This study investigated the characteristics of transmission routes of COVID-19 cluster infections (⩾10 linked cases within a short period) in Gangwon Province between 22 February 2020 and 31 May 2021. Transmission routes were divided into five major categories and 35 sub-categories according to the relationship between the infector and the infectee and the location of transmission. A total of 61 clusters occurred during the study period, including 1741 confirmed cases (55.7% of all confirmed cases (n = 3125)). The the five major routes of transmission were as follows: ‘using (staying in) the same facility (50.7%), ‘cohabiting family members’ (23.3%), ‘social gatherings with acquaintances’ (10.8%), ‘other transmission routes’ (7.0%), and ‘social gatherings with non-cohabiting family members/relatives’ (5.5%). For transmission caused by using (staying in) the same facility, the highest number of confirmed cases was associated with churches, followed by medical institutions (inpatient), sports facilities, military bases, offices, nightlife businesses, schools, restaurants, day-care centres and kindergarten, and service businesses. Our analysis highlights specific locations with frequent transmission of infections, and transmission routes that should be targeted in situations where adherence to disease control rules is difficult.

To understand the characteristics and influencing factors related to cluster infections in Jiangsu Province, China, we investigated case reports to explore transmission dynamics and influencing factors of scales of cluster infection. The effectiveness of interventions was assessed by changes in the time-dependent reproductive number (Rt). From 25th January to 29th February, Jiangsu Province reported a total of 134 clusters involving 617 cases. Household clusters accounted for 79.85% of the total. The time interval from onset to report of index cases was 8 days, which was longer than that of secondary cases (4 days) (χ2 = 22.763, P < 0.001) and had a relationship with the number of secondary cases (the correlation coefficient (r) = 0.193, P = 0.040). The average interval from onset to report was different between family cluster cases (4 days) and community cluster cases (7 days) (χ2 = 28.072, P < 0.001). The average time interval from onset to isolation of patients with secondary infection (5 days) was longer than that of patients without secondary infection (3 days) (F = 9.761, P = 0.002). Asymptomatic patients and non-familial clusters had impacts on the size of the clusters. The average reduction in the Rt value in family clusters (26.00%, 0.26 ± 0.22) was lower than that in other clusters (37.00%, 0.37 ± 0.26) (F = 4.400, P = 0.039). Early detection of asymptomatic patients and early reports of non-family clusters can effectively weaken cluster infections.