scholarly journals 400. Impact of SARS-CoV-2 Test-based Strategy to Reduce Quarantine Days Among Asymptomatic Healthcare Workers After Household Exposure

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S302-S302
Author(s):  
Bhagyashri D Navalkele ◽  
Jose Lucar ◽  
James B Brock ◽  
Jason Parham
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Return To Work ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Close Contact ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Safe Patient Care ◽  
Post Exposure ◽  
Early Return

Abstract Background Appropriate staffing is essential to provide safe patient care. During the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers (HCWs) are missing work days due to illness or high-risk exposure (HRE) to an infected person. To avoid staffing shortages, we implemented a SARS-CoV-2 test-based strategy among asymptomatic HCWs after HRE to facilitate early return to work. Methods In July 2020, our institution implemented a SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test-based strategy among HCWs within 7 days of HRE. HCWs were defined as any paid or unpaid persons directly or indirectly involved in patient care. HRE was defined as close contact < 6 feet with an infected household member without use of mask and lasting for ≥ 15 minutes. Contact with a patient or coworker was not considered high-risk due to universal masking and eye protection use. HCWs underwent SARS-CoV-2 RT PCR testing of a nasopharyngeal swab at least once (1-2 days post-exposure) or twice (5-7 days post-exposure). HCWs with symptoms at baseline were excluded. HCWs who were asymptomatic during evaluation were considered as truly asymptomatic (TA). Saved work-days (SWD) were calculated based on number of days saved due to testing strategy compared to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s recommended 14-day quarantine. HCWs were allowed to return to work within 7 days of HRE if they tested negative, or after completing 10-day isolation period ± improvement in symptoms from symptom onset if they tested positive. Results Between 07/01/2020 to 12/31/2020, 450 unique asymptomatic HCWs underwent SARS-CoV-2 testing. Of those, 84% were women and median age was 36 years, 347 tested negative and 103 tested positive. Of those positives, 33% of HCWs tested positive on day 2 after HRE with 141 SWDs (average 2 days/person). Only 37% were TA positives. Of those negatives, 94% were TA SARS-CoV-2 negative with 2620 SWDs (average 7.5 days/person). There were no healthcare outbreaks related to HCWs allowed to return to work following this strategy. Asymptomatic healthcare workers commonly tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 on day 2 from household exposure compared to other days Conclusion Test-based strategy among asymptomatic HCWs with HRE reduced loss of workdays and helped limit staffing shortages. Majority of positive HCWs developed symptoms after positive SARS-CoV-2 testing, which may support allowing most fully vaccinated HCWs with no COVID-like symptoms to continue to work unless symptomatic. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

scholarly journals Evaluation of a home-based 7-day infection control strategy for healthcare workers following high-risk exposure to SARS-CoV-2: a cohort study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carla Benea ◽  
Laura Rendon ◽  
Jesse Papenburg ◽  
Charles Frenette ◽  
Ahmed Imcaoudene ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Infection Control ◽  
Control Strategy ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Control Strategies ◽  
Risk Exposure ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Post Exposure ◽  
Home Based ◽  
Second Wave

ABSTRACTBackgroundEvidence-based infection control strategies are needed for healthcare workers (HCWs) following high-risk exposure to SARS-CoV-2. This study evaluated the negative predictive value (NPV) of a home-based 7-day infection control strategy.MethodsHCWs advised by their Infection Control or Occupational Health officer to self-isolate due to a high-risk SARS-CoV-2 exposure were enrolled between May-September 2020. The strategy consisted of symptom-triggered nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 RNA testing from day 0-6 post exposure, followed by standardized home-based nasopharyngeal swab and saliva testing on day 7. The NPV of this strategy was calculated for i) clinical COVID-19 diagnosis from day 8-14 post exposure, and for ii) asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 detected by standardized nasopharyngeal swab and saliva specimens collected at days 9-10 and 14 post exposure. Interim results are reported in the context of a second wave threatening this essential workforce.ResultsAmong 30 HCWs enrolled to date (age 31±9 years, 24 [80.0%] female), 3 were diagnosed with COVID-19 by day 14 post exposure (secondary attack rate 10.0%), with all cases detected by the 7-day infection control strategy: NPV for subsequent clinical COVID-19 or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 detection by day 14 was 100.0% (95%CI: 93.1-100.0%).InterpretationAmong HCWs with high-risk exposure to SARS-CoV-2, a home-based 7-day infection control strategy may have a high NPV for subsequent COVID-19 and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 detection. While ongoing data collection and data sharing are needed to improve the precision of the estimated NPV, we report interim results to inform infection control strategies in light of a second wave threatening this essential workforce.

scholarly journals The management of surgical patients in the emergency setting during COVID-19 pandemic: the WSES position paper

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Belinda De Simone ◽  
Elie Chouillard ◽  
Massimo Sartelli ◽  
Walter L. Biffl ◽  
Salomone Di Saverio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Emergency Surgery ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Mass Casualty ◽  
Position Paper ◽  
Surgical Patients ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Emergency Setting ◽  
Open Approach ◽  
Rt Pcr

Abstract Background Since the COVID-19 pandemic has occurred, nations showed their unpreparedness to deal with a mass casualty incident of this proportion and severity, which resulted in a tremendous number of deaths even among healthcare workers. The World Society of Emergency Surgery conceived this position paper with the purpose of providing evidence-based recommendations for the management of emergency surgical patients under COVID-19 pandemic for the safety of the patient and healthcare workers. Method A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) through the MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase and SCOPUS databases. Synthesis of evidence, statements and recommendations were developed in accordance with the GRADE methodology. Results Given the limitation of the evidence, the current document represents an effort to join selected high-quality articles and experts’ opinion. Conclusions The aim of this position paper is to provide an exhaustive guidelines to perform emergency surgery in a safe and protected environment for surgical patients and for healthcare workers under COVID-19 and to offer the best management of COVID-19 patients needing for an emergency surgical treatment. We recommend screening for COVID-19 infection at the emergency department all acute surgical patients who are waiting for hospital admission and urgent surgery. The screening work-up provides a RT-PCR nasopharyngeal swab test and a baseline (non-contrast) chest CT or a chest X-ray or a lungs US, depending on skills and availability. If the COVID-19 screening is not completed we recommend keeping the patient in isolation until RT-PCR swab test result is not available, and to manage him/she such as an overt COVID patient. The management of COVID-19 surgical patients is multidisciplinary. If an immediate surgical procedure is mandatory, whether laparoscopic or via open approach, we recommend doing every effort to protect the operating room staff for the safety of the patient.

scholarly journals Evaluation of a home-based 7-day infection control strategy for healthcare workers following high-risk exposure to severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2): A cohort study

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Carla Benea ◽  
Laura Rendon ◽  
Jesse Papenburg ◽  
Charles Frenette ◽  
Ahmed Imacoudene ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Infection Control ◽  
Control Strategy ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Control Strategies ◽  
Risk Exposure ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Home Based ◽  
Respiratory Coronavirus ◽  
Second Wave

Abstract Objective: Evidence-based infection control strategies are needed for healthcare workers (HCWs) following high-risk exposure to severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In this study, we evaluated the negative predictive value (NPV) of a home-based 7-day infection control strategy. Methods: HCWs advised by their infection control or occupational health officer to self-isolate due to a high-risk SARS-CoV-2 exposure were enrolled between May and October 2020. The strategy consisted of symptom-triggered nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 RNA testing from day 0 to day 7 after exposure and standardized home-based nasopharyngeal swab and saliva testing on day 7. The NPV of this strategy was calculated for (1) clinical coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnosis from day 8–14 after exposure, and for (2) asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 detected by standardized nasopharyngeal swab and saliva specimens collected at days 9, 10, and 14 after exposure. Interim results are reported in the context of a second wave threatening this essential workforce. Results: Among 30 HCWs enrolled, the mean age was 31 years (SD, ±9), and 24 (80%) were female. Moreover, 3 were diagnosed with COVID-19 by day 14 after exposure (secondary attack rate, 10.0%), and all cases were detected using the 7-day infection control strategy: the NPV for subsequent clinical COVID-19 or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 detection by day 14 was 100.0% (95% CI, 93.1%–100.0%). Conclusions: Among HCWs with high-risk exposure to SARS-CoV-2, a home-based 7-day infection control strategy may have a high NPV for subsequent COVID-19 and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 detection. Ongoing data collection and data sharing are needed to improve the precision of the estimated NPV, and here we report interim results to inform infection control strategies in light of a second wave threatening this essential workforce.

scholarly journals COVID-19 serological testing for Healthcare Workers in Lombardy, Italy

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
G Del Castillo ◽  
A Castrofino ◽  
F Grosso ◽  
A Barone ◽  
L Crottogini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Geographical Area ◽  
Healthcare Facility ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Infection Prevalence ◽  
Serological Testing ◽  
Prevention Policy ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Serological Tests ◽  
Screening Process

Abstract Issue COVID-19 pandemic began in Italy on February 20th, 2020. Since the beginning of the emergency Healthcare Workers' (HCWs) involvement was prominent, mainly due to direct assistance to COVID-19 patients. Therefore, we implemented a prevention policy for HCW screening through serological and RT-PCR testing. Description of the problem HCW screening for SARS-CoV-2 infection is essential for prevention and control of the pandemic. Lombardy's Healthcare authorities settled a screening process for HCWs divided into three steps: 1) body temperature assessment at the beginning and the end of work shift, if fever > 37.5 °C was present the HCW was sent back home and a nasopharyngeal swab was performed; 2) progressive recruitment for serological testing; 3) on those positive to IgG a nasopharyngeal swab was performed and tested for viral RNA by RT-PCR. Results Among 79185 HCW tested, 9589 (12%) were positive on serological IgG testing. Of the 9589 positive a nasopharyngeal swab was performed on 6884. Of these 358 (5%) tested positive and the remaining 6526 (95%) negative to RT-PCR. We calculated a Positive Predictive Value of 5.2%. The rate of positive serological tests for each Healthcare facility varied between 0% and 78%. Five percent of all facilities, belonging to Brescia, Bergamo and Cremona area, reported a positivity rate higher than 40% in HCWs. A second cluster (18% of all facilities), involving the same geographical area, reported a rate between 20% and 40%, whereas the remaining facilities (76%) of the region a rate <20%. Lessons Serological IgG testing can be, if followed by immediate nasopharyngeal swab testing, a valid screening intervention on asymptomatic HCWs especially in a high infection prevalence setting. Key messages Serological IgG testing can be, if followed by immediate nasopharyngeal swab testing, a valid screening intervention on asymptomatic HCWs. Infection prevention in HCW may benefit from a screening campaign especially in high prevalence settings.

scholarly journals SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence in Healthcare Workers in Germany: A Follow-Up Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (9) ◽  
pp. 4540
Author(s):  
Johannes Korth ◽  
Benjamin Wilde ◽  
Sebastian Dolff ◽  
Jasmin Frisch ◽  
Michael Jahn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Risk Group ◽  
Close Contact ◽  
Virus Transmission ◽  
High Risk Group ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Igg Antibody

SARS-CoV-2 is a worldwide challenge for the medical sector. Healthcare workers (HCW) are a cohort vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 infection due to frequent and close contact with COVID-19 patients. However, they are also well trained and equipped with protective gear. The SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody status was assessed at three different time points in 450 HCW of the University Hospital Essen in Germany. HCW were stratified according to contact frequencies with COVID-19 patients in (I) a high-risk group with daily contacts with known COVID-19 patients (n = 338), (II) an intermediate-risk group with daily contacts with non-COVID-19 patients (n = 78), and (III) a low-risk group without patient contacts (n = 34). The overall seroprevalence increased from 2.2% in March–May to 4.0% in June–July to 5.1% in October–December. The SARS-CoV-2 IgG detection rate was not significantly different between the high-risk group (1.8%; 3.8%; 5.5%), the intermediate-risk group (5.1%; 6.3%; 6.1%), and the low-risk group (0%, 0%, 0%). The overall SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence remained low in HCW in western Germany one year after the outbreak of COVID-19 in Germany, and hygiene standards seemed to be effective in preventing patient-to-staff virus transmission.

scholarly journals Response to BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine among healthcare workers in Italy: a 3-month follow-up

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Domenico Ponticelli ◽  
Fabiana Madotto ◽  
Sara Conti ◽  
Ippazio C. Antonazzo ◽  
Andrea Vitale ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Vaccine Response ◽  
Serology Testing ◽  
Effectiveness Data

AbstractThis study investigated the response to BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine among healthcare workers (HCWs) in an Italian teaching hospital. 444 participants were surveyed with either multiple RT-PCR assays for detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid in nasopharyngeal swabs or serology testing for the research of virus-specific immunoglobulins. Adverse events following immunization (AEFI) were reported. Two weeks after the first dose anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies exceeded reactivity cut-off in 82.5% the participants. Four HCWs tested positive at nasopharyngeal swab after 3 months. More than three-quarters reported AEFIs. Our findings offer an insight regarding the vaccine response after 3 months from its administration, with a special focus on effectiveness data, as well as the type and number of AEFIs complained by HCW recipients. The presented study may serve as reference for future research which will be necessary to explore the long-term safety of this vaccine, especially in population at high risk for infection, such as HCWs.

scholarly journals Dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positivity and seroprevalence among high-risk healthcare workers and hospital staff

2020 ◽  
Vol 106 (1) ◽  
pp. 102-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Martin ◽  
I. Montesinos ◽  
N. Dauby ◽  
C. Gilles ◽  
H. Dahma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Hospital Staff ◽  
Rt Pcr

scholarly journals Influenza Vaccination of Healthcare Workers and Vaccine Allocation for Healthcare Workers During Vaccine Shortages

2005 ◽  
Vol 26 (11) ◽  
pp. 882-890 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas R. Talbot ◽  
Suzanne F. Bradley ◽  
Sara E. Cosgrove ◽  
Christian Ruef ◽  
Jane D. Siegel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Influenza Vaccination ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Close Contact ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Vaccination Rates ◽  
Healthcare Associated ◽  
Vaccine Shortages

AbstractInfluenza causes substantial morbidity and mortality annually, particularly in high-risk groups such as the elderly, young children, immunosuppressed individuals, and individuals with chronic illnesses. Healthcare-associated transmission of influenza contributes to this burden but is often under-recognized except in the setting of large outbreaks. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has recommended annual influenza vaccination for healthcare workers (HCWs) with direct patient contact since 1984 and for all HCWs since 1993. The rationale for these recommendations is to reduce the chance that HCWs serve as vectors for healthcare-associated influenza due to their close contact with high-risk patients and to enhance both HCW and patient safety. Despite these recommendations as well as the effectiveness of interventions designed to increase HCW vaccination rates, the percentage of HCWs vaccinated annually remains unacceptably low. Ironically, at the same time that campaigns have sought to increase HCW vaccination rates, vaccine shortages, such as the shortage during the 2004-2005 influenza season, present challenges regarding allocation of available vaccine supplies to both patients and HCWs. This two-part document outlines the position of the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America on influenza vaccination for HCWs and provides guidance for the allocation of influenza vaccine to HCWs during a vaccine shortage based on influenza transmission routes and the essential need for a practical and adaptive strategy for allocation. These recommendations apply to all types of healthcare facilities, including acute care hospitals, long-term-care facilities, and ambulatory care settings.

scholarly journals LUNG ULTRASOUND IN RULING OUT COVID-19 AMONG HEALTHCARE WORKERS IN TWO ITALIAN EMERGENCY DEPARTMENTS: A MULTICENTER STUDY.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberto Copetti ◽  
Giulia Amore ◽  
Caterina Giudice ◽  
Daniele Orso ◽  
Silvia Cola ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Negative Predictive Value ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Emergency Departments ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Lung Ultrasound ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Negative Case ◽  
Adjudication Committee

Purpose: The high percentage of asymptomatic patients and the non-high sensitivity of real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test on nasopharyngeal swab cause some healthcare workers to be infected but asymptomatic and a source of spread of the epidemic. This study aimed to verify if the lung ultrasound (LUS) had enough high negative predictive value to rule out coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among a population of healthcare workers operating in the Emergency Department. Methods: A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted, enrolling healthcare workers among the staff of two Emergency Departments in Northeast Italy. The definitive diagnosis of COVID-19 was established by an adjudication committee, based on the clinical data and RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal swab result. Results: From March 30, 2020, to April 22, 2020, we enrolled 155 cases. The adjudication committee determined two true positives for COVID-19. Twenty-one healthcare workers presented suggestive symptoms (2 true positives and 19 false positives). The nasopharyngeal swab was positive in one case (1 false-negative case). LUS was suggestive for COVID-19 pneumonia in 4 cases (2 false-positive cases). The diagnostic accuracy of LUS was 98.7% (95% CI 95.4%-99.8%). The sensitivity and the specificity of LUS were 100% (95% CI 15.8% -100%) and 98.7% (95% CI 95.4% - 99.8%), respectively. The negative predictive value was 100% (95% CI 100% -100%). Conclusion: LUS has a good enough negative predictive value for ruling out COVID-19 in a population of healthcare workers exposed to COVID-19.

scholarly journals COVID-19 relapse with prolonged viral shedding up to 60 days or re-infection, in 3 frontline healthcare workers with recurrent symptoms and persistent SARS-CoV-2 PCR positivity in Ireland, a developing diagnostic challenge: A case report

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan McGrath ◽  
Tara McGinty ◽  
Maureen Lynch ◽  
Edel O'Regan ◽  
Dominic Natin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Return To Work ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Respiratory Symptoms ◽  
Virus Disease ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Diagnostic Challenge ◽  
Clinical Role ◽  
Illness Onset ◽  
Viral Shedding ◽  
Diagnostic Difficulties

Abstract Background:To date, the Corona Virus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in more than 24,400 confirmed cases in Ireland, with more than 30% involving Healthcare Workers (HCW). As more staff become involved in the care of COVID-19 patients, many key clinical considerations remain uncertain, including the possibility of re-infection following initial illness, the clinical significance of prolonged viral shedding and the degree of protection conferred by development of anti- Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies.We present 3 cases of COVID19-infected HCWs, each with distinct episodes of recurrent symptoms following initial resolution and with persistently positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR results, ranging up to 60 days post onset of illness. PCR results, cycle threshold (Ct) values and clinical assessment are provided to discuss the diagnostic difficulties in assessing relapsed COVID-19 infection, or re-infection with new virus following return to work. Case presentations: Patient 1,2 and 3 (age range 25-36) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 via rtPCR on oro/nasopharyngeal swab with initial Ct values of 21.72, 24.52 and 26.58 respectively, following presentation with respiratory symptoms. All completed 14 day periods of self-isolation with full resolution of symptoms. Each patient has a clinical role and was involved in the management of COVID-19 patients following return to work. Patient 1 was admitted to hospital 44 days after initial illness, with cough, dyspnoea and a concurrent diagnosis of neurosyphilis. SARS-CoV-2 PCR was positive with Ct value 31.36 and remained positive for at least 60 days following initial illness onset. A full clinical recovery followed. Patients 2 and 3 represented to the Emergency Department with recurrent respiratory symptoms 29 and 40 days following initial illness onset respectively. SARS-CoV-2 PCR was demonstrated in each with Ct values 31.16 and 30.72 respectively. Each subsequently made a full recovery following a second period of self-isolation. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG was demonstrated in all 3 patients. Conclusions: These cases demonstrate the diagnostic difficulties in determining intermittent presentation of COVID-19 infection with prolonged viral shedding, or re-infection with new virus following return to work. As the pandemic progresses, this represents a growing diagnostic challenge impacting patient assessment, staff deployment following illness and infection control.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document