Abstract
Testing and isolation of infectious employees is one of the critical strategies to make the workplace safe during the pandemic for many organizations. Adaptive testing frequency reduces cost while keeping the pandemic under control at the workplace. However, most models aimed at estimating test frequencies were structured for municipalities or large organizations such as university campuses of highly mobile individuals. By contrast, the workplace exhibits distinct characteristics: employee positivity rate may be different from the local community because of rigorous protective measures at workplace, or self-selection of co-workers with common behavioral tendencies for adherence to pandemic mitigation guidelines. Moreover, dual exposure to COVID19 occurs at work and home that complicates transmission modelling, as does transmission tracing at the workplace. Hence, we developed bi-modal SEIR model and R-shiny tool that accounts for these differentiating factors to adaptively estimate the testing frequency for workplace. Our tool uses easily measurable parameters: community incidence rate, risks of acquiring infection from community and work-place, workforce size, and sensitivity of testing. Our model is best suited for moderate-sized organizations with low internal transmission rates, no-outward facing employees whose position demands frequent in-person interactions with the public, and low to medium population positivity rates. Simulations revealed that employee behavior in adherence to protective measures at work and in their community, and the onsite workforce size have large effects on testing frequency. Reducing workplace transmission rate through workplace mitigation protocols and higher sensitivity of the test deployed, though to a lesser extent. Furthermore, our simulations showed that sentinel testing leads to only marginal increase in the number of infections even for high community incidence rates, suggesting that this may be a cost-effective approach in future pandemics. We used our model to accurately guide testing regimen for three campuses of The Jackson Laboratory.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by The Jackson Laboratory, USA
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
IRB of The Jackson Laboratory determined on November 16th, 2020, before any research procedures, that the study is Exempt human subjects research.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced and software developed in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
