Management of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant Community Screenings in Shanghai, China: A Cross-Sectional Study

Figures & data

Table 1 Characteristics of 203 Residential Committee Directors

Sample Information	Number	Percentage
Age, yr
<30	5	2.4
30–40	103	50.7
41–50	82	40.3
>50	13	6.4
Sex
Female	110	54.2
Male	93	45.8
Educational background
Junior	55	27
Bachelor	141	69.4
Master	6	2.9
Doctor	1	0.4
Medical background
Yes	25	12.3
No	178	87.7
Community training
Yes	107	52.7
No	96	47.3
Awareness of cross-infection
Yes	121	59.6
No	82	40.4

Table 2 Infection Prevention and Control Management Patterns During the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant Pandemic: Results from 203 Valid Questionnaires

Items	Total
Number of samplings	383,601
Number of community staff members	2965
Number of medical workers	750
Number of sampling sites	575
Number of sampling tables	743
One meter spacing, n (%)
Yes	192 (94.6)
No	11 (5.4)
One-way flow, n (%)
Yes	174 (85.7)
No	29 (14.3)
One table per sampling site
One medical worker	375 (87.82)
Some medical workers	52 (12.18)
Two table per sampling site
Spacing≥1.5m between sampling stations	158 (69.30)
Spacing<1.5m between sampling stations	70 (30.70)
More than two table per sampling site
Spacing≥1.5m between sampling stations	63 (71.59)
Spacing<1.5m between sampling stations	25 (28.41)

Figure 1 The common layouts of community NAT sites.

Notes: (A) There is only one sampling table and medical worker at a single sampling site. (B) There is only one sampling table at a single sampling site, with multiple medical workers taking samples and residents not facing each other at the time of sampling. (C) There are multiple sampling tables at a single sampling site, with multiple medical workers taking samples. The distance between sampling tables is more than 1.5m, and the residents are not face to face during sampling. (D) There are multiple sampling tables at a single sampling site, with multiple medical workers taking samples. The distance between sampling tables is less than 1.5m, and residents are not face to face during sampling. (E) There is only one sampling table at a single sampling site, with multiple medical workers taking samples and residents facing each other at the time of sampling. (F) There are multiple sampling tables at a single sampling site, with multiple medical workers taking samples and residents sitting back to back during sampling.

Table 3 Comparison of Number of Tables per Sampling Site

Sample Information	1 Table	2 Tables	>2 Tables	P-value
Number of samplings	1290.00 (734.00, 2092.50)	2230.00 (1282.50, 3213.00)	2376.50 (2149.75, 3489.00)	0.000
Number of community staff members	10.00 (6.00,18.00)	10.00 (8.00,15.00)	15.50 (10.50,20.75)	0.116
Number of medical workers	2.00 (2.00,4.00)	4.00 (2.00,6.00)	5,50 (4.00,7.00)	0.000
Number of sampling sites	2.50 (2.00,4.00)	2.00 (1.00,3.00)	2.00 (1.00,2.00)	0.035
Number of total sampling tables	2.50 (2.00,4.00)	4.00 (2.00,6.00)	5.50 (2.00,6.75)	0.000

Note: All values are written as median (IQR).

Abbreviation: IQR, interquartile range.

Table 4 Comparison of Low-Risk and High-Risk Groups in One-Table Sampling Sites

Sample Information	Low-Risk Group*	High-Risk Group^†	P-value
Number of samplings	1266.50 (710.75, 2097.50)	1339.00 (795, 2039.50)	0.950
Number of community staff members	11.50 (6.00,18.00)	10.00 (7.50,15.25)	0.609
Number of medical workers	2.00 (2.00,4.00)	4.00 (2.00,5.25)	0.075
Number of sampling sites	3.00 (2.00,4.00)	2.00 (1.00,4.00)	0.109
Number of sampling tables	3.00 (2.00,4.00)	2.00 (1.00,4.00)	0.109
Community training
Yes	67 (55.8)	8 (36.4)	0.093
No	53 (44.2)	14 (63.6)
Awareness of cross-infection
Yes	68 (56.7)	16 (72.7)	0.159
No	52 (43.3)	6 (27.3)

Notes: All values are presented as median (IQR) or n (%). *One medical worker served at one sampling table. †Multiple medical workers served at one sampling table.

Abbreviations: IQR, interquartile range; n, number.

Table 5 Comparison of Low-Risk and High-Risk Groups in Sampling Sites with Two Tables Spaced 1.5m Apart

Sample Information	Low-Risk Group*	High-Risk Group^†	P-value
Number of samplings	1727.50 (978.50, 2656.00)	3800.00 (3013.00, 5800.00)	0.001
Number of community logistic staff members	11.00 (8.00,15.00)	10.00 (8.00,30.00)	0.401
Number of medical workers	3.00 (2.00,5.25)	6.00 (4.00,13.00)	0.007
Number of sampling sites	2.00 (1.00,3.00)	3.00 (2.00,4.00)	0.126
Number of total sampling tables	4.00 (2.00,6.00)	6.00 (4.00,8.00)	0.126
Community training
Yes	20 (58.8)	4 (36.4)	0.194
No	14 (41.2)	7 (63.6)
Awareness of cross-infection
Yes	20 (58.8)	7 (63.6)	0.777
No	14 (41.2)	4 (36.4)

Notes: All values are presented as median (IQR) or n (%). *One medical worker served at one sampling table. †Multiple medical workers served at one sampling table.

Abbreviations: IQR, interquartile range; n, number.

Table 6 Comparisons Among Communities of Different Sizes

Sample Info	The Number of Residents <1000	The Number of Residents 1000~3000	The number of Residents >3000	P-value
Number of community staff members	7.00(5.00,10.00)	12.00(8.00,16.00)	21.00(12.00,30.00)	0.000
Number of medical workers	2.00(1.00,2.00)	3.00(2.00,4.00)	7.00(6.00,10.00)	0.000
Number of sampling sites	1.00(1.00,2.00)	3.00(2.00,4.00)	4.00(3.00,7.00)	0.000
Number of total sampling tables	2.00(1.00,2.00)	3.00(2.00,4.00)	7.00(6.00,8.00)	0.000
Community training
Yes	37(58.7)	58(55.2)	12(34.3)	0.051
No	26(41.3)	47(44,8)	23(65.7)
Awareness of cross infection
Yes	29(46.0)	65(61.9)	27(77.1)	0.009
No	34(54.0)	40(38.1)	8(22.9)

Note: All values are presented as median (IQR) or n (%).

Abbreviations: IQR, interquartile range; n, number.

Table 7 Comparison of Low-Risk and High-Risk Groups in Communities with Less Than 1000 Residents

Sample Information	Low-Risk Group*	High-Risk Group^†	P-value
Number of community staff members	592.50 (336.50, 859.00)	780.00 (325.50, 935.50)	0.992
Number of medical workers	7.00 (5.00,10.00)	6.00 (5.00,13.00)	0.137
Number of sampling sites	2.00 (1.00,2.00)	2.00 (2.00,2.00)	0.162
Number of sampling tables	2.00 (1.00,2.00)	1.00 (1.00,1.50)	0.053
Community training
Yes	34 (62.96)	3 (33.33)	0.095
No	20 (37.04)	6 (66.67)
Awareness of cross infection
Yes	22 (40.74)	7 (77.78)	0.039
No	32 (59.26)	2 (22.22)

Notes: All values are presented as median (IQR) or n (%). *Two tables spaced ≥1.5m. ^†Two tables spaced <1.5m.

Abbreviations: IQR, interquartile range; n, number.

Table 8 Comparison of Low-Risk and High-Risk Groups in Communities with 1000~3000 Residents

Sample Information	Low-Risk Group*	High-Risk Group^†	P-value
Number of sampling	1858.00(1359.00, 2250.75)	1800.00(1339.00, 2300.00)	0.884
Number of community staff members	12.00(8.00,18.00)	10.00(8.00,12.00)	0.106
Number of medical workers	3.00(2.00,4.00)	4.00(3.00,6.00)	0.023
Number of sampling sites	3.00(2.00,4.00)	2.00(1.00,3.00)	0.075
Number of sampling tables	3.50(2.00,4.00)	3.00(2.00,4.00)	0.127
Community logistic staffs training
Yes	52(57.78)	6(40.00)	0.200
No	38(42.22)	9(60.00)
Awareness of cross-infection
Yes	54(60.00)	11(73.33)	0.325
No	36(40.00)	4(26.67)

Notes: All values are presented as median (IQR) or n (%). *Two tables spaced ≥1.5m. ^†Two tables spaced <1.5m.

Abbreviations: IQR, interquartile range; n, number.

Table 9 Comparison of Low-Risk and High-Risk Groups in Communities with More Than 3000 Residents

Sample Information	Low-Risk Group*	High-Risk Group^†	P-value
Number of sampling	3723.50(3348.00, 4527.00)	4000.00(3483.00, 5660.50)	0.257
Number of community logistic staff members	22.50(19.00,30.00)	15.00(10.00,31.00)	0.371
Number of medical workers	7.00(5.75,8.50)	7.00(5.50,12.00)	0.724
Number of sampling sites	6.00(3.00,8.00)	4.00(2.00,4.50)	0.024
Number of sampling tables	7.00(6.00,8.00)	6.00(4.00,9.00)	0.302
Community logistic staff training
Yes	7(31.82)	5(38.46)	0.689
No	15(68.18)	8(61.54)
Awareness of cross-infection
Yes	19(86.36)	8(61.54)	0.091
No	3(13.64)	5(38.46)

Notes: All values are presented as median (IQR) or n (%). *Two tables spaced ≥1.5m. ^†Two tables spaced <1.5m.

Abbreviations: IQR, interquartile range; n, number.