Analysis of Higher Education Athletic Department COVID-19 Testing: A Comparison of Screening Versus Testing-Based Protocols.
Kasey Stickler, John Castillo, Andy Gilliland, John Roth, Andrew Brown, Adam M Franks, David Rupp
Author Information
Kasey Stickler: Division of Sports Medicine, Department of Family and Community Health, Joan C. Edwards School of Medicine, Marshall University, Huntington, WV.
John Castillo: Department of Family and Community Medicine, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH.
Andy Gilliland: Division of Sports Medicine, Department of Family and Community Health, Joan C. Edwards School of Medicine, Marshall University, Huntington, WV.
John Roth: Joan C. Edwards School of Medicine, Marshall University, Huntington, WV; and.
Andrew Brown: Division of Sports Medicine, Department of Family and Community Health, Joan C. Edwards School of Medicine, Marshall University, Huntington, WV.
Adam M Franks: Department of Family and Community Health, Joan C. Edwards School of Medicine, Marshall University, Huntington, WV.
David Rupp: Division of Sports Medicine, Department of Family and Community Health, Joan C. Edwards School of Medicine, Marshall University, Huntington, WV.
OBJECTIVE: To determine efficacy of screening-based versus testing COVID-19 management protocols. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. SETTING: Athletic departments of a National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) and National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division I institution. PATIENTS: All student-athletes (n = 303 and 437) and staff (n = 34 and 291) within the NAIA and NCAA athletic departments. Total cohort (n = 1065). INTERVENTIONS: The authors analyzed the independent variables of screening and testing rates. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Dependent variables of positive rates, percent positive rates, competition missed, and cost were analyzed. RESULTS: The screening-based protocol (n = 20���798) generated 139 tests and a percent positive rate of 10.07% for student-athletes. Half of the staff (17 of 34) also had positive results. Protocol costs were $45,038 and 29 games were missed among all teams. The testing-based protocol did not screen but tested student-athletes 14���837 times, which resulted in 158 positives (P < 0.00001) and a percent positive rate of 1.06%. Only 14.37% (43 of 291) of staff tested positive (P < 0.00001). Protocol costs were $1,616���570 and 43 games were missed among all teams. CONCLUSIONS: The testing-based protocol protected student-athletes and staff better than the screening-based protocol, but at >35 times the cost. Neither protocol resulted in severe infections necessitating hospitalizations, and fewer games were missed in the screening-based protocol. Because institutions have different levels of financial support, varied but viable protocols are needed.
References
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Interim clinical guidance for management of patients with confirmed Coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/clinical-guidance-management-patients.html. Accessed April 19, 2022.
Matricardi PM, Dal Negro RW, Nisini R. The first, holistic immunological model of COVID-19: implications for prevention, diagnosis, and public health measures. Pediatr Allergy Immunol. 2020;31:454���470.
NCAA.org. NCAA cancels remaining winter and spring championships. Ncaa.org. Available at: https://www.ncaa.org/news/2020/3/12/ncaa-cancels-remaining-winter-andspringchampionships.aspx. March 12, 2020. Accessed April 19, 2022.
Blinder A, Martin J. Trump and Biden seek an electoral edge from an unlikely source. Coll football. The New York times. Published September 12, 2020. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/12/sports/ncaafootball/trump-football-big-ten.html. Accessed April 19, 2022.
Crowe LLP. National collegiate athletic Association Consolidated financial Statements. Amazonaws.com. Available at: https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/ncaa/finance/201920NCAAFIN_FinancialStatement.pdf. Accessed April 19, 2022.
Swanson R, Smith AB. COVID-19 and the cutting of college athletic teams. Sport Soc. 2020;23:1724���1735.
Uzicanin A, Gaines J. Community congregate settings. In: The CDC Field Epidemiology Manual. Oxford University Press; 2019:363���374.
Garver MJ, Gordon AM, Philipp NM, et al. Change-event steals ���athlete��� from ���college athlete���: perceived impact and depression, anxiety, and stress. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2021;14:1873���1882.
NCAA.org. Pandemic continues to impact student-athlete mental health. Ncaa.org. Available at: https://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/pandemic-continues-impact-student-athlete-mental-health. Published February 16, 2021. Accessed May 4, 2022.
Mulcahey MK, Gianakos AL, Mercurio A, et al. Sports medicine considerations during the COVID-19 pandemic. Am J Sports Med. 2021;49:512���521.
(hq) WH. Holding gatherings during the COVID-19 pandemic: WHO policy brief, 2 August 2021. Who.int. Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/holding-gatherings-during-the-covid-19-pandemic-who-policy-brief-2-august-2021. Published August 3, 2021. Accessed April 9, 2022.
CDC. Health Departments. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/php/infection-control.html. Published July 30, 2022. Accessed April 9, 2022.
Miller D. Conference USA COVID-19 plan; 2020. https://conferenceusa.com/news/2020/8/31/general-c-usa-board-of-directors-medical-update.aspx
National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics. Regular season COVID manual. Naia.org. Available at: https://www.naia.org/covid19/files/Regular_Season_COVID_Manual_1.31.21.pdf. Published January 31, 2021. Accessed September 19, 2022.
Harris KM, Mackey-Bojack S, Bennett M, et al. Sudden unexpected death due to myocarditis in young people, including athletes. Am J Cardiol. 2021;143:131���134.
Ibarrola M, D��volos I. Myocarditis in athletes after COVID-19 infection: the heart is not the only place to screen. Sports Med Health Sci. 2020;2:172���173.
Martinez MW, Tucker AM, Bloom OJ, et al. Prevalence of inflammatory heart disease among professional athletes with prior COVID-19 infection who received systematic return-to-play cardiac screening. JAMA Cardiol. 2021;6:745���752.
Dumyati G, Gaur S, Nace DA, et al. Does universal testing for COVID-19 work for everyone?. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2020;21:1525���1532.
West Virginia's response to COVID-19. Governor.wv.gov. Available at: https://governor.wv.gov/Pages/WV-COVID-19-actions-and-executive-orders.aspx. Accessed April 9, 2022.
Return to play Guidelines. Protocols and Procedures in response to Covid-19. Midsouthconference.org. 2020. Available at: https://www.mid-southconference.org/stats/MSC/MSC%20COVID%20-%20updated%2008242020.pdf. Accessed May 4, 2022.
Kentucky���s response to COVID-19. Governor.ky.gov. Available at: https://governor.ky.gov/covid19. Accessed May 5, 2022.
CDC. Interim Infection Prevention and Control Recommendations to Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Spread in Nursing Homes. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/nursing-homes-testing.html. Published August 23, 2022. Accessed September 2, 2022.
