Lois Larson
In January 2020, several airports worldwide began implementing preventive safety measures against the spread of coronavirus. These measures included temperature checks and health questionnaires. However, the effectiveness of these screening methods has been questioned, as they often fail to detect infected passengers and may result in false positives. While screening may not entirely stop the spread of the disease, it can provide valuable time to implement other measures and raise awareness about the spread of the disease. As of March 2020, the United States had expanded its entry screening protocols to 20 airports, and China pledged to cooperate internationally on exit and entry screening.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Airports implementing screening | Airports in the US, Germany, China, Indonesia, New Zealand, Thailand, Japan, France, Australia, South Korea, Vietnam, Taiwan, Canada, the EU, and the UK |
| Screening methods | Thermal scanning, symptom screening, temperature checks, health questionnaires, health declarations |
| Effectiveness | Screening has been deemed ineffective in detecting infected passengers, with researchers claiming it will miss more than half of those exposed to the virus. |
| Benefits | Screening can help slow the spread of the virus, discourage ill travelers from traveling, and raise awareness about the virus and ways to protect oneself. |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
Thermal scanning and symptom screening
Despite the controversy, many airports implemented thermal scanning during the coronavirus pandemic. In June 2020, Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) – the world's third-busiest airport – started piloting thermal scanning of passengers. The trial was voluntary and lasted at least two months, with scanners placed in both departure and arrival areas. Passengers departing who registered temperatures of more than 100.4 degrees were told not to travel, and arriving passengers with high temperatures were referred to staff from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Thermal scanning was also implemented at three major US airports for passengers arriving from Wuhan, China, in 2020. In the EU, authorities have been vigilant, with healthcare settings having strong infection control measures in place. In one case, a man who was asymptomatic at the airport and passed the screening checks became ill the next day. After consulting a card he was given at the airport, he followed the advice to stay at home and contact his local health department.
While thermal scanning may help reassure the public, there is little evidence to suggest it is an efficient measure for detecting infected travellers. Jeanine Pommier of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) has said that "scientific evidence does not support entry screening as an efficient measure for detecting incoming travellers with infectious diseases". The World Health Organization does not recommend thermal screening, stating that "it is generally considered that entry screening offers little benefit while requiring considerable resources".
Hotel Senacki: Airport Transfers and Travel Convenience
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Effectiveness of screening
Airport screening for COVID-19 involves the use of thermal scanning and/or symptom screening. Thermography, a technique used to detect potential subjects affected by COVID-19, is affected by uncertainty contributions and measurement errors, leading to false-positive and false-negative cases.
The effectiveness of airport screening in detecting travellers infected with COVID-19 has been questioned by experts. While screening may help reassure the public and slow the spread of the virus, providing time to implement other measures, there is limited evidence that it is an efficient measure for detecting infected travellers. Many people may not show symptoms until several days after infection, and some individuals with chronic conditions have constantly elevated body temperatures, leading to false positives and negatives.
A study of Canadian airport screening measures during the SARS outbreak found that while hundreds of thousands of passengers were screened, officials did not detect any cases of SARS. Similarly, during the 2014 Ebola outbreak in western Africa, more than 300,000 passengers were screened, but four cases were missed as they were asymptomatic at the time of screening.
According to a CNN investigation, US authorities had screened more than 30,000 passengers by mid-February 2020 without detecting any cases of COVID-19. At least four of these passengers later fell ill with the virus. A study by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine estimated that 46.5% of infected travellers would not be detected, depending on the incubation period, sensitivity of exit and entry screening, and the proportion of asymptomatic cases.
While airport screening for COVID-19 may have limited effectiveness in detecting infected travellers, it can provide benefits such as discouraging ill travellers from travelling, raising awareness about the spread of disease, and educating travellers about protective measures.
Exploring Orleans, France: Airport Accessibility and Travel Options
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Screening failures
Airport screening for coronavirus has been implemented in many countries, including the US, China, and several countries in Europe. However, there have been several reports of screening failures, where infected passengers passed through airports unnoticed.
One example of screening failure occurred in Shanghai, where eight Chinese citizens, employees at a restaurant in Bergamo, Italy, arrived at Shanghai Pudong International Airport on February 27 and 29, despite being infected with COVID-19. This incident highlights the challenges of airport screening, especially during the COVID-19 outbreak.
Another instance of screening failure was reported by CNN, where out of 30,000 passengers screened by US authorities, at least four later fell ill with coronavirus. This indicates that infected individuals can slip through the cracks, potentially contributing to the spread of the virus.
In addition, during the SARS epidemic in Canada, intensive border screening failed to detect a single case out of 251 infections. This raises questions about the effectiveness of thermal screening, which is often used to detect elevated body temperatures associated with infectious diseases.
While airport screening can provide some reassurance to the public, experts argue that scientific evidence does not support it as an efficient measure for detecting incoming travelers with infectious diseases, especially in the case of coronavirus, where symptoms may be mild or absent during the incubation period.
To address these challenges, some countries have implemented additional measures, such as health questionnaires and exit screenings, to identify potentially infected individuals before they board planes. However, even with these measures in place, the impact on preventing local epidemics may be marginal.
SJd Airport's Covid Testing: Availability and Process
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Quarantine restrictions
Some countries have chosen to close their borders entirely, such as Anguilla, which closed all of its airports until at least June 30, 2025. Similarly, Slovakia has closed its borders and airports, only allowing Slovakian nationals and residents to enter, who must then quarantine for 14 days in a government-designated facility. Other countries have restricted entry to only their citizens and residents, such as Sao Tome and Principe, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which has suspended flights from countries with confirmed COVID-19 cases.
In some cases, travellers are required to present a negative coronavirus test upon arrival, as is the case in Antigua and Barbuda. Here, travellers without a valid medical certificate will be forced to quarantine for 14 days or until they test negative for coronavirus. In other cases, travellers may be tested upon arrival and then quarantined in a designated facility if they test positive, as is the practice in some countries like the UAE.
While these quarantine restrictions aim to curb the spread of coronavirus, their effectiveness has been questioned. Some sources suggest that quarantine measures may provide valuable time to implement other measures, such as distributing test kits. However, the success of entry/exit screenings has been debated, with some studies showing their limitations in detecting infected travellers.
Uber in Montreal Airport: Available or Not?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Screening benefits
While screening may not be a foolproof method to stop the spread of coronavirus, it does offer some benefits.
Firstly, screening can help discourage ill travellers from travelling and slow down the spread of the virus, providing valuable time to implement other measures such as distributing test kits. Screening can also help raise awareness and educate travellers about the spread of the disease and ways to protect themselves. For example, passengers without symptoms may be given cards at points of entry with instructions by health officials on what to do if they develop symptoms later.
Another benefit of screening is that it can help gather contact information, which is useful if an infection spreads during a flight. Screening can also help provide guidance to travellers on what to do if they become ill. For instance, a man who was asymptomatic at the airport and passed the screening checks, became ill the next day. After consulting the card he received at the airport, he followed the advice to stay at home and contact his local health department.
Additionally, screening can help prevent some sick or exposed individuals from travelling. For example, at least one New Zealander was prevented from boarding an evacuation flight from Wuhan, China, after failing a health check.
While screening has its limitations, it can still play a role in the overall strategy to combat the spread of coronavirus when combined with other measures such as isolation, quarantine, contact tracing, and outbreak management.
Dublin Airport Preclearance: What Happens After?
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
By January 2020, several airports around the world started to implement preventative safety measures against the spread of coronavirus. The US, for example, expanded screening protocols from 3 to 20 airports for passengers arriving from China. Other countries that have introduced temperature checks for incoming travellers include Thailand, Japan, France, Australia, South Korea, Vietnam, and Taiwan, and New Zealand.
While screening doesn’t stop the spread of disease, it can be beneficial in slowing it down and providing valuable time to put other measures in place. Screening can also discourage ill travellers from travelling and raise awareness about the spread of disease. However, screenings may not always be effective at detecting early signs of infection, and there is little evidence to suggest that these procedures are making a significant difference.
The most common way to screen travellers for infectious diseases is through fever screening, where travellers' temperatures are taken. There are also health questionnaires that ask travellers about their travel history and whether they have been in close contact with anyone who has the virus.
One issue with airport screenings is that they may flag passengers who have a different type of infection while missing those who are incubating the virus but have not started showing symptoms. Screening during flu season, for example, means that large numbers of people who are not infected with coronavirus are probably being detained as false positives due to similar symptoms.
Some countries have implemented travel restrictions and quarantine requirements for travellers arriving from outbreak hotspots. For example, the US government advised citizens not to travel to China and denied entry to foreign nationals who had visited China in the previous two weeks.
