Introduction Basic Military Training at Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland implemented several sequential non-pharmaceutical interventions in response to coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). One measure, arrival quarantine, has not been studied as a modern military disease prevention strategy. This study aimed to determine the effect of a 14-day arrival quarantine on symptomatic COVID-19 testing. Material and Methods A retrospective cohort study compared symptomatic COVID-19 testing among all trainees who entered Basic Military Training between March 17, 2020, and April 17, 2020, before the implementation of universal arrival COVID-19 testing, during their first 2 weeks in arrival quarantine compared to the rest of their training. Furthermore, symptomatic COVID-19 testing in the last 5 weeks of training in those who completed arrival quarantine was compared to testing in the last 5 weeks for trainees who arrived between February 16, 2020, and March 16, 2020, and did not undergo arrival quarantine. Nominal variables were compared by chi-square test, and continuous variables were compared by Mann–Whitney U test. This study was approved as a public health surveillance project by the 59th Medical Wing Institutional Review Board. Results Five thousand five hundred and seventy-six trainees started training between February 16, 2020, and April 17, 2020, with 2,573 trainees undergoing an arrival quarantine compared to 3,003 trainees who did not. Trainees who underwent arrival quarantine had higher rates of COVID-19 testing while in arrival quarantine (10.5 tests per 1,000 trainee-weeks vs. 2.3, P ≤ .001) and higher rates of concomitant influenza testing (74% vs. 38%, P = .001) compared to after they completed quarantine. Trainees that completed quarantine had less symptomatic COVID-19 testing after day 14 of training (2.3 tests per 1,000 trainee-weeks vs. 14.3, P ≤ .001) and influenza testing (38% vs. 74%, P = .001) compared to trainees that did not undergo arrival quarantine. Conclusion Arrival quarantine appears to be an effective non-pharmaceutical intervention associated with fewer symptomatic COVID-19 tests, especially after completion of quarantine.

中文翻译：

---

抵达隔离对一组军事基础学员后续 COVID-19 测试的影响

简介 圣安东尼奥-拉克兰联合基地的基本军事训练实施了若干连续的非药物干预措施，以应对 2019 年冠状病毒病 (COVID-19)。其中一项措施，即到达检疫，尚未作为现代军事疾病预防策略进行研究。本研究旨在确定 14 天抵达隔离对症状性 COVID-19 检测的影响。材料和方法 一项回顾性队列研究比较了 2020 年 3 月 17 日至 2020 年 4 月 17 日期间在实施普遍到达 COVID-19 测试之前进入基础军事训练的所有受训人员在其前 2 周的症状性 COVID-19 测试与其他培训相比，抵达隔离区。此外，将完成抵达隔离的学员在过去 5 周培训中的 COVID-19 症状检测与在 2020 年 2 月 16 日至 2020 年 3 月 16 日之间抵达且未接受抵达隔离的学员在过去 5 周的检测进行比较。名义变量比较采用卡方检验，连续变量比较采用Mann-Whitney U检验。该研究被第 59 届医学翼机构审查委员会批准为公共卫生监测项目。结果 2020 年 2 月 16 日至 2020 年 4 月 17 日期间，共有 5576 名学员开始培训，其中 2573 名学员接受了入境隔离，3003 名学员没有接受隔离。接受到达隔离的学员在到达隔离期间的 COVID-19 检测率较高（每 1,000 个学员周 10.5 次检测，而 2.3，与完成隔离后相比，P ≤ .001）和更高的伴随流感检测率（74% 对 38%，P = .001）。完成隔离的学员在培训第 14 天后的 COVID-19 症状检测（每 1,000 个学员周 2.3 次检测对比 14.3，P ≤ .001）和流感检测（38% 对比 74%，P = .001）相比较少未接受入境检疫的学员。结论 到达隔离似乎是一种有效的非药物干预措施，与较少的症状性 COVID-19 检测相关，尤其是在隔离完成后。001) 和流感检测 (38% vs. 74%, P = .001) 与未接受抵达隔离的学员相比。结论 到达隔离似乎是一种有效的非药物干预措施，与较少的症状性 COVID-19 检测相关，尤其是在隔离完成后。001) 和流感检测 (38% vs. 74%, P = .001) 与未接受抵达隔离的学员相比。结论 到达隔离似乎是一种有效的非药物干预措施，与较少的症状性 COVID-19 检测相关，尤其是在隔离完成后。