Effective control of SARS-CoV-2 transmission between healthcare workers during a period of diminished community prevalence of COVID-19.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Jones NK
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7326489 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Effective control of SARS-CoV-2 transmission between healthcare workers during a period of diminished community prevalence of COVID-19.
Jones Nick K NK Rivett Lucy L Sparkes Dominic D Forrest Sally S Sridhar Sushmita S Young Jamie J Pereira-Dias Joana J Cormie Claire C Gill Harmeet H Reynolds Nicola N Wantoch Michelle M Routledge Matthew M Warne Ben B Levy Jack J Córdova Jiménez William David WD Samad Fathima Nisha Begum FNB McNicholas Chris C Ferris Mark M Gray Jane J Gill Michael M Curran Martin D MD Fuller Stewart S Chaudhry Afzal A Shaw Ashley A Bradley John R JR Hannon Gregory J GJ Goodfellow Ian G IG Dougan Gordon G Smith Kenneth Gc KG Lehner Paul J PJ Wright Giles G Matheson Nicholas J NJ Baker Stephen S Weekes Michael P MP
eLife 20200619
Previously, we showed that 3% (31/1032)of asymptomatic healthcare workers (HCWs) from a large teaching hospital in Cambridge, UK, tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in April 2020. About 15% (26/169) HCWs with symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) also tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (Rivett et al., 2020). Here, we show that the proportion of both asymptomatic and symptomatic HCWs testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 rapidly declined to near-zero between 25th April and 24th May 2020, correspondin ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundWe aimed to detect the risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers (HCWs) in 2020 before the vaccination era.MethodsWe surveyed SARS-CoV-2 infection among the HCWs in a hospital through screening for antibody levels and the detection of viral RNA by RT-PCR between May 2020 and December 2020. Occupational and non-occupational potential predictors of disease were surveyed for the HCWs included in this study.ResultsAmong 1925 personnel in the hospital, 1732 were included to the study with a response rate of 90%. The overall infection rate of HCWs was 16.3% at the end of 2020, before vaccinations started. In the multivariate analysis, being janitorial staff (OR: 2.24, CI: 1.21-4.14, p = 0.011), being a medical secretary (OR: 4.17, CI: 2.12-8.18, p < 0.001), having at least one household member with a COVID-19 diagnosis (OR: 8.98, CI: 6.64-12.15, p < 0.001), and number of household members > 3 (OR: 1.67, CI: 1.26-2.22, p < 0.001) were found to be significantly associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection.ConclusionsMedical secretaries and janitorial staff were under increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The community-hospital gradient can explain the mode of transmission for infection among HCWs. In the setting of this study, community measures were less strict, whereas hospital infection control was adequate and provided necessary personal protective equipment. Increasing risk in larger households and households with diagnosed COVID-19 patient indicates the community-acquired transmission of the infection.
| S-EPMC8395820 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The aim of the study was to estimate the SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence among HCWs in Cochabamba, Bolivia and to determine the potential risk factors. In January 2021, a cross-sectional SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence study was conducted in 783 volunteer clinical and non-clinical HCWs in tertiary care facilities. It was based on IgG detection using ELISA, chemiluminiscence, and seroneutralisation tests from dried blood spots. Analysis revealed a high seroprevalence (43.4%) of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies. The combination of anosmia and ageusia (OR: 68.11; 95%-CI 24.83-186.80) was predictive of seropositivity. Belonging to the cleaning staff (OR: 1.94; 95%-CI 1.09-3.45), having more than two children in the same house (OR: 1.74; 95%-CI 1.12-2.71), and having been in contact with a close relative with COVID-19 (OR: 3.53; 95%-CI 2.24-5.58) were identified as risk factors for seropositivity in a multivariate analysis. A total of 47.5% of participants had received medication for COVID-19 treatment or prevention, and only ~50% of symptomatic subjects accessed PCR or antigenic testing. This study confirms a massive SARS-CoV-2 attack rate among HCWs in Cochabamba by the end of January 2021. The main risk factors identified are having a low-skilled job, living with children, and having been in contact with an infected relative in the household.
| S-EPMC8874891 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Hospital healthcare workers (HCWs) are at increased risk of contracting COVID-19 infection. We aimed to determine the seroprevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies in HCWs in Ireland. Two tertiary referral hospitals in Irish cities with diverging community incidence and seroprevalence were identified; COVID-19 had been diagnosed in 10.2% and 1.8% of staff respectively by the time of the study (October 2020). All staff of both hospitals (N = 9038) were invited to participate in an online questionnaire and blood sampling for SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing. Frequencies and percentages for positive SARS-CoV-2 antibody were calculated and adjusted relative risks (aRR) for participant characteristics were calculated using multivariable regression analysis. In total, 5788 HCWs participated (64% response rate). Seroprevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 was 15% and 4.1% in hospitals 1 and 2, respectively. Thirty-nine percent of infections were previously undiagnosed. Risk for seropositivity was higher for healthcare assistants (aRR 2.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.4-3.0), nurses (aRR: 1.6, 95% CI 1.1-2.2), daily exposure to patients with COVID-19 (aRR: 1.6, 95% CI 1.2-2.1), age 18-29 years (aRR: 1.4, 95% CI 1.1-1.9), living with other HCWs (aRR: 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.5), Asian background (aRR: 1.3, 95% CI 1.0-1.6) and male sex (aRR: 1.2, 95% CI 1.0-1.4). The HCW seroprevalence was six times higher than community seroprevalence. Risk was higher for those with close patient contact. The proportion of undiagnosed infections call for robust infection control guidance, easy access to testing and consideration of screening in asymptomatic HCWs. With emerging evidence of reduction in transmission from vaccinated individuals, the authors strongly endorse rapid vaccination of all HCWs.
| S-EPMC8314060 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTracheostomy is a commonly performed procedure in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) receiving mechanical ventilation (MV). This review aims to investigate the occurrence of SARS-CoV-2 transmission from patients to healthcare workers (HCWs) when tracheostomies are performed.MethodsThis systematic review used the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis framework. Studies reporting SARS-CoV-2 infection in HCWs involved in tracheostomy procedures were included.ResultsSixty-nine studies (between 01/11/2019 and 16/01/2022) reporting 3117 tracheostomy events were included, 45.9% (1430/3117) were performed surgically. The mean time from MV initiation to tracheostomy was 16.7 ± 7.9 days. Location of tracheostomy, personal protective equipment used, and anaesthesia technique varied between studies. The mean procedure duration was 14.1 ± 7.5 minutes; was statistically longer for percutaneous tracheostomies compared with surgical tracheostomies (mean duration 17.5 ± 7.0 versus 15.5 ± 5.6 minutes, p = 0.02). Across 5 out of 69 studies that reported 311 tracheostomies, 34 HCWs tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and 23/34 (67.6%) were associated with percutaneous tracheostomies.ConclusionsIn this systematic review we found that SARS-CoV-2 transmission to HCWs performing or assisting with a tracheostomy procedure appeared to be low, with all reported transmissions occurring in 2020, prior to vaccinations and more recent strains of SARS-CoV-2. Transmissions may be higher with percutaneous tracheostomies. However, an accurate estimation of infection risk was not possible in the absence of the actual number of HCWs exposed to the risk during the procedure and the inability to control for multiple confounders related to variable timing, technique, and infection control practices.
| S-EPMC9347596 | biostudies-literature
Project description:During the July 2020 first wave of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in Zambia, PCR-measured prevalence was 13.4% among outpatients at health facilities, an absolute difference of 5.7% compared with prevalence among community members. This finding suggests that facility testing might be an effective strategy during high community transmission.
| S-EPMC8314838 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealthcare workers (HCWs) are at risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and for spreading severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) amongst colleagues and patients.AimTo study the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA and possible onward transmission by HCWs upon return to work after COVID-19, and association with disease severity and development of antibodies over time.MethodsUnvaccinated HCWs with positive SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) were recruited prospectively. Data on symptoms were collected via telephone questionnaires on days 2, 7, 14 and 21 after a positive test. Upon return to work, repeat SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR was performed and serum was collected. Repeat serum samples were collected at weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16 to determine antibody dynamics over time. Phylogenetic analysis was conducted to investigate possible transmission events originating from HCWs with a positive repeat RT-PCR.FindingsSixty-one (84.7%) participants with mild/moderate COVID-19 had a repeat SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR performed upon return to work (median 13 days after symptom onset), of which 30 (49.1%) were positive with a median cycle threshold (Ct) value of 29.2 (IQR 26.9-29.9). All HCWs developed antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. No significant differences in symptomatology and presence of antibodies were found between repeat RT-PCR-positive and -negative HCWs. Eleven direct colleagues of six participants with a repeat RT-PCR Ct value <30 tested positive after the HCW returned to work. Phylogenetic and epidemiologic analysis did not indicate onward transmission through HCWs who were SARS-CoV-2 RNA positive upon return to work.ConclusionsHCWs regularly return to work with substantial SARS-CoV-2 RNA loads. However, this study found no evidence for subsequent in-hospital transmission.
| S-EPMC8916832 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 is an illness caused by a novel coronavirus known as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Laboratory healthcare workers (LHCWs) are at highest risk for COVID-19 infection due to direct exposure to COVID-19 patients and/or infected samples.ObjectivesOur primary objective in this study was to evaluate SARS-CoV-2 Ab testing as a screening tool for detecting COVID-19 infection among asymptomatic LHCWs. Our secondary aims were to establish the relationship between exposure to COVID-19 infection and subsequent asymptomatic disease and working in different areas of the laboratory.MethodThe detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was done by different methods (rapid testing, electrochemiluminescence, and chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay). The study included 199 asymptomatic LHCWs at Assiut University Hospital, Egypt, from different laboratory areas including molecular biology, microbiology, parasitology, and outpatient clinic laboratories in addition to LHCWs involved in automation, phlebotomy, rotating physicians, and those working in the sample receiving area.ResultsThe incidence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies by rapid testing and immunoassay among asymptomatic LHCWs was 29.6% and 24.4%. Laboratory phlebotomists (55.6%) were most likely to be exposed to positive patients and samples, followed by those working in the sample receiving area (32%), LHCWs in the automation area (29.6%), rotating doctors (28.6%), and LHCWs in the diagnostic molecular biology laboratory (15.4%). The sensitivities of the rapid test and SARS-CoV-2 total antibody were 94.1% and 92%, whereas the specificities were 92.6% and 91%.ConclusionRapid serological testing is an effective screening method for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection among asymptomatic LHCWs and the identification of the groups of workers who have a significantly higher seroprevalence than the rest of the laboratory population.
| S-EPMC9106521 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe SARS-CoV-2 virus responsible for severe respiratory infection associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was first confirmed in Florida on March 1, 2020. Responding to the pandemic, multi-agency collaborative partnerships put in place actions integrating point-of-care antibody testing at established large-scale COVID-19 testing sites where the baseline seropositivity of COVID-19 in health care workers and first responders in Florida at the start of the pandemic was established.PurposeDetermine the seropositivity of healthcare workers and first responders at five drive thru testing sites using a rapid SARS-CoV-2 antibody test in Florida from May 6 through June 3, 2020.MethodsThe first drive-thru SARS-CoV-2 antibody test site was opened at Miami Hard Rock Stadium, May 6, 2020. Testing expanded to three additional sites on May 9, 2020: Jacksonville, Orlando, and Palm Beach. The fifth and final site, Miami Beach, began testing on May 21, 2020. Healthcare workers and first responder's self-seeking SARS-CoV-2 testing were designated for antibody testing and completed a laboratory collection form onsite for the point-of-care test. All testing was performed on whole blood specimens (obtained by venipuncture) using the Cellex Inc. qSARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM Rapid Test. Seropositivity was assessed by univariate analysis and by logistic regression including the covariates age, sex, race/ethnicity, and testing location.Results and discussionAs of June 3, 2020, of 5,779 healthcare workers and first responders tested, 4.1% were seropositive (range 2.6-8.2%). SARS-COV-2 antibody tests had higher odds of being positive for persons testing at the Miami Hard Rock Stadium (aOR 2.24 [95% C.I. 1.48-3.39]), persons of Haitian/Creole ethnicity (aOR 3.28 [95% C.I. 1.23-8.72]), Hispanic/Latino(a) ethnicity (aOR 2.17 [95% C.I. 1.50-3.13], and Black non-Hispanic persons (aOR 1.63 [95% C.I. 1.08-2.46]). SARS-COV-2 antibody prevalence among first responders and healthcare workers in five sites in Florida varied by race and ethnicity and by testing location.
| S-EPMC8040388 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A majority of SARS-CoV-2 infections are transmitted from a minority of infected subjects, some of which may be symptomatic or pre-symptomatic. We aimed to quantify potential infectiousness among asymptomatic healthcare workers (HCWs) in relation to prior or later symptomatic disease. We previously (at the onset of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic) performed a cohort study of SARS-CoV-2 infections among 27,000 healthcare workers (HCWs) at work in the capital region of Sweden. We performed both SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR and serology. Furthermore, the cohort was comprehensively followed for sick leave, both before and after sampling. In the present report, we used the cohort database to quantify potential infectiousness among HCWs at work. Those who had sick leave either before or after sampling were classified as post-symptomatic or pre-symptomatic, whereas the virus-positive subjects with no sick leave were considered asymptomatic. About 0.2% (19/9449) of HCW at work were potentially infectious and pre-symptomatic (later had disease) and 0.17% (16/9449) were potentially infectious and asymptomatic (never had sick leave either before nor after sampling). Thus, 33% and 28% of all the 57 potentially infectious subjects were pre-symptomatic or asymptomatic, respectively. When a questionnaire was administered to HCWs with past infection, only 10,5% of HCWs had had no indication at all of having had SARS-CoV-2 infection ("truly asymptomatic"). Our findings provide a unique quantification of the different groups of asymptomatic, potentially infectious HCWs.
| S-EPMC8682911 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealthcare workers (HCWs) have been disproportionately affected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which may be driven, in part, by nosocomial exposure. If HCW exposure is predominantly nosocomial, HCWs in paediatric facilities, where few patients are admitted with COVID-19, may lack antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) and be at increased risk during the current resurgence.AimTo compare the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 amongst HCWs in paediatric facilities in seven European countries and South Africa (N=8).MethodsAll categories of paediatric HCWs were invited to participate in the study, irrespective of previous symptoms. A single blood sample was taken and data about previous symptoms were documented. Serum was shipped to a central laboratory in London where SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G was measured.FindingsIn total, 4114 HCWs were recruited between 1st May and mid-July 2020. The range of seroprevalence was 0-16.93%. The highest seroprevalence was found in London (16.93%), followed by Cape Town, South Africa (10.36%). There were no positive HCWs in the Austrian, Estonian and Latvian cohorts; 2/300 [0.66%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18-2.4] HCWs tested positive in Lithuania; 1/124 (0.81%, 95% CI 0.14-4.3) HCWs tested positive in Romania; and 1/76 (1.3%, 95% CI 0.23-7.0) HCWs tested positive in Greece.ConclusionOverall seroprevalence amongst paediatric HCWs is similar to their national populations and linked to the national COVID-19 burden. Staff working in paediatric facilities in low-burden countries have very low seroprevalence rates and thus are likely to be susceptible to COVID-19. Their susceptibility to infection may affect their ability to provide care in the face of increasing cases of COVID-19, and this highlights the need for appropriate preventative strategies in paediatric healthcare settings.
| S-EPMC7836791 | biostudies-literature