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

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 policie...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical infectious diseases 2021-11, Vol.73 (10), p.1871-1878
Hauptverfasser: van den Berg, Polly, Schechter-Perkins, Elissa M, Jack, Rebecca S, Epshtein, Isabella, Nelson, Richard, Oster, Emily, Branch-Elliman, Westyn
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung: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. There is no significant difference in K-12 student and staff severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 case rates in Massachusetts public school districts implementing ≥3 versus ≥6 ft of physical distancing between students, given other mitigation measures (eg, universal masking).
ISSN:1058-4838
1537-6591
DOI:10.1093/cid/ciab230