National and international guidelines differ about the optimal physical distancing between students for prevention of SARS-CoV-2 transmission; studies directly comparing the impact of ≥3 versus ≥6 feet 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. 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 (IRR) for students and staff members in districts with ≥3 versus ≥6 feet of physical distancing were estimated using log-binomial regression; models adjusted for community incidence are also reported. 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 feet versus ≥6 feet of physical distancing between students (IRR, 0.891, 95% CI, 0.594-1.335); results were similar after adjusting for community incidence (adjusted IRR, 0.904, 95% CI, 0.616-1.325). Cases among school staff in districts with ≥3 feet versus ≥6 feet of physical distancing were also similar (IRR, 1.015, 95% CI, 0.754-1.365). Lower physical distancing policies can be adopted in school settings with masking mandates without negatively impacting student or staff safety.

Background: Emergency department (ED) visits provide an opportunity for hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening for patients who otherwise might not be tested. We report on a novel nontargeted, opt‐out HCV screening and linkage‐to‐care (LTC) program implemented in an urban ED.Methods: This is a descriptive analysis from 3 months (November 2016–January 2017) of a nontargeted, opt‐out ED HCV screening and LTC program among patients at least 13 years old undergoing phlebotomy for clinical purposes. A multipurpose best practice advisory (BPA) alerted providers to the program and generated order labels. For patients who authorized testing, specimens were drawn in the ED for HCV antibody (Ab) and reflex confirmatory RNA tests. Public health navigators attempted to contact RNA‐positive patients and arrange outpatient visits.Results: HCV Ab tests were performed on 3,808 patients, a 6,950% increase from preprogram. The proportion of HCV Ab test positivity was 13.2% (504/3,808, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 12.2%–14.3%) and of those 97.8% (493/504) had a follow‐up RNA test performed. A total of 292 were confirmed positive for active infection, for an overall RNA positivity rate of 7.7% (95% CI = 6.8%–8.5%). Of those with active infection, 155 (53%) were outside the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention birth cohort for increased risk for HCV including 46 (15.8%, 95% CI = 11.8%–20.4%) who also did not report injection drug use. Linkage attempts were documented on 223 (76.4%) patients and appointments were scheduled for 102 (38% of attempted). Sixty‐six patients attended their LTC visit (22.5% of all RNA‐positive patients, 30% of linkage‐eligible patients).Conclusions: Nontargeted opt‐out HCV testing can be successfully implemented in an ED setting. A number of patients diagnosed were outside traditional risk groups. Once diagnosed, an ED population may be difficult to engage in care, but a structured interdisciplinary program can successfully link patients to HCV care.

It is unclear whether sites that screen large numbers of patients for Hepatitis C Virus but achieve limited follow-up are more or less effective at having patients succeed through linkage and treatment than lower volume sites that have higher linkage percentages. The objective was to compare the rates of HCV identification, linkage to care, and treatment success between different study sites including the Emergency Department, 3 outpatient clinics with unique patients, and the inpatient setting at one medical center This is a descriptive analysis of 2 years of data from a protocol that integrated HCV screening and treatment into clinical services throughout multiple departments in one medical center. The program used a best practice advisory to prompt testing at all sites, with different triggers for it to fire at each site, and one central navigation program that attempted to link all patients diagnosed with hepatitis C virus to outpatient care. Outcomes included volume of tests performed in each site, Antibody and RNA rates at each site, demographic data, navigation and linkage outcomes, and post-linkage treatment completion. 28,435 patients were screened across 5 clinical locations. RNA+ rates and absolute numbers linked to MD (linkage rates among all RNA+) were: ED 7.2% RNA+, 224 (22.6%) linked; Inpatient 14.8% RNA+, 27 (17.6%) linked, General Internal Medicine 3.9% RNA+, 269 (65.8%) linked, Infectious Diseases 4.0% RNA+, 34(70.8%) linked, Family Medicine 2.0% RNA+, 28 (75.7%) linked. Demographics, linkage barriers, and treatment initiation rates were different at all sites. Among sites there were differences in the sociodemographic characteristics of patients diagnosed with HCV, as well as differences in the success linking patients to outpatient care. At this medical center, the ED screened the most patients, the inpatient area had the highest RNA positivity rate, the FM clinic had the highest linkage rate, GIM linked the most patients by absolute number, and GIM also had the highest number of patients start treatment.