Use of whole-genome sequencing to investigate a cluster of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections in emergency department personnel.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Chan ER
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8144813 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundIt is important to understand the mode of transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) for disease control. We aimed to clarify how soon SARS-CoV-2 transmission can occur after infection by asymptomatically infected individuals.MethodsWe analyzed the publicly available epidemiological information for a cluster of 108 cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases in Osaka, Japan.ResultsAmong cases, 51 cases attended a live music club only once and were considered to have a single visit. Ten remained asymptomatic at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis by reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction, which was on average 20 days after exposure. Three routes of secondary transmission were identified, with 2-4 days from infection to transmission. All index cases for secondary transmission were asymptomatic at the time of contact with other people. Based on the date of symptom onset in the remaining 41 cases, the period from exposure to illness ranged from 2 to 17 days.ConclusionsSeemingly healthy people could spread SARS-CoV-2 during intense activities in enclosed environments without sufficient ventilation. Asymptomatically infected persons can transmit the virus as soon as 2 days after infection. Continuous efforts to avoid crowding and to maintain personal hygiene are needed for effective control of COVID-19.
| S-EPMC7499593 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Large-scale, 1-time testing of >12,000 asymptomatic healthcare personnel in California, USA, during April-June 2020 showed that prevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 was low (<1%). Testing might identify asymptomatic and presymptomatic persons, including some with high viral burden, enabling prompt implementation of measures to limit nosocomial spread.
| S-EPMC7774535 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesEmergency department (ED) health care personnel (HCP) are at risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2. The objective of this study was to determine the attributable risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection from providing ED care, describe personal protective equipment use, and identify modifiable ED risk factors. We hypothesized that providing ED patient care increases the probability of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter prospective cohort study of 1,673 ED physicians, advanced practice providers (APPs), nurses, and nonclinical staff at 20 U.S. centers over 20 weeks (May to December 2020; before vaccine availability) to detect a four-percentage point increased SARS-CoV-2 incidence among HCP related to direct patient care. Participants provided monthly nasal and serology specimens and weekly exposure and procedure information. We used multivariable regression and recursive partitioning to identify risk factors.ResultsOver 29,825 person-weeks, 75 participants (4.5%) acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection (31 were asymptomatic). Physicians/APPs (aOR 1.07; 95% CI 0.56-2.03) did not have higher risk of becoming infected compared to nonclinical staff, but nurses had a marginally increased risk (aOR 1.91; 95% CI 0.99-3.68). Over 99% of participants used CDC-recommended personal protective equipment (PPE), but PPE lapses occurred in 22.1% of person-weeks and 32.1% of SARS-CoV-2-infected patient intubations. The following factors were associated with infection: household SARS-CoV-2 exposure; hospital and community SARS-CoV-2 burden; community exposure; and mask non-use in public. SARS-CoV-2 intubation was not associated with infection (attributable risk fraction 13.8%; 95% CI -2.0-38.2%), and nor were PPE lapses.ConclusionsAmong unvaccinated U.S. ED HCP during the height of the pandemic, the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection was similar in nonclinical staff and HCP engaged in direct patient care. Many identified risk factors were related to community exposures.
| S-EPMC9307202 | biostudies-literature
Project description:During January 2013-August 2014, a total of 1,800 patients in Iran who had respiratory illness were tested for Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus. A cluster of 5 cases occurred in Kerman Province during May-July 2014, but virus transmission routes for some infections were unclear.
| S-EPMC4313658 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In 2013 in Tunisia, 3 persons in 1 family were infected with Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV). The index case-patient's respiratory tract samples were negative for MERS-CoV by reverse transcription PCR, but diagnosis was retrospectively confirmed by PCR of serum. Sequences clustered with those from Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates.
| S-EPMC4178422 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Healthcare personnel are at high risk for exposure to influenza by direct and indirect contact, droplets and aerosols, and by aerosol generating procedures. Information on air and surface influenza contamination is needed to assist in developing guidance for proper prevention and control strategies. To understand the vulnerabilities of healthcare personnel, we measured influenza in the breathing zone of healthcare personnel, in air and on surfaces within a healthcare setting, and on filtering facepiece respirators worn by healthcare personnel when conducting patient care.Thirty participants were recruited from an adult emergency department during the 2015 influenza season. Participants wore personal bioaerosol samplers for six hours of their work shift, submitted used filtering facepiece respirators and medical masks and completed questionnaires to assess frequency and types of interactions with potentially infected patients. Room air samples were collected using bioaerosol samplers, and surface swabs were collected from high-contact surfaces within the adult emergency department. Personal and room bioaerosol samples, surface swabs, and filtering facepiece respirators were analyzed for influenza A by polymerase chain reaction.Influenza was identified in 42% (53/125) of personal bioaerosol samples, 43% (28/ 96) of room bioaerosol samples, 76% (23/30) of pooled surface samples, and 25% (3/12) of the filtering facepiece respirators analyzed. Influenza copy numbers were greater in personal bioaerosol samples (17 to 631 copies) compared to room bioaerosol samples (16 to 323 copies). Regression analysis suggested that the amount of influenza in personal samples was approximately 2.3 times the amount in room samples (Wald ?2 = 16.21, p<0.001).Healthcare personnel may encounter increased concentrations of influenza virus when in close proximity to patients. Occupations that require contact with patients are at an increased risk for influenza exposure, which may occur throughout the influenza season. Filtering facepiece respirators may become contaminated with influenza when used during patient care.
| S-EPMC6118374 | biostudies-other
Project description:The largest nosocomial outbreak of Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) occurred in South Korea in 2015. Health Care Personnel (HCP) are at high risk of acquiring MERS-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) infections, similar to the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-Coronavirus (SARS-CoV) infections first identified in 2003. This study described the similarities and differences in epidemiological and clinical characteristics of 183 confirmed global MERS cases and 98 SARS cases in Taiwan associated with HCP. The epidemiological findings showed that the mean age of MERS-HCP and total MERS cases were 40 (24~74) and 49 (2~90) years, respectively, much older than those in SARS [SARS-HCP: 35 (21~68) years, p = 0.006; total SARS: 42 (0~94) years, p = 0.0002]. The case fatality rates (CFR) was much lower in MERS-HCP [7.03% (9/128)] or SARS-HCP [12.24% (12/98)] than the MERS-non-HCP [36.96% (34/92), p<0.001] or SARS-non-HCP [24.50% (61/249), p<0.001], however, no difference was found between MERS-HCP and SARS-HCP [p = 0.181]. In terms of clinical period, the days from onset to death [13 (4~17) vs 14.5 (0~52), p = 0.045] and to discharge [11 (5~24) vs 24 (0~74), p = 0.010] and be hospitalized days [9.5 (3~22) vs 22 (0~69), p = 0.040] were much shorter in MERS-HCP than SARS-HCP. Similarly, days from onset to confirmation were shorter in MERS-HCP than MERS-non-HCP [6 (1~14) vs 10 (1~21), p = 0.044]. In conclusion, the severity of MERS-HCP and SARS-HCP was lower than that of MERS-non-HCP and SARS-non-HCP due to younger age and early confirmation in HCP groups. However, no statistical difference was found in MERS-HCP and SARS-HCP. Thus, prevention of nosocomial infections involving both novel Coronavirus is crucially important to protect HCP.
| S-EPMC4773072 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Abstract Objective To evaluate clinical prediction tools for making decisions in patients with severe urinary tract infections (UTIs). Methods This was a retrospective study conducted at 2 hospitals (combined emergency department (ED) census 190,000). Study patients were admitted via the ED with acute pyelonephritis or severe sepsis?septic shock related UTI. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) augmented by decision curve analysis and sensitivity of each rule for predicting mortality and ICU admission were compared. Results The AUROC of PRACTICE was greater than that of BOMBARD (0.15 difference, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.09–0.22), SIRS (0.21 difference, 95% CI = 0.14–0.28) and qSOFA (0.06 difference, 95% CI = 0–0.11) for predicting mortality. PRACTICE had a greater net benefit compared to BOMBARD and SIRS at all thresholds and a greater net benefit compared to qSOFA between a 1% and 10% threshold probability level for predicting mortality. PRACTICE had a greater net benefit compared to all other scores for predicting ICU admission across all threshold probabilities. A PRACTICE score >75 was more sensitive than a qSOFA score >1 (90% versus 54.3%, 35.7 difference, 95% CI = 24.5–46.9), SIRS criteria >1 (18.6 difference, 95% CI = 9.5–27.7), and a BOMBARD score >2 (12.9 difference, 95% CI = 5–12.9) for predicting mortality. Conclusion PRACTICE was more accurate than BOMBARD, SIRS, and qSOFA for predicting mortality. PRACTICE had a superior net benefit at most thresholds compared to other scores for predicting mortality and ICU admissions.
| S-EPMC7493503 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:In 2003, Taiwan experienced a series of outbreaks of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and 1 laboratory-contamination accident. Here we describe a new phylogenetic analytical method to study the sources and dissemination paths of SARS-associated coronavirus (SARS-CoV) infections in Taiwan. METHODS:A phylogenetic analytical tool for combining nucleotide sequences from 6 variable regions of a SARS-CoV genome was developed by use of 20 published SARS-CoV sequences; and this method was validated by use of 80 published SARS-CoV sequences. Subsequently, this new tool was applied to provide a better understanding of the entire complement of Taiwanese SARS-CoV isolates, including 20 previously published and 19 identified in this study. The epidemiological data were integrated with the results from the phylogenetic tree and from the nucleotide-signature pattern. RESULTS:The topologies of phylogenetic trees generated by the new and the conventional strategies were similar, with the former having better robustness than the latter, especially in comparison with the maximum-likelihood trees: the new strategy revealed that during 2003 there were 5 waves of epidemic SARS-CoV infection, which belonged to 3 phylogenetic clusters in Taiwan. CONCLUSIONS:The new strategy is more efficient than its conventional counterparts. The outbreaks of SARS in Taiwan originated from multiple sources.
| S-EPMC7199491 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A short cut review was carried out to establish whether there are significant differences in the performance of emergency physicians and anaesthetists when carrying out rapid sequence intubation (RSI) in the emergency department. A total of 407 papers were found of which 12 presented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The author, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes, results, and study weaknesses of these best papers are tabulated. The clinical bottom line is that there is little or no difference in the rates of success and complications between emergency department clinicians and anaesthetists performing RSI.
| S-EPMC2564135 | biostudies-literature