Search

Households are a significant source of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, even during periods of low community-level spread. Comparing household transmission rates by SARS-CoV-2 variant may provide relevant information about current risks and prevention strategies. This investigation aimed to estimate differences in household transmission risk comparing the SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron variants using data from contact tracing and interviews conducted from November 2021 through February 2022 in five U.S. public health jurisdictions (City of Chicago, Illinois; State of Connecticut; City of Milwaukee, Wisconsin; State of Maryland; and State of Utah). Generalized estimating equations were used to estimate attack rates and relative risks for index case and household contact characteristics. Data from 848 households, including 2,622 individuals (median household size = 3), were analyzed. Overall transmission risk was similar in households with Omicron (attack rate = 47.0%) compared to Delta variant (attack rate = 48.0%) circulation. In the multivariable model, a pattern of increased transmission risk was observed with increased time since a household contact's last COVID-19 vaccine dose in Delta households, although confidence intervals overlapped (0–3 months relative risk = 0.8, confidence interval: 0.5–1.2; 4–7 months relative risk = 1.3, 0.9–1.8; ≥8 months relative risk = 1.2, 0.7–1.8); no pattern was observed in Omicron households. Risk for household contacts of symptomatic index cases was twice that of household contacts of asymptomatic index cases (relative risk = 2.0, 95% confidence interval: 1.4–2.9), emphasizing the importance of symptom status, regardless of variant. Uniquely, this study adjusted risk estimates for several index case and household contact characteristics and demonstrates that few characteristics strongly dictate risk, likely reflecting the complexity of the biological and social factors which combine to impact SARS-CoV-2 transmission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes coronavirus disease (COVID-19), originally relied mainly on nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) samples collected by healthcare workers (HCWs). However, [...]

The purpose of this study was to determine alcohol use (particularly heavy drinking) and social normative estimations of alcohol use according to student residence (fraternity, sorority, residence hall, or apartment complex). To achieve this purpose, a survey was conducted in all 34 sections of a general education core English class at a northwestern public university. Students living in fraternities, compared with males living in apartment complexes and residence halls, consumed more alcohol, engaged more frequently in heavy episodic drinking, and drank more when "partying." A similar pattern was true for females living in sororities relative to females students living in apartment complexes and residence halls. In most cases, social normative estimations were higher than reported use among those living in fraternities, sororities, residence halls, and apartment complexes. As hypothesized, social normative estimates of alcohol use were highest among students living in fraternities and sororities. Thus, it appears that social normative estimations of frequent and heavy drinking may contribute to alcohol use patterns, particularly among members of fraternities and sororities. These results confirm that students' choice of residence is a dominant influence when it comes to drinking behavior.

Objectives. We sought to modify an instrument and to use it to collect information on smoking knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors among Hispanics/Latinos, and to adapt survey methods to obtain high participation levels. Methods. Promotoras (outreach workers) conducted face-to-face interviews with 1485 Hispanic adults (July 2007-April 2008). The project team used GeoFrame field enumeration methods to develop a sampling frame from households in randomly selected colonias (residential areas along the Texas--Mexico border that may lack some basic necessities (e.g. portable water), in El Paso, Texas. Results. The revised questionnaire included 36 unchanged items from the State Adult Tobacco Survey, 7 modified items, and 17 new items focusing on possible culturally specific quitting methods, secondhand smoke issues, and attitudes and knowledge about tobacco use that might be unique for Hispanic/ Latino groups. The eligibility rate was 90.2%, and the conservative combined completed screener and interview response rate was 80.0%. Conclusions. Strategic, targeted, carefully designed methods and surveys can achieve high reach and response rates in hard-to-reach populations. Similar procedures could be used to obtain cooperation of groups who may not be accessible with traditional methods. (Am J Public Health. 2010;100:S159-S164. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2009.167338)

To link to full-text access for this article, visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2009.06.009 Byline: Jennifer M. Bombard (a), Linda L. Pederson (b), John J. Koval (c), Michelle O'Hegarty (a) Keywords: Polytobacco use; Tobacco smoking; Cigarette smoking; Smokeless tobacco Abstract: Current cigarette smoking combined with ever use of other tobacco products (lifetime polytobacco use) is important to examine as users may be at greater risk for illicit drug use, nicotine addiction, and adverse health outcomes. We determined estimates and patterns of lifetime polytobacco use and conducted multivariable analyses to determine demographic, family and friend, psychosocial, and lifestyle factors associated with use among a sample of Canadian young adults. Overall prevalence was 36.3% for current cigarette use; 10.1% for current cigarette use only and 26.2% for lifetime polytobacco use. Among polytobacco users, current cigarette use and ever cigar use was most frequent (67.2%). For males, the final model contained demographic, family and friends, and lifestyle factors. For females, the final model also included psychosocial factors. Illicit drug use was the strongest significant predictor for lifetime polytobacco use among males. We found gender specific differences when comparing lifetime polytobacco users to current cigarette-only users, in particular; male lifetime polytobacco users were more likely to use drugs and alcohol. Interventions focusing on individual substances should consider addressing combinations of use. Author Affiliation: (a) Office on Smoking and Health, National Center for Chronic Disease and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, United States (b) Community Health and Preventive Medicine, Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, United States (c) Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada

Objective: To explore risk perceptions of traditional and nontraditional tobacco products (NTPs) among young adult smokers. Methods: Focus groups with African Americans, non-Hispanic whites, and Hispanics. Risk ratings of light, regular, and menthol cigarettes and of NTPs and marijuana and cigarettes were compared. Results: Participants tended to view light cigarettes as safer than regular cigarettes. Shisha and herbal products were rated as safer than traditional cigarettes, but there were differences in ratings by race/ethnicity, related to preferred cigarette variety. Conclusions: Health communication messages about the use of cigarettes and NTPs should consider risk perceptions about the products and racial/ethnic differences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To inform prevention strategies, we assessed the extent of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission and settings in which transmission occurred in a Georgia public school district., Methods: During 1 December 2020-22 January 2021, SARS-CoV-2-infected index cases and their close contacts in schools were identified by school and public health officials. For in-school contacts, we assessed symptoms and offered SARS-CoV-2 reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing; performed epidemiologic investigations and whole-genome sequencing to identify in-school transmission; and calculated secondary attack rate (SAR) by school setting (eg, sports, elementary school classroom), index case role (ie, staff, student), and index case symptomatic status., Results: We identified 86 index cases and 1119 contacts, 688 (61.5%) of whom received testing. Fifty-nine of 679 (8.7%) contacts tested positive; 15 of 86 (17.4%) index cases resulted in ≥2 positive contacts. Among 55 persons testing positive with available symptom data, 31 (56.4%) were asymptomatic. Highest SARs were in indoor, high-contact sports settings (23.8% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 12.7%-33.3%]), staff meetings/lunches (18.2% [95% CI, 4.5%-31.8%]), and elementary school classrooms (9.5% [95% CI, 6.5%-12.5%]). The SAR was higher for staff (13.1% [95% CI, 9.0%-17.2%]) vs student index cases (5.8% [95% CI, 3.6%-8.0%]) and for symptomatic (10.9% [95% CI, 8.1%-13.9%]) vs asymptomatic index cases (3.0% [95% CI, 1.0%-5.5%])., Conclusions: Indoor sports may pose a risk to the safe operation of in-person learning. Preventing infection in staff members, through measures that include coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination, is critical to reducing in-school transmission. Because many positive contacts were asymptomatic, contact tracing should be paired with testing, regardless of symptoms., (Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2021.)

Background: Improved understanding of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spectrum of disease is essential for clinical and public health interventions. There are limited data on mild or asymptomatic infections, but recognition of these individuals is key as they contribute to viral transmission. We describe the symptom profiles from individuals with mild or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection., Methods: From 22 March to 22 April 2020 in Wisconsin and Utah, we enrolled and prospectively observed 198 household contacts exposed to SARS-CoV-2. We collected and tested nasopharyngeal specimens by real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) 2 or more times during a 14-day period. Contacts completed daily symptom diaries. We characterized symptom profiles on the date of first positive rRT-PCR test and described progression of symptoms over time., Results: We identified 47 contacts, median age 24 (3-75) years, with detectable SARS-CoV-2 by rRT-PCR. The most commonly reported symptoms on the day of first positive rRT-PCR test were upper respiratory (n = 32 [68%]) and neurologic (n = 30 [64%]); fever was not commonly reported (n = 9 [19%]). Eight (17%) individuals were asymptomatic at the date of first positive rRT-PCR collection; 2 (4%) had preceding symptoms that resolved and 6 (13%) subsequently developed symptoms. Children less frequently reported lower respiratory symptoms (21%, 60%, and 69% for <18, 18-49, and ≥50 years of age, respectively; P = .03)., Conclusions: Household contacts with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection reported mild symptoms. When assessed at a single timepoint, several contacts appeared to have asymptomatic infection; however, over time all developed symptoms. These findings are important to inform infection control, contact tracing, and community mitigation strategies., (Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2020.)

Background: The evidence base for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is nascent. We sought to characterize SARS-CoV-2 transmission within US households and estimate the household secondary infection rate (SIR) to inform strategies to reduce transmission., Methods: We recruited patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and their household contacts in Utah and Wisconsin during 22 March 2020-25 April 2020. We interviewed patients and all household contacts to obtain demographics and medical histories. At the initial household visit, 14 days later, and when a household contact became newly symptomatic, we collected respiratory swabs from patients and household contacts for testing by SARS-CoV-2 real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) and sera for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies testing by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). We estimated SIR and odds ratios (ORs) to assess risk factors for secondary infection, defined by a positive rRT-PCR or ELISA test., Results: Thirty-two (55%) of 58 households secondary infection among household contacts. The SIR was 29% (n = 55/188; 95% confidence interval [CI], 23%-36%) overall, 42% among children (aged <18 years) of the COVID-19 patient and 33% among spouses/partners. Household contacts to COVID-19 patients with immunocompromised conditions and household contacts who themselves had diabetes mellitus had increased odds of infection with ORs 15.9 (95% CI, 2.4-106.9) and 7.1 (95% CI: 1.2-42.5), respectively., Conclusions: We found substantial evidence of secondary infections among household contacts. People with COVID-19, particularly those with immunocompromising conditions or those with household contacts with diabetes, should take care to promptly self-isolate to prevent household transmission., (Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2020.)

Introduction: For the past 20 years, there have been no changes to the text-only cigarette warning labels in the United States. During this same time period, other countries placed large graphic warning labels on cigarette packages. The purpose of this study was to investigate the reactions of U.S. young adult smokers and nonsmokers aged 18 to 24 years to Canadian cigarette label text and graphic warnings. The study focused on determining their perceptions and the potential impact of Canadian labels on smoking, and study participants were asked for suggestions for modifications of U.S. cigarette warning labels so they would be effective for smoking deterrence and cessation., Methods: During January and February 2002, 11 focus groups consisting of 54 smokers and 41 nonsmokers were conducted in the Detroit metropolitan area. Current smokers were defined as those who had smoked a cigarette within the past 30 days. Participants were asked about their knowledge and perceptions of current U.S. cigarette warning labels and their impressions of Canadian cigarette warning labels., Analysis: A content analysis and a word index were applied to the transcripts of all focus groups to identify and clarify themes and domains that appeared in group discussions and to compare results across different groups., Results: Focus group participants reported that Canadian cigarette warning labels were more visible and informative than U.S. cigarette warning labels. Messages perceived to be relevant to smokers were considered effective. Education level did not appear related to how participants responded to warning labels. There were some differences for warning labels that had sex-specific messages., Discussion: Warning labels are one component of comprehensive tobacco control and smoking cessation efforts. Stronger warnings on cigarette packages need to be part of a larger U.S. public health educational effort.