Dataset Information

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Seroprevalence Survey Among 17 971 Healthcare and Administrative Personnel at Hospitals, Prehospital Services, and Specialist Practitioners in the Central Denmark Region.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The objective of this study was to perform a seroprevalence survey on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among Danish healthcare workers to identify high-risk groups.

Methods

All healthcare workers and administrative personnel at the 7 hospitals, prehospital services, and specialist practitioner clinics in the Central Denmark Region were invited to be tested by a commercial SARS-CoV-2 total antibody enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (Wantai Biological Pharmacy Enterprise Co, Ltd, Beijing, China).

Results

A total of 25 950 participants were invited. Of these, 17 971 had samples available for SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing. After adjustment for assay sensitivity and specificity, the overall seroprevalence was 3.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.5%-3.8%). The seroprevalence was higher in the western part of the region than in the eastern part (11.9% vs 1.2%; difference: 10.7 percentage points [95% CI, 9.5-12.2]). In the high-prevalence area, the emergency departments had the highest seroprevalence (29.7%), whereas departments without patients or with limited patient contact had the lowest seroprevalence (2.2%). Among the total 668 seropositive participants, 433 (64.8%) had previously been tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA, and 50.0% had a positive reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (PCR) result.

Conclusions

We found large differences in the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in staff working in the healthcare sector within a small geographical area of Denmark. Half of all seropositive staff had been tested positive by PCR prior to this survey. This study raises awareness of precautions that should be taken to avoid in-hospital transmission. Regular testing of healthcare workers for SARS-CoV-2 should be considered to identify areas with increased transmission.

SUBMITTER: Jespersen S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7797753 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Seroprevalence Survey Among 17 971 Healthcare and Administrative Personnel at Hospitals, Prehospital Services, and Specialist Practitioners in the Central Denmark Region.

Jespersen Sanne S Mikkelsen Susan S Greve Thomas T Kaspersen Kathrine Agergård KA Tolstrup Martin M Boldsen Jens Kjærgaard JK Redder Jacob Dvinge JD Nielsen Kent K Abildgaard Anders Mønsted AM Kolstad Henrik Albert HA Østergaard Lars L Thomsen Marianne Kragh MK Møller Holger Jon HJ Erikstrup Christian C

Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America 20211101 9

<h4>Background</h4>The objective of this study was to perform a seroprevalence survey on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among Danish healthcare workers to identify high-risk groups.<h4>Methods</h4>All healthcare workers and administrative personnel at the 7 hospitals, prehospital services, and specialist practitioner clinics in the Central Denmark Region were invited to be tested by a commercial SARS-CoV-2 total antibody enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (Wantai Bio ...[more]

PMID: 33011792

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWorkplace violence against healthcare workers has been a well-known problem for more than 40 years. This problem is also relevant for prehospital personnel who are at risk of physical and/or psychological violence during work. Violence and threats of violence can have physical and psychological consequences, including personal challenges in their everyday life, use of sick days, reports, and the need for professional help. Therefore, this study aimed to describe the extent of and subsequent reporting of physical and psychological workplace violence toward the prehospital healthcare workers in Denmark in a two-year period. Moreover, we wanted to elucidate any possible effect of workplace violence on the private and professional lives of the prehospital healthcare personnel.MethodsA nation-wide survey where a validated anonymised questionnaire was directed to all of the approximately 4500 Danish prehospital healthcare workers.ResultsOut of 584 complete responses we found that 47.4% had experienced psychological violence on the job whereas 25.7% had experienced physical violence on the job within the past two years. The perpetrators were mainly patients or relatives of the patients. Physical violence was mostly reported as punching, pushing, and kicking, while psychological violence included threats of violence and other intimidation. After experiencing violence the respondents reported both physical and psychological harm, which for some prehospital healthcare workers had consequences for their professional and/or personal life. Furthermore, some prehospital healthcare workers reported that the violence had resulted in some patients receiving worse treatment afterwards. We found that violence was rarely reported to either employers or the police, because respondents believed the events were not important enough to merit reporting, or because a report was not considered to make any difference to the healthcare worker. The survey demonstrates that, as a minimum, at least one healthcare worker in 30 and one healthcare worker in 16 has been exposed to episodes of violence and threats of violence within the last two years.ConclusionWe suggest that the prehospital organisations emphasise reporting future episodes of physical and/or psychological violence. Knowing the extent of the problem is a prerequisite for addressing, debriefing, and/or other psychological follow-up.Trial registrationN/A.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine whether emergency physicians (EPs) and prehospital emergency medical services (EMS) personnel differ in their assessment of motor vehicle crash (MVC) severity and the potential for serious injury when viewing crash scene photographs.MethodsAttending and resident EPs, paramedics, and emergency medical technicians (EMTs) from a single emergency medicine system used a web-based survey platform to rate the severity of 100 crash photographs on a 10-point Likert scale (Crash Score) and the potential for serious injury on a 0-100% scale (Injury Score). Serious injury was defined as skull fracture or intracranial bleeding, spine fracture or spinal cord injury, intrathoracic or intraabdominal injury, or long bone fracture. Crash and Injury Scores were stratified into EP and paramedic/EMT (EMS) groups and the mean score was calculated for each photo. Spearman rank correlation coefficients with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) and Bland-Altman plots were constructed to assess agreement. Secondary analyses were performed after categorizing data into quartiles based on participants' estimations of MVC severity.ResultsA total of 54 attending and 53 resident EPs, 156 paramedics, and 34 EMTs were invited to participate in the survey. Of these, 39 (72%) attending and 46 (87%) resident EPs, 107 (69%) paramedics, and 17 (50%) EMTs completed the survey. A total of 183 (88%) surveys were completed in full. The overall Crash Score correlation coefficient between EPs and EMS was 0.98 (95% CI, 0.97-0.99). The Crash Score correlation coefficients for each quartile were 0.86 (0.57-0.97), 0.93 (0.85-0.96), 0.58 (0.16-0.85), and 0.88 (0.66-0.97), respectively. The overall Injury Score correlation coefficient between EPs and EMS was 0.98 (0.88-0.97). The Injury Score correlation coefficients for each quartile were 0.94 (0.48-0.91), 0.76 (0.50-0.92), 0.80 (0.69-1.00), and 0.94 (0.57-0.97), respectively.ConclusionAlthough overall agreement between EPs and EMS personnel was excellent, differences in estimation of crash severity and potential for injury were identified among crashes estimated to be moderate in severity.

Project description:BackgroundIn response to the declining utilization and patient revenue due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. hospital industry furloughed at least 1.4 million health care workers to contain their clinical-related expenses. However, it remains unclear how hospitals responded by adjusting their administrative expenses, which account for more than a quarter of U.S. hospitals' spending, a proportion substantially higher than that of other industrialized countries. Examining changes in hospitals' administrative expenses during the COVID-19 pandemic is important for understanding hospitals' cost-containment behaviors under operational shocks during a pandemic.ObjectiveTo assess changes in hospitals' administrative expenses and clinical expenses during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.DesignTime-series observational study.Participants1420 Medicare-certified general acute-care hospitals with fiscal years starting in January and continuously operating during 2016-2020.Main measuresHospitals' annual administrative expenses and clinical expenses.Key resultsHospitals' median administrative and clinical expenses both increased consistently around 4% each year from 2016 to 2019. From 2019 to 2020, the median administrative expenses grew by 6.2% while the median clinical expenses grew by 0.6%. The interrupted time-series regression estimated an additional 6.4% (95% CI, 4.5 to 8.2%) increase in administrative expenses in 2020, relative to the pre-COVID annual increase of 3.9% (95% CI, 3.3 to 4.4%), while an additional increase in clinical expenses in 2020 (0.5%; 95% CI, -0.3 to 1.4%) did not differ from the pre-COVID annual increase of 3.7% (95% CI, 3.5 to 4%). Stratified analysis showed hospitals with larger utilization volume, located in states with lower COVID-19 burden, or situated in counties with higher median household income experienced larger increase in administrative expenses in 2020.ConclusionsIn 2020, administrative expenses grew much faster than clinical expenses, resulting in a larger share of hospital financial resources allocated to administrative activities. Higher administrative expenses might reflect hospitals' operational effort in response to the pandemic or inefficient cost management.

Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 is thought to be more prevalent among ethnic minorities and individuals with low socioeconomic status. We aimed to investigate the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies during the COVID-19 pandemic among citizens 15 years or older in Denmark living in social housing (SH) areas.MethodsWe conducted a study between January 8th and January 31st, 2021 with recruitment in 13 selected SH areas. Participants were offered a point-of-care rapid SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG antibody test and a questionnaire concerning risk factors associated with COVID-19. As a proxy for the general Danish population we accessed data on seroprevalence from Danish blood donors (total Ig ELISA assay) in same time period.ResultsOf the 13,279 included participants, 2296 (17.3%) were seropositive (mean age 46.6 (SD 16.4) years, 54.2% female), which was 3 times higher than in the general Danish population (mean age 41.7 (SD 14.1) years, 48.5% female) in the same period (5.8%, risk ratios (RR) 2.96, 95% CI 2.78-3.16, p > 0.001). Seropositivity was higher among males (RR 1.1, 95% CI 1.05-1.22%, p = 0.001) and increased with age, with an OR seropositivity of 1.03 for each 10-year increase in age (95% CI 1.00-1.06, p = 0.031). Close contact with COVID-19-infected individuals was associated with a higher risk of infection, especially among household members (OR 5.0, 95% CI 4.1-6.2 p < 0,001). Living at least four people in a household significantly increased the OR of seropositivity (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.0-1.6, p = 0.02) as did living in a multi-generational household (OR 1.3 per generation, 95% CI 1.1-1.6, p = 0.003). Only 1.6% of participants reported not following any of the national COVID-19 recommendations.ConclusionsDanish citizens living in SH areas of low socioeconomic status had a three times higher SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence compared to the general Danish population. The seroprevalence was significantly higher in males and increased slightly with age. Living in multiple generations households or in households of more than four persons was a strong risk factor for being seropositive. Results of this study can be used for future consideration of the need for preventive measures in the populations living in SH areas.

Project description:BackgroundPrehospital acute pain is a frequent symptom that is often inadequately managed. The concerns of opioid induced side effects are well-founded. To ensure patient safety, ambulance personnel are therefore provided with treatment protocols with dosing restrictions, however, with the concomitant risk of insufficient pain treatment of the patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of a liberal intravenous fentanyl treatment protocol on efficacy and safety measures.MethodsA two-armed, cluster-randomised trial was conducted in the Central Denmark Region over a 1-year period. Ambulance stations (stratified according to size) were randomised to follow either a liberal treatment protocol (3 μg/kg) or a standard treatment protocol (2 μg/kg). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with sufficient pan relief (numeric rating scale (NRS, 0-10) < 3) at hospital arrival. Secondary outcomes included abnormal vital parameters as proxy measures of safety. A multi-level mixed effect logistic regression model was applied.ResultsIn total, 5278 patients were included. Ambulance personnel following the liberal protocol administered higher doses of fentanyl [117.7 μg (95% CI 116.7-118.6)] than ambulance personnel following the standard protocol [111.5 μg (95% CI 110.7-112.4), P = 0.0001]. The number of patient with sufficient pain relief at hospital arrival was higher in the liberal treatment group than the standard treatment group [44.0% (95% CI 41.8-46.1) vs. 37.4% (95% CI 35.2-39.6), adjusted odds ratio 1.47 (95% CI 1.17-1.84)]. The relative decrease in NRS scores during transport was less evident [adjusted odds ratio 1.18 (95% CI 0.95-1.48)]. The occurrences of abnormal vital parameters were similar in both groups.ConclusionsLiberalising an intravenous fentanyl treatment protocol applied by ambulance personnel slightly increased the number of patients with sufficient pain relief at hospital arrival without compromising patient safety. Future efforts of training ambulance personnel are needed to further improve protocol adherence and quality of treatment.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02914678 ). Date of registration: 26th September, 2016.

Project description:ImportanceAnnual influenza vaccinations are currently recommended for all health care personnel (HCP) to limit the spread of influenza to those at high risk of developing serious complications from the virus. Vaccination coverage has been shown to be significantly greater among employers requiring and encouraging HCP to receive the annual influenza vaccination.ObjectivesTo compare the proportion of respondent hospitals requiring HCP to receive annual influenza vaccination between 2013 and 2017 and to assess the degree to which these proportions differed between Veterans Affairs (VA) and non-VA hospitals.Design, setting, and participantsThis national survey study included responses from 1062 infection preventionists between 2013 and 2017 from nationally representative samples of all VA and non-VA hospitals in the United States. Data analysis was conducted from November 17, 2017, to March 26, 2018.Main outcomes and measuresSurvey response indicating hospital requirement for annual influenza vaccination of HCP.ResultsThe overall response rate for the 2013 survey was 69.3% (non-VA, 70.6% [403 of 571]; VA, 63.5% [80 of 126]) and in 2017 was 59.1% (non-VA, 59.1% [530 of 897]; VA, 58.9% [73 of 124]). Among all responding hospitals, mandatory influenza vaccination requirements for HCP increased from 37.1% in 2013 to 61.4% in 2017 (difference, 24.3%; 95% CI, 18.4%-30.2%; P < .001). This change was driven by non-VA hospitals, as requirement policies increased from 44.3% (171 of 386) in 2013 to 69.4% (365 of 526) in 2017 (difference, 25.1%; 95% CI, 18.8%-31.4%; P < .001). Conversely, there was no significant change during this period in the proportion of VA hospitals that required influenza vaccinations for HCP (1.3% [1 of 77] to 4.1% [3 of 73]; difference, 2.8%; 95% CI, -2.4% to 8.0%; P = .29).Conclusions and relevanceDespite a substantial increase in mandates among non-VA hospitals, we found that many non-VA hospitals and nearly all VA hospitals are still not currently mandating influenza vaccinations for HCP. In addition to implementing other well-described strategies to increase vaccination rates, health care organizations should consider mandating influenza vaccinations while appropriately weighing and managing the moral, ethical, and legal implications.

Dataset Information

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Seroprevalence Survey Among 17 971 Healthcare and Administrative Personnel at Hospitals, Prehospital Services, and Specialist Practitioners in the Central Denmark Region.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Seroprevalence Survey Among 17 971 Healthcare and Administrative Personnel at Hospitals, Prehospital Services, and Specialist Practitioners in the Central Denmark Region.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets