SARS-CoV-2 testing, infection and places of contamination in France, a national cross-sectional study, December 2021.

backgroundThis study aimed to describe the use of diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 in France until December 2021, the characteristics of people infected, and places of contamination.

methodsData were collected from the national 2021 Health Barometer cross-sectional study, which was conducted between February and December 2021 and included French-speaking individuals aged 18-85 years old selected through randomly generated landline and mobile phone numbers. Participants were interviewed about COVID-19-like symptoms in the previous 12 months, diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2, positive diagnosis for SARS-CoV-2, and the place(s) of contamination. Determinants of diagnostic testing and of infection were studied using univariate and multivariate Poisson regressions.

resultsA total of 24,514 persons participated in the study. We estimated that 66.4% [65.0-67.7] of persons had been tested for SARS-CoV-2 the last time they experienced COVID-19-like symptoms, and that 9.8% [9.3-10.3] of the population in France - with or without symptoms - had been tested positive. Diagnostic testing was less frequent in men, unemployed persons, and people living alone; it was also less frequent during the first months of the pandemic. The estimated proportion of the population infected was higher in healthcare professionals (PRa: 1.5 [1.3-1.7]), those living in large cities ( > = 200 000 inhabitants, and Paris area) (1.4 [1.2-1.6]), and in households comprising > 3 persons (1.7 [1.5-2.0]). It was lower in retired persons (0.8 [0.6-0.97]) and those over 65 years old (0.6 [0.4-0.9]). Almost two-thirds (65.7%) of infected persons declared they knew where they were contaminated; 5.8% [4.5-7.4] reported being contaminated outdoors, 47.9% [44.8-51.0] in unventilated indoor environments, and 43.4% [40.3-46.6] in ventilated indoor environments. Specifically, 51.1% [48.0-54.2] declared they were contaminated at home or in a family of friend's house, 29.1% [26.4-31.9] at their workplace, 13.9% [11.9-16.1] in a healthcare structure, and 9.0% [7.4-10.8] in a public eating place (e.g., cafeteria, bar, restaurant).

conclusionsTo limit viral spread, preventive actions should preferentially target persons tested least frequently and those at a higher risk of infection. They should also target contamination in households, healthcare structures, and public eating places. Importantly, contamination is most frequent in places where prevention measures are most difficult to implement.