health care utilization related to COVID-19 concerns (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.70; 95% CI, 1.21-2.38) compared with term-born individuals; similar differences were also seen for the subgroup of individuals born at less than 28 weeks' gestation (aOR, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.40-3.29). Maternal history of a psychiatric disorder was a significant covariate associated with health care utilization for all individuals (aOR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.17-1.78). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that during the COVID-19 pandemic, children and young adults born preterm were more likely to have used health care related to COVID-19 concerns compared with their term-born peers, independent of a history of BPD or asthma. Further exploration of factors associated with COVID-19-related health care use may facilitate refinement of care models

Descontaminação prévia de materiais médico-cirúrgicos: estudo da eficácia de desinfetantes químicos e água e sabão Descontaminación prévia de los instrumentos médico-quirúrgicos: estudio de la eficacia de desinfectantes químicos y agua y jabón Previous descontamination of the medical surgical materials: study of the efficiency of chemical disinfectants and water and soap

Estudo experimental, visando a comparar a eficácia da descontaminação prévia de materiais médico-cirúrgicos pelo uso de desinfetantes químicos e pela utilização de água, sabão e ação mecânica, e verificar a interferência da matéria orgânica nesse procedimento. Utilizaram-se como carreadores pinças cirúrgicas contaminadas com Staphylococcus aureus ATCC-6538, Salmonella cholerae suis ATCC-10708 e Pseudomonas aeruginosa ATCC-15442, em presença e ausência de matéria orgânica (soro fetal bovino a 10%). Empregaram-se cinco tratamentos: glutaraldeído 2%, hipoclorito de sódio 1%, peróxido de hidrogênio 6%, álcool 70% e, água, sabão e ação mecânica; com oito repetições, em um total de 480 observações. Nas condições testadas, os desinfetantes foram eficazes na descontaminação prévia de materiais médico-cirúrgicos e pouco inativados pela matéria orgânica. A limpeza mecânica com água e sabão apresentou redução dos microrganismos a níveis considerados adequados para descontaminação prévia.<br>Estudio experimental, dirigido a comparar la eficacia de la descontaminación previa de instrumentos médico-quirúrgicos por el uso de desinfectantes químicos y de agua, jabón y acción mecánica, y vereificar la interferencia de la materia orgánica en ese procedimento. Se utilizaron como vehículos, pinzas quirúrgicas contaminadas con Staphylococcus aureus ATCC-6538, Salomella choleras suis ATCC-10708 y Pseydomonas aeruginosa ATCC-15423, en presencia y ausencia de materia orgánica (suero fetal bovino, 10%). Se emplearon cinco tratamientos: glutaraldeído 2%, hipoclorito de sodio 1%, peróxido de hidrógeno 6%, alcohol 70% y agua, jabón y acción mecánica; con ocho repeticiones, en un total de 480 observaciones. En las condiciones probadas, los desinfectantes fueron eficaces en la descontaminación previa de instrumentos médico-quirúrgicos y poco inactivados por la materia orgánica. La limpieza mecánica con agua y jabón, presentó redución de microorganismos a niveles considerados adecuados para descontaminación previa.<br>In this experimental study we compared the previous descontamination efficacy of the medical surgical materials by the use of chemical disinfectants and the mechanical cleaning with water and soap, as well as verified the organic material interference in these procedures. To carry out this study, we used surgical pincers under contamination with: Staphylococcus aureus ATCC-6538, Salmonella cholerae suis ATCC-10708, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa ATCC-15442 in presence and absence of organic matter (fetal bovine serum). The following treatments: glutaraldehyde 2%, sodium hypochlorite 1%, hydrogen peroxide 6%, alcohol 70% and the mechanical cleaning with water and soap were compared with eight repetitions in a total of 480 observations. In the described conditions, the disinfectants had a good efficacy in the previous descontamination of the medical surgical materials and a less inativation by the organic material. The mechanical cleaning with water and soap showed a reduction of the microrganism to safe levels, considered adequate for previous descontamination

A Clinical Severity Index for Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Development, Consensus, and Future Directions.

Disease activity and severity of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) dictate therapeutic options and management, but the decision-making process for determining severity varies among practitioners. To reduce variability in practice patterns and help clinicians monitor the clinical course of the disease in an office setting, we aimed to create an international consensus severity scoring index for EoE. A multidisciplinary international group of adult and pediatric EoE researchers and clinicians, as well as non-EoE allergy immunology and gastroenterology experts, formed 3 teams to review the existing literature on histology, endoscopy, and symptoms of EoE in the context of progression and severity. A steering committee convened a 1-day virtual meeting to reach consensus on each team's opinion on salient features of severity across key clinicopathologic domains and distill features that would allow providers to categorize disease severity. Symptom features and complications and inflammatory and fibrostenotic features on both endoscopic and histologic examination were collated into a simplified scoring system-the Index of Severity for Eosinophilic Esophagitis (I-SEE)-that can be completed at routine clinic visits to assess disease severity using a point scale of 0-6 for mild, 7-14 for moderate, and ≥15 for severe EoE. A multidisciplinary team of experts iteratively created a clinically usable EoE severity scoring system denominated "I-SEE" to guide practitioners in EoE management by standardizing disease components reflecting disease severity beyond eosinophil counts. I-SEE should be validated and refined using data from future clinical trials and routine clinical practice to increase its utilization and functionality