Dataset Information

Low-threshold SARS-CoV-2 testing facility for hospital staff: Prevention of COVID-19 outbreaks?

ABSTRACT: Background The ongoing global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has caused over 4.7 million infections greatly challenging healthcare workers (HCW) and medical institutions worldwide. The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has shown to significantly impact mental and physical health of HCW. Thus, implementation of testing facilities supporting HCW are urgently needed. Methods A low-threshold SARS-CoV-2 testing facility was introduced at the University Hospital Bonn, Germany, in March 2020. Irrespective of clinical symptoms employees were offered a voluntary and free SARS-CoV-2 test. Furthermore, employees returning from SARS-CoV-2 risk regions and employees after risk contact with SARS-CoV-2 infected patients or employees were tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Pharyngeal swabs were taken and reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction for detection of SARS-CoV-2 was performed, test results being available within 24 h. Profession, symptoms and reason for SARS-CoV-2 testing of employees were recorded. Results Between 9th March and April 30, 2020, a total of 1510 employees were tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection. 1185 employees took advantage of the low-threshold testing facility. One percent (n = 11) were tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection, 18% being asymptomatic, 36% showing mild and 36% moderate/severe symptoms (missing 10%). Furthermore, of 56 employees returning from SARS-CoV-2 risk regions, 18% (10/56) were tested SARS-CoV-2 positive. After risk contact tracking by the hospital hygiene 6 patient-to-employee transmissions were identified in 163 employees with contact to 55 SARS-CoV-2 positive patients. Conclusion In the absence of easily accessible public SARS-CoV-2 testing facilities low-threshold SARS-CoV-2 testing facilities in hospitals with rapid testing resources help to identify SARS-CoV-2 infected employees with absent or mild symptoms, thus stopping the spread of infection in vulnerable hospital environments. High levels of professional infection prevention training and implementation of specialized wards as well as a perfectly working hospital hygiene network identifying and tracking risk contacts are of great importance in a pandemic setting. Highlights • Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections are higher in employees of a hospital environment compared to the general population.• Low-threshold testing facility helps to identify SARS-CoV-2 positive employees with absent or mild clinical symptoms.• Tracking of risk contacts by the hospital hygiene prevent distribution of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

SUBMITTER: Menting T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7580697 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) cycle threshold (Ct) has been suggested as an approximate measure of initial viral burden. The utility of cycle threshold, at admission, as a predictor of disease severity has not been thoroughly investigated.Methods and findingsWe conducted a retrospective study of SARS-CoV-2 positive, hospitalized patients from 3/26/2020 to 8/5/2020 who had SARS-CoV-2 Ct data within 48 hours of admission (n = 1044). Only patients with complete survival data, discharged (n = 774) or died in hospital (n = 270), were included in our analysis. Laboratory, demographic, and clinical data were extracted from electronic medical records. Multivariable logistic regression was applied to examine the relationship of patient mortality with Ct values while adjusting for established risk factors. Ct was analyzed as continuous variable and subdivided into quartiles to better illustrate its relationship with outcome. Cumulative incidence curves were created to assess whether there was a survival difference in the setting of the competing risks of death versus patient discharge. Mean Ct at admission was higher for survivors (28.6, SD = 5.8) compared to non-survivors (24.8, SD = 6.0, P<0.001). In-hospital mortality significantly differed (p<0.05) by Ct quartile. After adjusting for age, gender, BMI, hypertension and diabetes, increased cycle threshold was associated with decreased odds of in-hospital mortality (0.91, CI 0.89-0.94, p<0.001). Compared to the 4th Quartile, patients with Ct values in the 1st Quartile (Ct <22.9) and 2nd Quartile (Ct 23.0-27.3) had an adjusted odds ratio of in-hospital mortality of 3.8 and 2.6 respectively (p<0.001). The discriminative ability of Ct to predict inpatient mortality was found to be limited, possessing an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.68 (CI 0.63-0.71).ConclusionSARS-CoV-2 Ct was found to be an independent predictor of patient mortality. However, further study is needed on how to best clinically utilize such information given the result variation due to specimen quality, phase of disease, and the limited discriminative ability of the test.

Project description:BackgroundAsymptomatic carriers were positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) without developing symptoms, which might be a potential source of infection outbreak. Here, we aim to clarify the epidemiologic and influencing factors of asymptomatic carriers in the general population.MethodsIn our hospital, all hospital staff have received throat swab RT-PCR test, plasma COVID-19 IgM/IgG antibodies test and chest CT examination. We analyzed the correlation between infection rates and gender, age, job position, work place and COVID-19 knowledge training of the staff. After that, all asymptomatic staff were re-examined weekly for 3 weeks.FindingsA total of 3764 hospital staff were included in this single-center cross-sectional study. Among them, 126 hospital staff had abnormal findings, and the proportion of asymptomatic infection accounted for 0.76% (28/3674). There were 26 staff with IgM+, 73 with IgG+, and 40 with ground glass shadow of chest CT. Of all staff with abnormal findings, the older they are, the more likely they are to be the staff with abnormal results, regardless of their gender. Of 3674 hospital staff, the positive rate of labor staff is obviously higher than that of health care workers (HCWs) and administrative staff (P<0.05). In the course of participating in the treatment of COVID-19, there was no statistically significant difference in positive rates between high-risk departments and low-risk departments (P>0.05). The positive rate of HCWs who participated in the COVID-19 knowledge training was lower than those did not participate in early training (P <0.01). Importantly, it was found that there was no statistical difference between the titers of IgM antibody of asymptomatic infections and confirmed patients with COVID-19 in recovery period (P>0.05). During 3 weeks follow-up, all asymptomatic patients did not present the development of clinical symptoms or radiographic abnormalities after active intervention in isolation point.InterpretationTo ensure the safety of resumption of work, institutions should conduct COVID-19 prevention training for staff and screening for asymptomatic patients, and take quarantine measures as soon as possible in areas with high density of population.FundingThe Key Project for Anti-2019 novel Coronavirus Pneumonia from the Ministry of Science and Technology, China; Wuhan Emergency Technology Project of COVID-19 epidemic, China.

Project description:The exchange of microbes between humans and the built environment is a dynamic process that has significant impact on health. Most studies exploring the microbiome of the built environment have been predicated on improving our understanding of pathogen emergence, persistence, and transmission. Previous studies have demonstrated that SARS-CoV-2 presence significantly correlates with the proportional abundance of specific bacteria on surfaces in the built environment. However, in these studies, SARS-CoV-2 originated from infected patients. Here, we perform a similar assessment for a clinical microbiology lab while staff were handling SARS-CoV-2 infected samples. The goal of this study was to understand the distribution and dynamics of microbial population on various surfaces within different sections of a clinical microbiology lab during a short period of 2020 Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. We sampled floors, benches, and sinks in 3 sections (bacteriology, molecular microbiology, and COVID) of an active clinical microbiology lab over a 3-month period. Although floor samples harbored SARS-CoV-2, it was rarely identified on other surfaces, and bacterial diversity was significantly greater on floors than sinks and benches. The floors were primarily colonized by bacteria common to natural environments (e.g., soils), and benchtops harbored a greater proportion of human-associated microbes, including Staphylococcus and Streptococcus. Finally, we show that the microbial composition of these surfaces did not change over time and remained stable. Despite finding viruses on the floors, no lab-acquired infections were reported during the study period, which suggests that lab safety protocols and sanitation practices were sufficient to prevent pathogen exposures. IMPORTANCE For decades, diagnostic clinical laboratories have been an integral part of the health care systems that perform diagnostic tests on patient's specimens in bulk on a regular basis. Understanding their microbiota should assist in designing and implementing disinfection, and cleaning regime in more effective way. To our knowledge, there is a lack of information on the composition and dynamics of microbiota in the clinical laboratory environments, and, through this study, we have tried to fill that gap. This study has wider implications as understanding the makeup of microbes on various surfaces within clinical laboratories could help identify any pathogenic bacterial taxa that could have colonized these surfaces, and might act as a potential source of laboratory-acquired infections. Mapping the microbial community within these built environments may also be critical in assessing the reliability of laboratory safety and sanitation practices to lower any potential risk of exposures to health care workers.

Project description:BackgroundTo evaluate how a national policy of testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) regardless of symptoms was implemented during outbreaks in Dutch nursing homes in the second wave of the pandemic and to explore barriers and facilitators to serial testing.MethodsWe conducted a mixed-method study of nursing homes in the Netherlands with a SARS-CoV-2 outbreak after 15 September 2020. Direct care staff and management from 355 healthcare organizations were invited to participate in a digital survey. A total of 74 out of 355 (20.9%) healthcare organizations participated and provided information about 117 nursing homes. We conducted 26 in-depth interviews on the outbreak and the testing strategy used. We also conducted four focus group meetings involving managers, physicians, nurses, and certified health assistants. Recordings were transcribed and data were thematically analyzed.ResultsOne hundred and four nursing homes (89%) tested residents regardless of their symptoms during the outbreak, and 85 nursing homes (73%) tested the staff regardless of their symptoms. However, interviews showed testing was sometimes implemented during later stages of the outbreak and was not always followed up with serial testing. Barriers to serial testing regardless of symptoms were lack of knowledge of local leaders with decisional making authority, lack of a cohort ward or skilled staff, and insufficient collaboration with laboratories or local public health services. Important facilitators to serial testing were staff willingness to undergo testing and the availability of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests.ConclusionsSerial testing regardless of symptoms was only partially implemented. The response rate of 21% of nursing home organizations gives a risk of selection bias. Barriers to testing need to be addressed. A national implementation policy that promotes collaboration between public health services and nursing homes and educates management and care staff is necessary.

Project description:Undetected infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) contributes to transmission in nursing homes, settings where large outbreaks with high resident mortality have occurred (1,2). Facility-wide testing of residents and health care personnel (HCP) can identify asymptomatic and presymptomatic infections and facilitate infection prevention and control interventions (3-5). Seven state or local health departments conducted initial facility-wide testing of residents and staff members in 288 nursing homes during March 24-June 14, 2020. Two of the seven health departments conducted testing in 195 nursing homes as part of facility-wide testing all nursing homes in their state, which were in low-incidence areas (i.e., the median preceding 14-day cumulative incidence in the surrounding county for each jurisdiction was 19 and 38 cases per 100,000 persons); 125 of the 195 nursing homes had not reported any COVID-19 cases before the testing. Ninety-five of 22,977 (0.4%) persons tested in 29 (23%) of these 125 facilities had positive SARS-CoV-2 test results. The other five health departments targeted facility-wide testing to 93 nursing homes, where 13,443 persons were tested, and 1,619 (12%) had positive SARS-CoV-2 test results. In regression analyses among 88 of these nursing homes with a documented case before facility-wide testing occurred, each additional day between identification of the first case and completion of facility-wide testing was associated with identification of 1.3 additional cases. Among 62 facilities that could differentiate results by resident and HCP status, an estimated 1.3 HCP cases were identified for every three resident cases. Performing facility-wide testing immediately after identification of a case commonly identifies additional unrecognized cases and, therefore, might maximize the benefits of infection prevention and control interventions. In contrast, facility-wide testing in low-incidence areas without a case has a lower proportion of test positivity; strategies are needed to further optimize testing in these settings.

Dataset Information

Low-threshold SARS-CoV-2 testing facility for hospital staff: Prevention of COVID-19 outbreaks?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets