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: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: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:IntroductionHealthcare 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.MethodsThirty 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.ResultsInfluenza 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 χ2 = 16.21, p<0.001).ConclusionsHealthcare 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-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate a cluster of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections in employees working on 1 floor of a hospital administration building.MethodsContact tracing was performed to identify potential exposures and all employees were tested for SARS-CoV-2. Whole-genome sequencing was performed to determine the relatedness of SARS-CoV-2 samples from infected personnel and from control cases in the healthcare system with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during the same period. Carbon dioxide levels were measured during a workday to assess adequacy of ventilation; readings >800 parts per million (ppm) were considered an indication of suboptimal ventilation. To assess the potential for airborne transmission, DNA-barcoded aerosols were released, and real-time polymerase chain reaction was used to quantify particles recovered from air samples in multiple locations.ResultsBetween December 22, 2020, and January 8, 2021, 17 coworkers tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, including 13 symptomatic and 4 asymptomatic individuals. Of the 5 cluster SARS-CoV-2 samples sequenced, 3 were genetically related, but these employees denied higher-risk contacts with one another. None of the sequences from the cluster were genetically related to the 17 control sequences of SARS-CoV-2. Carbon dioxide levels increased during a workday but never exceeded 800 ppm. DNA-barcoded aerosol particles were dispersed from the sites of release to locations throughout the floor; 20% of air samples had >1 log10 particles.ConclusionsIn a hospital administration building outbreak, sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 confirmed transmission among coworkers. Transmission occurred despite the absence of higher-risk exposures and in a setting with adequate ventilation based on monitoring of carbon dioxide levels.
| S-EPMC9929709 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus testing among first responders and healthcare personnel who participated in a May 2020-August 2020 serosurvey that assessed spike protein antibodies provided an opportunity to assess reinfection.MethodsSerology survey data were merged with virus testing results from Rhode Island (1 March 2020-17 February 2021) and New York City (10 March 2020-14 December 2020). Participants with a positive virus test ≥14 days before their serology test were included. Reinfection was defined as a second positive SARS-CoV-2 test ≥90 days after the first positive test. The association between serostatus and reinfection was assessed with a proportional hazards model.ResultsAmong 1572 previously infected persons, 40 (2.5%) were reinfected. Reinfection differed by serostatus: 8.4% among seronegative vs 1.9% among seropositive participants (P < .0001). Most reinfections occurred among Rhode Island nursing home and corrections personnel (n = 30) who were most frequently tested (mean 30.3 tests vs 4.6 for other Rhode Island and 2.3 for New York City participants). The adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for reinfection in seropositive vs seronegative persons was 0.41 (95% confidence interval [CI], .20-.81). Exposure to a household member with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) before the serosurvey was also protective (aHR, 0.34; 95% CI, .13-.89).ConclusionsReinfections were uncommon among previously infected persons over a 9-month period that preceded widespread variant circulation. Seropositivity decreased reinfection risk. Lower reinfection risk associated with exposure to a household member with COVID-19 may reflect subsequently reduced household transmission.
| S-EPMC8767877 | biostudies-literature
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