OBJECTIVE: Case investigation and contact tracing (CI/CT) are fundamental public health efforts widely used during the COVID-19 pandemic to mitigate transmission. This study investigated how state, local, and tribal public health departments used CI/CT during the COVID-19 pandemic, including CI/CT methodology, staffing models, training and support, and efforts to identify or prioritize populations disproportionately affected by COVID-19. METHODS: During March and April 2022, we conducted key informant interviews with up to 3 public health officials from 43 state, local, and tribal public health departments. From audio-recorded and transcribed interviews, we used the framework method to analyze key themes. RESULTS: Major adjustments to CI/CT protocols during the pandemic included (1) prioritizing populations for outreach; (2) implementing automated outreach for nonprioritized groups, particularly during COVID-19 surges; (3) discontinuing contact tracing and focusing exclusively on case investigation; and (4) adding innovations to provide additional support. Key informants also discussed the utility of having backup staffing to support overwhelmed public health departments and spoke to the difficulty in "right-sizing" the public health workforce, with COVID-19 surges leaving public health departments understaffed as case rates rose and overstaffed as case rates fell. CONCLUSIONS: When addressing future epidemics or outbreaks, public health officials should consider strategies that improve the effectiveness of CI/CT efforts over time, such as prioritizing populations based on disproportionate risk, implementing automated outreach, developing models that provide flexible additional staffing resources as cases rise and fall among local public health departments, incorporating demographic data in laboratory reporting, providing community connections and support, and having a system of self-notification of contacts.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) received surveillance data on how many people tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, but there was little information about what individuals did to mitigate transmission. To fill the information gap, we conducted an online, probability-based survey among a nationally representative panel of adults living in the United States to better understand the behaviors of individuals following a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result. Given the low response rates commonly associated with panel surveys, we assessed how well the survey data aligned with CDC surveillance data from March, 2020 to March, 2022. We used CDC surveillance data to calculate monthly aggregated COVID-19 case counts and compared these to monthly COVID-19 case counts captured by our survey during the same period. We found high correlation between our overall survey data estimates and monthly case counts reported to the CDC during the analytic period (r: +0.94; p < 0.05). When stratified according to demographic characteristics, correlations remained high. These correlations strengthened our confidence that the panel survey participants were reflective of the cases reported to CDC and demonstrated the potential value of panel surveys to inform decision making.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to (1) document how health departments (HDs) developed COVID-19 case investigation and contact tracing (CI/CT) interview scripts and the topics covered, and (2) understand how and why HDs modified those scripts. DESIGN: Qualitative analysis of CI/CT interview scripts and in-depth key informant interviews with public health officials in 14 HDs. Collected scripts represent 3 distinct points (initial, the majority of which were time stamped May 2020; interim, spanning from September 2020 to August 2021; and current, as of April 2022). SETTING: Fourteen state, local, and tribal health jurisdictions and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-six public health officials involved in leading CI/CT from 14 state, local, and tribal health jurisdictions (6 states, 3 cities, 4 counties, and 1 tribal area). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Interview script elements included in CI/CT interview scripts over time. RESULTS: Many COVID-19 CI/CT scripts were developed by modifying questions from scripts used for other communicable diseases. Early in the pandemic, scripts included guidance on isolation/quarantine and discussed symptoms of COVID-19. As the pandemic evolved, the length of scripts increased substantially, with significant additions on contact elicitation, vaccinations, isolation/quarantine recommendations, and testing. Drivers of script changes included changes in our understanding of how the virus spreads, risk factors and symptoms, new treatments, new variants, vaccine development, and adjustments to CDC's official isolation and quarantine guidance. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings offer suggestions about components to include in future CI/CT efforts, including educating members of the public about the disease and its symptoms, offering mitigation guidance, and providing sufficient support and resources to help people act on that guidance. Assessing the correlation between script length and number of completed interviews or other quality and performance measures could be an area for future study.

Underprioritization of mental health is a global problem and threatens the decades-long progress of the US President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) program. In recent years, mental health has become globally recognized as a part of universal healthcare, making this an opportune moment for the global community to integrate mental health services into routine programming. PEPFAR is well positioned to lead by example. We conceptualized 5 key strategies that might help serve as a framework to support mental health programming as part of PEPFAR's current 5-year strategic plan. PEPFAR and the global community have an opportunity to identify mental health service gaps and interweave global mental health priorities with actions to end the HIV and TB epidemics by 2030.

Tuberculosis (TB) is the leading cause of death among persons with HIV. In 2022, an estimated 167,000 TB-related deaths occurred globally among persons with HIV. TB preventive treatment (TPT) helps prevent TB disease and is recommended for persons at high risk for developing TB, including those with HIV. TPT, when taken with antiretroviral treatment (ART), can reduce TB-attributable deaths among persons with HIV. In 2018, the U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) program committed to offer one course of TPT to all eligible clients receiving ART. This analysis describes trends in TPT initiation and completion among PEPFAR-supported programs in 36 countries in Africa, Central and South America, and Asia during fiscal years (FYs) 2017-2023. Overall, TPT initiation rates peaked in FY19, a possible sign of programmatic saturation. TPT initiation among clients who had been on ART <6 months reached 59%, and overall completion rates up to 87% were reported. Approximately 13 million persons with HIV have completed TPT since FY17, but widespread adoption of shorter regimens, patient-centered approaches, and electronic medical record systems might be needed to ensure full TPT coverage. Through PEPFAR's partnership with national HIV programs, TPT has become the standard of care for persons with HIV.

Because of constrained personnel time, the Philadelphia Department of Public Health (Philadelphia, PA, USA) adjusted its COVID-19 contact tracing protocol in summer 2021 by prioritizing recent cases and limiting staff time per case. This action reduced required staff hours to prevent each case from 21-30 to 8-11 hours, while maintaining program effectiveness.

India has the largest number of multidrug-resistant TB | (MDR-TB) cases, defined as Mycobacterium tuberculosis | resistant to at least isoniazid (INH) and rifampicin (RIF).1 | However, less than half of all persons with MDR-TB in | India successfully complete treatment.1 Although initial | end-of-treatment outcomes offer a standardised time point | to assess the effect of treatment, these tend to | underestimate the overall burden of unfavourable longterm outcomes among persons treated for TB.2,3 The longterm outcomes of persons diagnosed with MDR-TB in | India, including the proportion with recurrent TB disease | or mortality, are unknown. This analysis was conducted | under programmatic conditions in a high-burden setting, | with no regular check-ups after treatment. The results can | be used to show the burden of recurrent illness and death | following treatment, and can be used as a benchmark to | measure improvement.

The US President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) is the largest HIV program globally, serving roughly 58% of the estimated 28.7 million people with HIV (PWH) on antiretroviral therapy (ART) in 2021 [1,2]. Tuberculosis (TB) remains the leading cause of death among PWH; an estimated 46% of TB cases are undiagnosed at the time of death, emphasizing the challenge of TB detection among this population [3]. The WHO four-symptom screen at every clinical encounter is the primary TB case finding strategy implemented in PEPFAR. Recent program data show 87% of PWH were screened for TB symptoms and, among those, only 2.7% screened positive and were referred for further TB evaluation [2]. Although the expected rate of TB symptom positivity among PWH is debated, PEPFAR's yield is not yet optimal compared with reports from the literature ranging from 30% to 67% [4]. Poor case detection leads to PWH with undiagnosed, untreated, and unreported TB, which contributes to subsequent TB-attributable mortality among PWH. The extent of gaps in case detection and mortality have been difficult to quantify. | | We estimated the number of missed TB/HIV diagnoses and TB-attributable deaths in the populations PEPFAR serves using data from PEPFAR, WHO, and the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) [1,5]. Data was analyzed for 2018–2021, reflecting data from before the COVID-19 pandemic through the most recently available year. WHO and UNAIDS reporting periods were aligned with PEPFAR data wherever possible. Country-level data was analyzed by year for the 32 countries where PEPFAR operated and reported TB data. All datasets were downloaded in April 2023 and analyzed in Tableau, version 2022.1.

Using a nationally representative panel survey, we examined isolation behaviors among persons in the United States who had positive SARS-CoV-2 test results during January 2021-March 2022. Compared with persons who received provider-administered results, persons with home-based results had 29% (95% CI 5%-47%) lower odds of following isolation recommendations.

Context The implementation of case investigation and contact tracing (CICT) for controlling COVID-19 (caused by SARS-Cov-2 virus) has proven challenging due to varying levels of public acceptance and initially constrained resources, especially enough trained staff. Evaluating the impacts of CICT will aid efforts to improve such programs.Objectives Estimate the number of COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations averted by CICT and identify CICT processes that could improve overall effectiveness.Design We used data on proportion of cases interviewed, contacts notified or monitored, and days from testing to contact notification from 14 jurisdictions to model the impact of CICT on cumulative cases counts and hospitalizations over a 60-day period. Using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)’s COVIDTracer tool, we estimated a range of impacts by assuming either contacts would quarantine only if monitored or would do so upon notification of potential exposure. We also varied the observed program metrics to assess their relative influence.Results Performance by jurisdictions varied widely. Jurisdictions isolated between 12 and 86% of cases (including contacts which became cases) within 6 to 10 days after exposure-and-infection. We estimated that CICT-related reductions in transmission ranged from 0.4% to 32%. For every 100 cases prevented by nonpharmaceutical interventions, CICT averted between 4 and 97 additional cases. Reducing time to case isolation by one day increased averted case estimates by up to 15 percentage points. Increasing the proportion of cases interviewed or contacts notified by 20 percentage points each resulted in at most 3 or 6 percentage point improvements in averted cases.Conclusions We estimated that case investigation and contact tracing reduced the number of COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations among all jurisdictions studied. Reducing time to isolation produced the greatest improvements in impact of CICT.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was performed as part of the official duties of all participants in support of the US CDC's COVID-19 Response.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This activity was reviewed by CDC and was conducted consistent with applicable federal law and CDC policy.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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.YesData is available upon request

Importance: Evidence of the impact of COVID-19 Case Investigation and Contact Tracing (CICT) programs is lacking. Policymakers need this evidence to assess its value. Objective(s): Estimate COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations averted nationwide by US states' CICT programs. Design(s): We combined data from US CICT programs (e.g., proportion of cases interviewed, contacts notified or monitored, and days to case and contact notification) with incidence data to model CICT impacts over 60 days period (November 25, 2020 to January 23, 2021) during the height of the pandemic. We estimated a range of impacts by varying assumed compliance with isolation and quarantine recommendations. Setting(s): US States and Territories Participants: Fifty-nine state and territorial health departments that received federal funding supporting COVID-19 pandemic response activities were eligible for inclusion. Of these, 22 states and 1 territory reported all measures necessary for the analysis. These 23 jurisdictions covered 42.5% of the US population (140 million persons), spanned all 4 census regions, and reported data that reflected all 59 federally funded CICT programs. Intervention(s): Public health case investigation and contact tracing Main Outcomes and Measures: Cases and hospitalizations averted; percent of cases averted among cases not prevented by vaccination and other non-pharmaceutical interventions (other NPIs). Result(s): We estimated 1.11 million cases and 27,231 hospitalizations were averted by CICT programs under a scenario where 80% of interviewed cases and monitored contacts, and 30% of notified contacts fully complied with isolation and quarantine guidance, eliminating their contributions to future transmission. As many as 1.36 million cases and 33,527 hospitalizations could have been prevented if all interviewed cases and monitored contacts had entered into and fully complied with isolation and quarantine guidelines upon being interviewed or notified. Across all scenarios and jurisdictions, CICT averted a median of 21.2% (range: 1.3% - 65.8%) of the cases not prevented by vaccination and other NPIs. Conclusions and Relevance: CICT programs likely had a substantial role in curtailing the pandemic in most jurisdictions during the winter 2020-2021 peak. Differences in impact across jurisdictions indicate an opportunity to further improve CICT effectiveness. These estimates demonstrate the potential benefits from sustaining and improving these programs. Copyright The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-ND 4.0 International license.

Introduction. Combining genomic and geospatial data can be useful for understanding Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) transmission in high tuberculosis burden settings. Methods. We performed whole genome sequencing (WGS) on Mtb DNA extracted from sputum cultures from a population-based tuberculosis study conducted in 2012-2016 in Gaborone, Botswana. We used kernel density estimation, spatial K-functions, and created spatial distributions of phylogenetic trees. WGS-based clusters of isolates <5 single nucleotide polymorphisms were considered recent transmission, and large WGS-based clusters (>10 members) were considered outbreaks. Results. We analyzed data from 1449 participants with culture-confirmed TB. Among these, 946 (65%) participants had both molecular and geospatial data. A total of 62 belonged to five large outbreaks (10-19 participants each). Geospatial clustering was detected in two of the five large outbreaks, suggesting heterogeneous spatial patterns within the community. Conclusions. Integration of genomic and geospatial data identified distinct patterns of tuberculosis transmission in a high-tuberculosis burden setting. Targeted interventions in these smaller geographies may interrupt on-going transmission. Copyright The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.

OBJECTIVE AND METHODS: Worldwide, tuberculosis (TB) is the leading cause of death from a single infectious agent. In many countries, national TB prevalence surveys are the only way to reliably measure the burden of TB disease and can also provide other evidence to inform national efforts to improve TB detection and treatment. Our objective was to synthesise the results and lessons learned from national surveys completed in Africa between 2008 and 2016, to complement a previous review for Asia. RESULTS: Twelve surveys completed in Africa were identified: Ethiopia (2010-2011), Gambia (2011-2013), Ghana (2013), Kenya (2015-2016), Malawi (2013-2014), Nigeria (2012), Rwanda (2012), Sudan (2013-2014), Tanzania (2011-2012), Uganda (2014-2015), Zambia (2013-2014) and Zimbabwe (2014). The eligible population in all surveys was people aged ≥15 years who met residency criteria. In total 588 105 individuals participated, equivalent to 82% (range 57-96%) of those eligible. The prevalence of bacteriologically confirmed pulmonary TB disease in those ≥15 years varied from 119 (95% CI 79-160) per 100 000 population in Rwanda and 638 (95% CI 502-774) per 100 000 population in Zambia. The male:female ratio was 2.0 overall, ranging from 1.2 (Ethiopia) to 4.1 (Uganda). Prevalence per 100 000 population generally increased with age, but the absolute number of cases was usually highest among those aged 35-44 years. Of identified TB cases, 44% (95% CI 40-49) did not report TB symptoms during screening and were only identified as eligible for diagnostic testing due to an abnormal chest X-ray. The overall ratio of prevalence to case notifications was 2.5 (95% CI 1.8-3.2) and was consistently higher for men than women. Many participants who did report TB symptoms had not sought care; those that had were more likely to seek care in a public health facility. HIV prevalence was systematically lower among prevalent cases than officially notified TB patients with an overall ratio of 0.5 (95% CI 0.3-0.7). The two main study limitations were that none of the surveys included people <15 years, and 5 of 12 surveys did not have data on HIV status. CONCLUSIONS: National TB prevalence surveys implemented in Africa between 2010 and 2016 have contributed substantial new evidence about the burden of TB disease, its distribution by age and sex, and gaps in TB detection and treatment. Policies and practices to improve access to health services and reduce under-reporting of detected TB cases are needed, especially among men. All surveys provide a valuable baseline for future assessment of trends in TB disease burden.

Combining genomic and geospatial data can be useful for understanding Mycobacterium tuberculosis transmission in high-burden tuberculosis (TB) settings. We performed whole-genome sequencing on M. tuberculosis DNA extracted from sputum cultures from a population-based TB study conducted in Gaborone, Botswana, during 2012-2016. We determined spatial distribution of cases on the basis of shared genotypes among isolates. We considered clusters of isolates with ≤5 single-nucleotide polymorphisms identified by whole-genome sequencing to indicate recent transmission and clusters of ≥10 persons to be outbreaks. We obtained both molecular and geospatial data for 946/1,449 (65%) participants with culture-confirmed TB; 62 persons belonged to 5 outbreaks of 10-19 persons each. We detected geospatial clustering in just 2 of those 5 outbreaks, suggesting heterogeneous spatial patterns. Our findings indicate that targeted interventions applied in smaller geographic areas of high-burden TB identified using integrated genomic and geospatial data might help interrupt TB transmission during outbreaks.

We combined field-based data with mathematical modeling to estimate the effectiveness of smartphone-enabled COVID-19 exposure notification in Pennsylvania, USA. We estimated that digital notifications potentially averted 7-69 cases/1,000 notifications during November 8, 2020-January 2, 2021. Greater use and increased compliance could increase the effectiveness of digital notifications.

Mumbai, India's second largest city, has one of the highest prevalences of drug-resistant tuberculosis* (DRTB) in the world. Treatment for DRTB takes longer and is more complicated than treatment for drug-susceptible tuberculosis (TB). Approximately 300 persons receive a new DRTB diagnosis each year in Mumbai's Dharavi slum(†); historically, fewer than one half of these patients complete DRTB treatment. As nationwide restrictions to mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic were implemented, a program to facilitate uninterrupted DRTB care for patients receiving treatment was also implemented. A comprehensive tool and risk assessment provided support to DRTB patients and linked those who relocated outside of Dharavi during the pandemic to DRTB care at their destination. During May 2020-September 2022, a total of 973 persons received DRTB treatment in Dharavi, including 255 (26%) who relocated during treatment. Overall, 25 (3%) DRTB patients were lost to follow-up, a rate substantially lower than the rate before the pandemic (18%). Proactive planning and implementation of simple tools retained patients on treatment during periods of travel restrictions and relocations, improving programmatic outcomes. This approach might aid public health programs serving migrant populations or patients receiving treatment for DRTB during public health emergencies.

BACKGROUND: Public health programs varied in ability to reach people with COVID-19 and their contacts to encourage separation from others. For both adult cases of COVID-19 and contacts, we estimated the impact of contact tracing activities on separation behaviors from January, 2020 until March, 2022. METHODS: We used a probability-based panel survey of a nationally representative sample to gather data for estimates and comparisons. RESULTS: An estimated 64,255,351 adults reported a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result; 79.6% isolated for >5 days, 60.2% isolated for >10 days, and 79.2% self-notified contacts. 24,057,139 (37.7%) completed a case investigation and 46.2% reported contacts to health officials. More adults who completed a case investigation isolated than adults who did not (>5 days, 82.6%; >10 days, 69.8% versus >5 days, 78.2% and >10 days 54.8%; p-values for both measures <0.05).84,946,636 adults were a contact to a COVID-19 case; 73.1% learned of their exposure directly from a case; 49.4% quarantined for >5 days, 18.7% quarantined for >14 days, and 13.5% completed a contact tracing call. More who completed a contact tracing call quarantined than those who did not (>5 days, 61.2%; >14 days, 25.2% versus >5 days, 48.5%; >14 days, 18.0%; p-values for both measures <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Engagement in contact tracing positively correlated with isolation and quarantine. However, most adults with COVID-19 isolated and self-notified contacts regardless of whether the public health workforce was able to reach them. Identifying and reaching contacts was challenging, and limited the ability to promote quarantining, and testing.

Case investigation and contact tracing (CI/CT) is a critical part of the public health response to COVID-19. Individuals' experiences with CI/CT for COVID-19 varied based on geographic location, changes in knowledge and guidelines, access to testing and vaccination, as well as demographic characteristics including age, race, ethnicity, income, and political ideology. In this paper, we explore the experiences and behaviors of adults with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results, or who were exposed to a person with COVID-19, to understand their knowledge, motivations, and facilitators and barriers to their actions. We conducted focus groups and one-on-one interviews with 94 cases and 90 contacts from across the United States. We found that participants were concerned about infecting or exposing others, which motivated them to isolate or quarantine, notify contacts, and get tested. Although most cases and contacts were not contacted by CI/CT professionals, those who were reported a positive experience and received helpful information. Many cases and contacts reported seeking information from family, friends, health care providers, as well as television news and Internet sources. Although participants reported similar perspectives and experiences across demographic characteristics, some highlighted inequities in receiving COVID-19 information and resources.

BACKGROUND: Co-management of HIV-TB coinfection remains a challenge globally. Addressing TB among people living with HIV (PLHIV) is a key priority for the Government of India (GoI). In 2016, GoI implemented single-window services to prevent and manage TB in PLHIV. To strengthen HIV-TB service delivery, case-based e-learning was introduced to health care providers at Antiretroviral Therapy centres (ARTc). METHODS: We implemented a hub and spoke model to deliver biweekly, virtual, case-based e-learning at select ARTc (n=115), from four states of India-Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu. We evaluated feasibility and acceptability of case-based e-learning and its impact on professional satisfaction, self-efficacy, knowledge retention using baseline and completion surveys, session feedback, pre-and post-session assessments. We reviewed routine programmatic data and patient outcomes to assess practices among participating ARTc. RESULTS: Between May 2018 and September 2020, 59 sessions were conducted with mean participation of 55 spokes and 152 participants. For 95% and 88% of sessions80% of respondents agreed that topics were clear and relevant to practice, and duration of session was appropriate, respectively. Session participants significantly improved in perceived knowledge, skills and competencies (+8.6%; p=0.025), and technical knowledge (+18.3%; p=0.04) from baseline. Participating ARTc increased TB screening (+4.2%, p<0.0001), TB diagnosis (+2.7%, p<0.0001), ART initiation (+4.3%, p<0.0001) and TB preventive treatment completion (+5.2%, p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: Case-based e-learning is an acceptable and effective modus of capacity building and developing communities of practice to strengthen integrated care. E-learning could address demand for accessible and sustainable continuing professional education to manage complex diseases, and thereby enhance health equity. We recommend expansion of this initiative across the country for management of co-morbidities as well as other communicable and non-communicable diseases to augment the existing capacity building interventions by provide continued learning and routine mentorship through communities of practice.

Introduction: Tuberculosis (TB) remains a leading cause of preventable morbidity and mortality, with an estimated 10.6 million new cases and 1.6 million deaths globally in 2021 (1). Nosocomial transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis, the etiologic agent responsible for TB disease, is a major public health concern. This is particularly true for high-prevalence, low-resource settings where the majority of the global TB burden exists (2–6). Interventions to reduce nosocomial transmission require a clear understanding of where TB spreads in health-care facilities.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the diagnosis, treatment, and care for tuberculosis (TB). Delays in seeking TB care may result in increased community transmission and unfavorable treatment outcomes. We sought to understand the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the proportion of patients with TB who delayed seeking the diagnosis and care for TB and explore the reasons for their postponement. METHODS: We surveyed a representative sample of outpatients treated for pulmonary TB from June to November 2020 using an anonymous standardized questionnaire. Multivariable logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of factors associated with the postponement of TB care. We used routinely collected surveillance data to assess trends of TB reports before and after the emergence of COVID-19 (2017-2019 vs. 2020-2022) in Tianjin, China. RESULTS: Among 358 participants who were diagnosed with pulmonary TB during the COVID-19 response, 61 (17%) postponed seeking TB diagnosis due to COVID-19, with 39 (64%) citing fear as the primary reason. Female sex (aOR:2.0; 95% CI: 1.1-3.7), previous antituberculosis treatment (aOR:3.2; 95%CI: 1.4-7.6), and TB diagnosis during the first-level response (aOR = 3.2, 1.7-6.2) were associated with the postponement. Among all 518 participants receiving antituberculosis treatment, 57 (11%) had postponed their regular healthcare visits due to COVID-19, 175 (34%) received no treatment supervision, and 32 (6%) experienced treatment interruption. Compared to 2017-2019, reported pulmonary TB declined by 36.8% during the first-level response to COVID-19, 23.5% during the second-level response, 14% during the third-level response in 2020, and 4.3% in 2021. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 response reduced the number of people who sought and received diagnosis, treatment, and care for TB in Tianjin, China. Integrative programs to ensure access and continuity of TB services should be considered and dual testing for SARS-CoV-2 and M. tuberculosis may facilitate finding cases.

Vermont contact tracing (CT) consistently identified people at risk for COVID-19. However, the prevalence ratio (PR) of COVID-19 among contacts compared with noncontacts when viral transmission was high (PR = 13.5; 95% CI: 13.2-13.9) was significantly less than when transmission was low (PR = 49.3; 95% CI: 43.2-56.3).

Mycobacterium tuberculosis transmission dynamics in high-burden settings are poorly understood. Growing evidence suggests transmission may be characterized by extensive individual heterogeneity in secondary cases (i.e., superspreading), yet the degree and influence of such heterogeneity is largely unknown and unmeasured in high burden-settings. We conducted a prospective, population-based molecular epidemiology study of TB transmission in both an urban and rural setting of Botswana, one of the highest TB burden countries in the world. We used these empirical data to fit two mathematical models (urban and rural) that jointly quantified both the effective reproductive number, [Formula: see text], and the propensity for superspreading in each population. We found both urban and rural populations were characterized by a high degree of individual heterogeneity, however such heterogeneity disproportionately impacted the rural population: 99% of secondary transmission was attributed to only 19% of infectious cases in the rural population compared to 60% in the urban population and the median number of incident cases until the first outbreak of 30 cases was only 32 for the rural model compared to 791 in the urban model. These findings suggest individual heterogeneity plays a critical role shaping local TB epidemiology within subpopulations.

OBJECTIVE: Healthcare facilities are a well-known high-risk environment for transmission of M. tuberculosis, the etiologic agent of tuberculosis (TB) disease. However, the link between M. tuberculosis transmission in healthcare facilities and its role in the general TB epidemic is unknown. We estimated the proportion of overall TB transmission in the general population attributable to healthcare facilities. METHODS: We combined data from a prospective, population-based molecular epidemiologic study with a universal electronic medical record (EMR) covering all healthcare facilities in Botswana to identify biologically plausible transmission events occurring at the healthcare facility. Patients with M. tuberculosis isolates of the same genotype visiting the same facility concurrently were considered an overlapping event. We then used TB diagnosis and treatment data to categorize overlapping events into biologically plausible definitions. We calculated the proportion of overall TB cases in the cohort that could be attributable to healthcare facilities. RESULTS: In total, 1,881 participants had TB genotypic and EMR data suitable for analysis, resulting in 46,853 clinical encounters at 338 healthcare facilities. We identified 326 unique overlapping events involving 370 individual patients; 91 (5%) had biologic plausibility for transmission occurring at a healthcare facility. A sensitivity analysis estimated that 3%-8% of transmission may be attributable to healthcare facilities. CONCLUSIONS: Although effective interventions are critical in reducing individual risk for healthcare workers and patients at healthcare facilities, our findings suggest that development of targeted interventions aimed at community transmission may have a larger impact in reducing TB.

IMPORTANCE: Evidence of the impact of COVID-19 case investigation and contact tracing (CICT) programs is lacking, but policy makers need this evidence to assess the value of such programs. OBJECTIVE: To estimate COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations averted nationwide by US states' CICT programs. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This decision analytical model study used combined data from US CICT programs (eg, proportion of cases interviewed, contacts notified or monitored, and days to case and contact notification) with incidence data to model outcomes of CICT over a 60-day period (November 25, 2020, to January 23, 2021). The study estimated a range of outcomes by varying assumed compliance with isolation and quarantine recommendations. Fifty-nine state and territorial health departments that received federal funding supporting COVID-19 pandemic response activities were eligible for inclusion. Data analysis was performed from July to September 2021. EXPOSURE: Public health case investigation and contact tracing. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcomes were numbers of cases and hospitalizations averted and the percentage of cases averted among cases not prevented by vaccination and other nonpharmaceutical interventions. RESULTS: In total, 22 states and 1 territory reported all measures necessary for the analysis. These 23 jurisdictions covered 42.5% of the US population (approximately 140 million persons), spanned all 4 US Census regions, and reported data that reflected all 59 federally funded CICT programs. This study estimated that 1.11 million cases and 27 231 hospitalizations were averted by CICT programs under a scenario where 80% of interviewed cases and monitored contacts and 30% of notified contacts fully complied with isolation and quarantine guidance, eliminating their contributions to future transmission. As many as 1.36 million cases and 33 527 hospitalizations could have been prevented if all interviewed cases and monitored contacts had entered into and fully complied with isolation and quarantine guidelines upon being interviewed or notified. Across both scenarios and all jurisdictions, CICT averted an estimated median of 21.2% (range, 1.3%-65.8%) of the cases not prevented by vaccination and other nonpharmaceutical interventions. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: These findings suggest that CICT programs likely had a substantial role in curtailing the pandemic in most jurisdictions during the 2020 to 2021 winter peak. Differences in outcomes across jurisdictions indicate an opportunity to further improve CICT effectiveness. These estimates demonstrate the potential benefits from sustaining and improving these programs.

Persistent gaps exist in healthcare workers' capacity to address HIV and tuberculosis in Asia and Africa due to constraints in resources and knowledge. Project ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes) leverages video-enabled technology to build workforce capacity and promote collaboration through mentorship and case-based learning. To understand current perceptions of ECHO participants and develop a comprehensive evaluation framework for ECHO implementation, we utilized modified appreciative inquiry guided focus group discussions (FGD) in India and Tanzania and called it SCORE (Strengths, Challenges, Opportunities, Results, and Evaluation). Content and thematic analysis of transcripts from FGDs and key-informant interviews triangulated perceptions of diverse stakeholders about ECHO implementation and identified key elements for development of the framework. The perceived strengths (S) were capacity building and establishing communities of practice. The perceived challenges (C) included securing resources, engaging leadership, and building systems for monitoring impact. Improved internet connectivity, addressing logistical challenges, encouraging session interactivity, and having strategic scale-up plans were perceived opportunities (O). Additionally, gathering measurable results (R) led to development of a comprehensive evaluation (E) framework. Contextualizing and facilitating SCORE with qualitative analysis of findings 6-12months post-ECHO implementation may serve as a best practice to assess mid-course corrections to improve ECHO implementation quality.

India has a high burden of drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR TB) and many cases go undetected by current drug susceptibility tests (DSTs). This study was conducted to identify rifampicin (RIF) and isoniazid (INH) resistance associated genetic mutations undetected by current clinical diagnostics amongst persons with DR TB in Chennai, India. Retrospectively stored 166 DR TB isolates during 2013-2016 were retrieved and cultured in Löwenstein-Jensen medium. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) and MGIT DST for RIF and INH were performed. Discordant genotypic and phenotypic sensitivity results were repeated for confirmation and the discrepant results considered final. Further, drug resistance-conferring mutations identified through WGS were analyzed for their presence as targets in current WHO-recommended molecular diagnostics. WGS detected additional mutations for rifampicin and isoniazid resistance than WHO-endorsed line probe assays. For RIF, WGS was able to identify an additional 10% (15/146) of rpoB mutant isolates associated with borderline rifampicin resistance compared to MGIT DST. WGS could detect additional DR TB cases than commercially available and WHO-endorsed molecular DST tests. WGS results reiterate the importance of the recent WHO revised critical concentrations of current MGIT DST to detect low-level resistance to rifampicin. WGS may help inform effective treatment selection for persons at risk of, or diagnosed with, DR TB.

Introduction: Case investigation and contact tracing are important tools to limit the spread of SARS-CoV-2, particularly when implemented efficiently. Our objective was to evaluate participation in and timeliness of COVID-19 contact tracing and whether these measures changed over time. Methods: We retrospectively assessed COVID-19 case investigation and contact tracing surveillance data from the Washington State centralized program for August 1-31, 2020 and October 1-31, 2020. We combined SARS-CoV-2 testing reports with contact tracing data to compare completeness, reporting of contacts, and program timeliness. Results: For August and October respectively, 4,600 (of 12,521) and 2,166 (of 16,269) individuals with COVID-19 were referred to the state program for case investigation. Investigators called 100% of referred individuals; 65% (August) and 76% (October) were interviewed. Of individuals interviewed, 33% reported contacts in August and 45% in October, with only mild variation by age, sex, race/ethnicity, and urbanicity. In August, 992 individuals with COVID-19 reported a total of 2,584 contacts (mean, 2.6), and in October, 739 individuals reported 2,218 contacts (mean, 3.0). Among contacts, 86% and 78% participated in interviews for August and October. The median time elapsed from specimen collection to contact interview was 4 days in August and 3 days in October, and from symptom onset to contact interview was 7 days in August and 6 days in October. Conclusions: While contact tracing improved with time, the proportion of individuals disclosing contacts remained below 50% and differed minimally by demographic characteristics. The longest time interval occurred between symptom onset and test result notification. Improving elicitation of contacts and timeliness of contact tracing may further decrease SARS-CoV-2 transmission.

Introduction: The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), through U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), supports a third of all people receiving HIV care globally. CDC works with local partners to improve methods to find, treat, and prevent HIV and tuberculosis. However, a shortage of trained medical professionals has impeded efforts to control the HIV epidemic in Sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. The Project Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO(TM)) model expands capacity to manage complex diseases, share knowledge, disseminate best practices, and build communities of practice. This manuscript describes a practical protocol for an evaluation framework and toolkit to assess ECHO implementation. Methods and Analysis: This mixed methods, developmental evaluation design uses an appreciative inquiry approach, and includes a survey, focus group discussion, semi-structured key informant interviews, and readiness assessments. In addition, ECHO session content will be objectively reviewed for accuracy, content validity, delivery, appropriateness, and consistency with current guidelines. Finally, we offer a mechanism to triangulate data sources to assess acceptability and feasibility of the evaluation framework and compendium of monitoring and evaluation tools. Expected impact of the study on public health: This protocol offers a unique approach to engage diverse group of stakeholders using an appreciative inquiry process to co-create a comprehensive evaluation framework and a compendium of assessment tools. This evaluation framework utilizes mixed methods (quantitative and qualitative data collection tools), was pilot tested in Tanzania, and has the potential for contextualized use in other countries who plan to evaluate their Project ECHO implementation.

CONTEXT: The implementation of case investigation and contact tracing (CICT) for controlling COVID-19 (caused by SARS-CoV-2 virus) has proven challenging due to varying levels of public acceptance and initially constrained resources, especially enough trained staff. Evaluating the impacts of CICT will aid efforts to improve such programs. OBJECTIVES: Estimate the number of COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations averted by CICT and identify CICT processes that could improve overall effectiveness. DESIGN: We used data on the proportion of cases interviewed, contacts notified or monitored, and days from testing to case and contact notification from 14 jurisdictions to model the impact of CICT on cumulative case counts and hospitalizations over a 60-day period. Using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's COVIDTracer Advanced tool, we estimated a range of impacts by assuming either contacts would quarantine only if monitored or would do so upon notification of potential exposure. We also varied the observed program metrics to assess their relative influence. RESULTS: Performance by jurisdictions varied widely. Jurisdictions isolated between 12% and 86% of cases (including contacts that became cases) within 6 to 10 days after infection. We estimated that CICT-related reductions in transmission ranged from 0.4% to 32%. For every 100 remaining cases after other nonpharmaceutical interventions were implemented, CICT averted between 4 and 97 additional cases. Reducing time to case isolation by 1 day increased averted case estimates by up to 15 percentage points. Increasing the proportion of cases interviewed or contacts notified by 20 percentage points each resulted in at most 3 or 6 percentage point improvements in averted cases. CONCLUSIONS: We estimated that CICT reduced the number of COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations among all jurisdictions studied. Reducing time to isolation produced the greatest improvements in impact of CICT.