Seropositivity and risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection in staff working in care homes during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Rowland TAJ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7640892 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectivesTo estimate prior severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among skilled nursing facility (SNF) staff in the state of Georgia and to identify risk factors for seropositivity as of fall 2020.DesignBaseline survey and seroprevalence of the ongoing longitudinal Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) Prevention in Nursing Homes study.SettingThe study included 14 SNFs in the state of Georgia.ParticipantsIn total, 792 SNF staff employed or contracted with participating SNFs were included in this study. The analysis included 749 participants with SARS-CoV-2 serostatus results who provided age, sex, and complete survey information.MethodsWe estimated unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for potential risk factors and SARS-CoV-2 serostatus. We estimated adjusted ORs using a logistic regression model including age, sex, community case rate, SNF resident infection rate, working at other facilities, and job role.ResultsStaff working in high-infection SNFs were twice as likely (unadjusted OR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.45-3.00) to be seropositive as those in low-infection SNFs. Certified nursing assistants and nurses were 3 times more likely to be seropositive than administrative, pharmacy, or nonresident care staff: unadjusted OR, 2.93 (95% CI, 1.58-5.78) and unadjusted OR, 3.08 (95% CI, 1.66-6.07). Logistic regression yielded similar adjusted ORs.ConclusionsWorking at high-infection SNFs was a risk factor for SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity. Even after accounting for resident infections, certified nursing assistants and nurses had a 3-fold higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity than nonclinical staff. This knowledge can guide prioritized implementation of safer ways for caregivers to provide necessary care to SNF residents.
| S-EPMC9495639 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceRisks for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among health care personnel (HCP) are unclear.ObjectiveTo evaluate the risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity among HCP with the a priori hypothesis that community exposure but not health care exposure was associated with seropositivity.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study was conducted among volunteer HCP at 4 large health care systems in 3 US states. Sites shared deidentified data sets, including previously collected serology results, questionnaire results on community and workplace exposures at the time of serology, and 3-digit residential zip code prefix of HCP. Site-specific responses were mapped to a common metadata set. Residential weekly coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cumulative incidence was calculated from state-based COVID-19 case and census data.ExposuresModel variables included demographic (age, race, sex, ethnicity), community (known COVID-19 contact, COVID-19 cumulative incidence by 3-digit zip code prefix), and health care (workplace, job role, COVID-19 patient contact) factors.Main outcome and measuresThe main outcome was SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity. Risk factors for seropositivity were estimated using a mixed-effects logistic regression model with a random intercept to account for clustering by site.ResultsAmong 24 749 HCP, most were younger than 50 years (17 233 [69.6%]), were women (19 361 [78.2%]), were White individuals (15 157 [61.2%]), and reported workplace contact with patients with COVID-19 (12 413 [50.2%]). Many HCP worked in the inpatient setting (8893 [35.9%]) and were nurses (7830 [31.6%]). Cumulative incidence of COVID-19 per 10 000 in the community up to 1 week prior to serology testing ranged from 8.2 to 275.6; 20 072 HCP (81.1%) reported no COVID-19 contact in the community. Seropositivity was 4.4% (95% CI, 4.1%-4.6%; 1080 HCP) overall. In multivariable analysis, community COVID-19 contact and community COVID-19 cumulative incidence were associated with seropositivity (community contact: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.5; 95% CI, 2.9-4.1; community cumulative incidence: aOR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.3-2.6). No assessed workplace factors were associated with seropositivity, including nurse job role (aOR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.9-1.3), working in the emergency department (aOR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.8-1.3), or workplace contact with patients with COVID-19 (aOR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.9-1.3).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study of US HCP in 3 states, community exposures were associated with seropositivity to SARS-CoV-2, but workplace factors, including workplace role, environment, or contact with patients with known COVID-19, were not. These findings provide reassurance that current infection prevention practices in diverse health care settings are effective in preventing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from patients to HCP.
| S-EPMC7948059 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aim of this study was to provide information about immunity against COVID-19 along with risk factors and behavior among employees in day care facilities and preschools (DCS) in Denmark. In collaboration with the Danish Union of Pedagogues, during February and March 2021, 47,810 members were offered a point-of-care rapid SARS-CoV-2 antibody test (POCT) at work and were invited to fill in an electronic questionnaire covering COVID-19 exposure. Seroprevalence data from Danish blood donors (total Ig enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA]) were used as a proxy for the Danish population. A total of 21,018 (45%) DCS employees completed the questionnaire and reported their POCT result {median age, 44.3 years (interquartile range [IQR], [32.7 to 53.6]); females, 84.1%}, of which 20,267 (96.4%) were unvaccinated and included in analysis. A total of 1,857 (9.2%) participants tested seropositive, significantly higher than a seroprevalence at 7.6% (risk ratio [RR], 1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14 to 1.27) among 40,541 healthy blood donors (median age, 42 years [IQR, 28 to 53]; males, 51.3%). Exposure at work (RR, 2.9; 95% CI, 2.3 to 3.6) was less of a risk factor than exposure within the household (RR, 12.7; 95% CI, 10.2 to 15.8). Less than 25% of participants reported wearing face protection at work. Most of the participants expressed some degree of fear of contracting COVID-19 both at work and outside work. SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was slightly higher in DCS staff than in blood donors, but possible exposure at home was associated with a higher risk than at work. DCS staff expressed fear of contracting COVID-19, though there was limited use of face protection at work. IMPORTANCE Identifying at-risk groups and evaluating preventive interventions in at-risk groups is imperative for the ongoing pandemic as well as for the control of future epidemics. Although DCS staff have a much higher risk of being infected within their own household than at their workplace, most are fearful of being infected with COVID-19 or bringing COVID-19 to work. This represents an interesting dilemma and an important issue which should be addressed by public health authorities for risk communication and pandemic planning. This study design can be used in a strategy for ongoing surveillance of COVID-19 immunity or other infections in the population. The findings of this study can be used to assess the need for future preventive interventions in DCS, such as the use of personal protective equipment.
| S-EPMC9927135 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionHealth care workers (HCWs) are at a high risk of infection owing to occupational exposure to patients and virus-contaminated surfaces.ObjectivesThe study was aimed to reveal and compare the seroprevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among patient-facing HCWs across 3 dental clinics equipped with different types of aspirating systems.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study included 157 HCWs (43.58 ± 1.66 y) from 3 dental clinics in Ekaterinburg (Russian Federation) who reported to work during the coronavirus disease pandemic. All HCWs underwent serological testing once a week to detect immunoglobulin G and M antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2. The V6000 aspirating system with a vacuum controller (dry or semidry mode) and high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters was used at clinics A and B, and the aspirated aerosol and air were evacuated and dissipated into the atmosphere. The VS900 aspirating vacuum pump without HEPA filters was used at clinic C. The aspirated aerosol and air were evacuated and dissipated into the operatories. All dental clinics followed the same recommendations for dental patient management and types of personal protective equipment used.ResultsThe estimated prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was 11.5% (19 HCWs) over a 5-mo follow-up (May to August 2020). The prevalence of infection was unaffected by sex or the role of the member in the dental team (dentist/dental assistant). The prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection (+) was significantly higher at clinic C (equipped with an aspirating vacuum pump without HEPA filters) than at other clinics.ConclusionThe type of aspirating system used and the presence of HEPA filters could affect the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection across dental clinics. Therefore, we recommend the use of aspirating systems installed with HEPA filters, which evacuate and dissipate aerosols into specialized areas.Knowledge transfer statementThis report confirms that dentists, being patient-facing HCWs, are at a high risk of acquiring the SARS-CoV-2 infection and identifies gaps in the protection of patients and staff in dental settings.
| S-EPMC7868347 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough evidence suggests that demographic characteristics including minority ethnicity increase the risk of infection with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), it is unclear whether these characteristics, together with occupational factors, influence anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG seroprevalence in hospital staff.MethodsWe conducted cross-sectional surveillance examining seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG amongst staff at University Hospitals of Leicester (UHL) NHS Trust. We quantified seroprevalence stratified by ethnicity, occupation and seniority of practitioner and used logistic regression to examine demographic and occupational factors associated with seropositivity.ResultsA total of 1148/10662 (10.8%) hospital staff members were seropositive. Compared to White staff (seroprevalence 9.1%), seroprevalence was higher in South Asian (12.3%) and Black (21.2%) staff. The occupations and department with the highest seroprevalence were nurses/healthcare assistants (13.7%) and the Emergency Department (ED)/Acute Medicine (17.5%), respectively. Seroprevalence decreased with seniority in medical/nursing practitioners. Minority ethnicity was associated with seropositivity on an adjusted analysis (South Asian: aOR 1.26; 95%CI: 1.07-1.49 and Black: 2.42; 1.90-3.09). Anaesthetics/ICU staff members were less likely to be seropositive than ED/Acute medicine staff (0.41; 0.27-0.61).ConclusionsEthnicity and occupational factors, including specialty and seniority, are associated with seropositivity for anti-SARS-Cov-2 IgG. These findings could be used to inform occupational risk assessments for front-line healthcare workers.
| S-EPMC7717317 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and delayed implementation of diagnostics have led to poorly defined viral prevalence rates. To address this, we analyzed seropositivity in US adults who have not previously been diagnosed with COVID-19. Individuals with characteristics that reflect the US population (n = 11,382) and who had not previously been diagnosed with COVID-19 were selected by quota sampling from 241,424 volunteers (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04334954 ). Enrolled participants provided medical, geographic, demographic, and socioeconomic information and 9,028 blood samples. The majority (88.7%) of samples were collected between May 10th and July 31st, 2020. Samples were analyzed via ELISA for anti-Spike and anti-RBD antibodies. Estimation of seroprevalence was performed by using a weighted analysis to reflect the US population. We detected an undiagnosed seropositivity rate of 4.6% (95% CI: 2.6 - 6.5%). There was distinct regional variability, with heightened seropositivity in locations of early outbreaks. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that the highest estimated undiagnosed seropositivity within groups was detected in younger participants (ages 18-45, 5.9%), females (5.5%), Black/African American (14.2%), Hispanic (6.1%), and Urban residents (5.3%), and lower undiagnosed seropositivity in those with chronic diseases. During the first wave of infection over the spring/summer of 2020 an estimate of 4.6% of adults had a prior undiagnosed SARS-CoV-2 infection. These data indicate that there were 4.8 (95% CI: 2.8-6.8) undiagnosed cases for every diagnosed case of COVID-19 during this same time period in the United States, and an estimated 16.8 million undiagnosed cases by mid-July 2020.
| S-EPMC7852277 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8486583 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFew studies have quantified aerosol concentrations of SARS-CoV-2 in hospitals and long-term care homes, and fewer still have examined samples for viability. This information is needed to clarify transmission risks beyond close contact.MethodsWe deployed particulate air samplers in rooms with COVID-19 positive patients in hospital ward and ICU rooms, rooms in long-term care homes experiencing outbreaks, and a correctional facility experiencing an outbreak. Samplers were placed between 2 and 3 meters from the patient. Aerosol (small liquid particles suspended in air) samples were collected onto gelatin filters by Ultrasonic Personal Air Samplers (UPAS) fitted with <2.5μm (micrometer) and <10 μm size-selective inlets operated for 16 hours (total 1.92m3), and with a Coriolis Biosampler over 10 minutes (total 1.5m3). Samples were assayed for viable SARS-CoV-2 virus and for the viral genome by multiplex PCR using the E and N protein target sequences. We validated the sampling methods by inoculating gelatin filters with viable vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), and with three concentrations of viable SARS-CoV-2, operating personal samplers for 16hrs, and quantifying viable virus recovery by TCID50 assay.ResultsIn total, 138 samples were collected from 99 rooms. RNA samples were positive in 9.1% (6/66) of samples obtained with the UPAS 2.5μm samplers, 13.5% (7/52) with the UPAS 10μm samplers, and 10.0% (2/20) samples obtained with the Coriolis samplers. Culturable virus was not recovered in any samples. Viral RNA was detected in 15.1% of the rooms sampled. There was no significant difference in viral RNA recovery between the different room locations or samplers. Method development experiments indicated minimal loss of SARS-CoV-2 viability via the personal air sampler operation.
| S-EPMC8483369 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate risk factors for hospital-acquired infection (HAI) in patients during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, including historical and concurrent cohorts.DesignRetrospective cohort.SettingThree Missouri hospitals, data from 1st January 2017 to 30th September 2020.ParticipantsPatients aged ≥18 years and admitted for ≥48 h.MethodsUnivariate and multi-variate Cox proportional hazards models incorporating the competing risk of death were used to determine risk factors for HAI. A-priori sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the urine-, blood- and respiratory-culture-based HAI definition.ResultsThe cohort included 254,792 admissions, with 7147 (2.8%) HAIs (1661 blood, 3407 urine, 2626 respiratory). Patients with SARS-CoV-2 had increased risk of HAI (adjusted hazards ratio 1.65, 95% confidence interval 1.38-1.96), and SARS-CoV-2 infection was one of the strongest risk factors for development of HAI. Other risk factors for HAI included certain admitting services, chronic comorbidities, intensive care unit stay during index admission, extremes of body mass index, hospital, and selected medications. Factors associated with lower risk of HAI included year of admission (declined over the course of the study), admitting service and medications. Risk factors for HAI were similar in sensitivity analyses restricted to patients with diagnostic codes for pneumonia/upper respiratory infection and urinary tract infection.ConclusionsSARS-CoV-2 was associated with significantly increased risk of HAI.
| S-EPMC9724556 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Representative school data on SARS-CoV-2 past-infection are scarce, and differences between pupils and staff remain ambiguous. We performed a nation-wide prospective seroprevalence study among pupils and staff over time and in relation to determinants of infection using Poisson regression and generalised estimating equations. A cluster random sample was selected with allocation by region and sociodemographic (SES) background. Surveys and saliva samples were collected in December 2020, March, and June 2021, and also in October and December 2021 for primary pupils. We recruited 885 primary and 569 secondary pupils and 799 staff in 84 schools. Cumulative seroprevalence (95% CI) among primary pupils increased from 11.0% (7.6; 15.9) at baseline to 60.4% (53.4; 68.3) in December 2021. Group estimates were similar at baseline; however, in June they were significantly higher among primary staff (38.9% (32.5; 46.4)) compared to pupils and secondary staff (24.2% (20.3; 28.8)). Infections were asymptomatic in 48-56% of pupils and 28% of staff. Seropositivity was associated with individual SES in pupils, and with school level, school SES and language network in staff in June. Associations with behavioural characteristics were inconsistent. Seroconversion rates increased two- to four-fold after self-reported high-risk contacts, especially with adults. Seroprevalence studies using non-invasive sampling can inform public health management.
| S-EPMC10203531 | biostudies-literature