Search

Objective: Case investigation and contact tracing (CI/CT) are fundamental public health efforts widely used during the COVID-19 pandemic to mitigate transmission. This study investigated how state, local, and tribal public health departments used CI/CT during the COVID-19 pandemic, including CI/CT methodology, staffing models, training and support, and efforts to identify or prioritize populations disproportionately affected by COVID-19., Methods: During March and April 2022, we conducted key informant interviews with up to 3 public health officials from 43 state, local, and tribal public health departments. From audio-recorded and transcribed interviews, we used the framework method to analyze key themes., Results: Major adjustments to CI/CT protocols during the pandemic included (1) prioritizing populations for outreach; (2) implementing automated outreach for nonprioritized groups, particularly during COVID-19 surges; (3) discontinuing contact tracing and focusing exclusively on case investigation; and (4) adding innovations to provide additional support. Key informants also discussed the utility of having backup staffing to support overwhelmed public health departments and spoke to the difficulty in "right-sizing" the public health workforce, with COVID-19 surges leaving public health departments understaffed as case rates rose and overstaffed as case rates fell., Conclusions: When addressing future epidemics or outbreaks, public health officials should consider strategies that improve the effectiveness of CI/CT efforts over time, such as prioritizing populations based on disproportionate risk, implementing automated outreach, developing models that provide flexible additional staffing resources as cases rise and fall among local public health departments, incorporating demographic data in laboratory reporting, providing community connections and support, and having a system of self-notification of contacts., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Objectives: We sought to (1) document how health departments (HDs) developed COVID-19 case investigation and contact tracing (CI/CT) interview scripts and the topics covered, and (2) understand how and why HDs modified those scripts., Design: Qualitative analysis of CI/CT interview scripts and in-depth key informant interviews with public health officials in 14 HDs. Collected scripts represent 3 distinct points (initial, the majority of which were time stamped May 2020; interim, spanning from September 2020 to August 2021; and current, as of April 2022)., Setting: Fourteen state, local, and tribal health jurisdictions and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)., Participants: Thirty-six public health officials involved in leading CI/CT from 14 state, local, and tribal health jurisdictions (6 states, 3 cities, 4 counties, and 1 tribal area)., Main Outcome Measure: Interview script elements included in CI/CT interview scripts over time., Results: Many COVID-19 CI/CT scripts were developed by modifying questions from scripts used for other communicable diseases. Early in the pandemic, scripts included guidance on isolation/quarantine and discussed symptoms of COVID-19. As the pandemic evolved, the length of scripts increased substantially, with significant additions on contact elicitation, vaccinations, isolation/quarantine recommendations, and testing. Drivers of script changes included changes in our understanding of how the virus spreads, risk factors and symptoms, new treatments, new variants, vaccine development, and adjustments to CDC's official isolation and quarantine guidance., Conclusions: Our findings offer suggestions about components to include in future CI/CT efforts, including educating members of the public about the disease and its symptoms, offering mitigation guidance, and providing sufficient support and resources to help people act on that guidance. Assessing the correlation between script length and number of completed interviews or other quality and performance measures could be an area for future study., Competing Interests: The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Using a nationally representative panel survey, we examined isolation behaviors among persons in the United States who had positive SARS-CoV-2 test results during January 2021-March 2022. Compared with persons who received provider-administered results, persons with home-based results had 29% (95% CI 5%-47%) lower odds of following isolation recommendations.

Background: Public health programs varied in ability to reach people with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and their contacts to encourage separation from others. For both adult case patients with COVID-19 and their contacts, we estimated the impact of contact tracing activities on separation behaviors from January 2020 until March 2022., Methods: We used a probability-based panel survey of a nationally representative sample to gather data for estimates and comparisons., Results: An estimated 64 255 351 adults reported a positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 test result; 79.6% isolated for ≥5 days, 60.2% isolated for ≥10 days, and 79.2% self-notified contacts. A total of, 24 057 139 (37.7%) completed a case investigation, and 46.2% of them reported contacts to health officials. More adults who completed a case investigation isolated than those who did not complete a case investigation (≥5 days, 82.6% vs 78.2%, respectively; ≥10 days, 69.8% vs 54.8%; both P < .05). A total of 84 946 636 adults were contacts of a COVID-19 case patient. Of these, 73.1% learned of their exposure directly from a case patient; 49.4% quarantined for ≥5 days, 18.7% quarantined for ≥14 days, and 13.5% completed a contact tracing call. More quarantined among those who completed a contact tracing call than among those who did not complete a tracing call (≥5 days, 61.2% vs 48.5%, respectively; ≥14 days, 25.2% vs 18.0%; both P < .05)., Conclusions: Engagement in contact tracing was positively correlated with isolation and quarantine. However, most adults with COVID-19 isolated and self-notified contacts regardless of whether the public health workforce was able to reach them. Identifying and reaching contacts was challenging and limited the ability to promote quarantining, and testing., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. The authors: No reported conflicts of interest. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America 2023.)