tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
Ann Epidemiol
. 2021 Apr 21;S1047-2797(21)00058-2.
doi: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2021.04.002. Online ahead of print.
Assessment of Contact Tracing for COVID-19 among People Experiencing Homelessness, Salt Lake County Health Department, March-May 2020
Victoria L Fields[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Tair Kiphibane[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Jeffrey T Eason[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Siosaia F Hafoka[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Adriana S Lopez[SUP] 5 [/SUP], Amy Schwartz[SUP] 6 [/SUP], Ankita Henry[SUP] 7 [/SUP], Cuc H Tran[SUP] 8 [/SUP], Jacqueline E Tate[SUP] 9 [/SUP], Hannah L Kirking[SUP] 10 [/SUP], Rebecca L Laws[SUP] 11 [/SUP], Thara Venkatappa[SUP] 12 [/SUP], Emily Mosites[SUP] 13 [/SUP], Martha P Montgomery[SUP] 14 [/SUP]
Affiliations
Abstract
Purpose: Contact tracing is intended to reduce the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but it is difficult to conduct among people who live in congregate settings, including people experiencing homelessness (PEH). This analysis compares person-based contact tracing among two populations in Salt Lake County, Utah, from March-May 2020.
Methods: All laboratory-confirmed positive cases among PEH (n=169) and documented in Utah's surveillance system were included in this analysis. The general population comparison group (n=163) were systematically selected from all laboratory-confirmed cases identified during the same period.
Results: Ninety-three PEH cases (55%) were interviewed compared to 163 (100%) cases among the general population (p<0.0001). PEH were more likely to be lost to follow-up at end of isolation (14.2%) versus the general population (0%; p-value<0.0001) and provided fewer contacts per case (0.31) than the general population (4.7) (p-value<0.0001). Contacts of PEH were more often unreachable (13.0% vs. 7.1%; p-value<0.0001).
Conclusions: These findings suggest that contact tracing among PEH should include a location-based approach, along with a person-based approach when resources allow, due to challenges in identifying, locating, and reaching cases among PEH and their contacts through person-based contact tracing efforts alone.
Keywords: COVID-19; Epidemiology; People Experiencing Homelessness, Contact Tracing; Public Health List of abbreviations and acronyms PEH?=?people experiencing homelessness; RT-PCR= reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction; SARS-CoV-2.
. 2021 Apr 21;S1047-2797(21)00058-2.
doi: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2021.04.002. Online ahead of print.
Assessment of Contact Tracing for COVID-19 among People Experiencing Homelessness, Salt Lake County Health Department, March-May 2020
Victoria L Fields[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Tair Kiphibane[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Jeffrey T Eason[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Siosaia F Hafoka[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Adriana S Lopez[SUP] 5 [/SUP], Amy Schwartz[SUP] 6 [/SUP], Ankita Henry[SUP] 7 [/SUP], Cuc H Tran[SUP] 8 [/SUP], Jacqueline E Tate[SUP] 9 [/SUP], Hannah L Kirking[SUP] 10 [/SUP], Rebecca L Laws[SUP] 11 [/SUP], Thara Venkatappa[SUP] 12 [/SUP], Emily Mosites[SUP] 13 [/SUP], Martha P Montgomery[SUP] 14 [/SUP]
Affiliations
- PMID: 33894384
- DOI: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2021.04.002
Abstract
Purpose: Contact tracing is intended to reduce the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but it is difficult to conduct among people who live in congregate settings, including people experiencing homelessness (PEH). This analysis compares person-based contact tracing among two populations in Salt Lake County, Utah, from March-May 2020.
Methods: All laboratory-confirmed positive cases among PEH (n=169) and documented in Utah's surveillance system were included in this analysis. The general population comparison group (n=163) were systematically selected from all laboratory-confirmed cases identified during the same period.
Results: Ninety-three PEH cases (55%) were interviewed compared to 163 (100%) cases among the general population (p<0.0001). PEH were more likely to be lost to follow-up at end of isolation (14.2%) versus the general population (0%; p-value<0.0001) and provided fewer contacts per case (0.31) than the general population (4.7) (p-value<0.0001). Contacts of PEH were more often unreachable (13.0% vs. 7.1%; p-value<0.0001).
Conclusions: These findings suggest that contact tracing among PEH should include a location-based approach, along with a person-based approach when resources allow, due to challenges in identifying, locating, and reaching cases among PEH and their contacts through person-based contact tracing efforts alone.
Keywords: COVID-19; Epidemiology; People Experiencing Homelessness, Contact Tracing; Public Health List of abbreviations and acronyms PEH?=?people experiencing homelessness; RT-PCR= reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction; SARS-CoV-2.