scholarly journals Point-of-Care COVID-19 Antigen Testing in Exposed German Healthcare Workers—A Cost Model

Author(s):  
Roland Diel ◽  
Norbert Hittel ◽  
Albert Nienhaus

Background: Hospital staffing shortages are again (mid-year 2021) becoming a significant problem as the number of positive COVID-19 cases continues to increase worldwide. Objective: To assess the costs of sending HCW into quarantine (Scenario 1) from the hospital’s and the taxpayer’s perspective versus the costs arising from implementing point-of-care COVID-19 antigen testing (POCT) for those staff members who, despite learning that they have been exposed to hospital patients later found to be infected with COVID-19, continue to report to work (Scenario 2). Methods: A mathematical model was built to calculate the costs of a sample-and-stay strategy for exposed healthcare workers (HCW) in Germany by utilizing a high-quality antigen fluorescent immunoassay (FIA), compared to the costs of quarantine. Direct costs and wage costs were evaluated from the hospital as well as from the taxpayer perspective assuming a SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence of 10%. Results: Serial POCT testing of exposed HCW in Germany (Scenario 2) who do not go into quarantine but continue to work during a post-exposure period of 14 days at their working place raises costs of EUR 289 (±20%: EUR 231 to EUR 346, rounded) per HCW at the expense of the employing hospital while the extra-costs to the taxpayer per exposed HCW are limited to EUR 16 (±20%: EUR 13 to EUR 19). In contrast, sending HCW into quarantine (Scenario 1) would result in costs of EUR 111 (±20%: EUR 89 to EUR 133) per exposed HCW for the hospital but EUR 2235 (±20%: EUR 1744 to EUR 2727) per HCW at the expense of the taxpayer. Conclusions: Monitoring exposed HCW who continued working by sequential POCT may considerably reduce costs from the perspective of the taxpayer and help mitigate personnel shortages in hospitals during pandemic COVID-19 waves.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Federico Diotallevi ◽  
Anna Campanati ◽  
Giulia Radi ◽  
Oriana Simonetti ◽  
Emanuela Martina ◽  
...  

UNSTRUCTURED Two months have passed since the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the pandemic of the Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19), caused by the SARS CoV-2 virus, on March 11, 2020. Medical and healthcare workers have continued to be on the frontline to defeat this disease, however, continual changes are being made to their working habits which are proving to be difficult. Since the beginning of the pandemic, a major reorganisation of all hospital wards, including dermatological wards, has been carried out in order to make medical and nursing staff available in COVID wards and to prevent the spread of infection. These strategies, which were also adopted in our clinic, proved to be effective, as no staff members or patients were infected by the virus. Now, thanks to the global decrease in SARS-CovV2 infections, it is necessary to make dermatological wards accessible to patients again, but it is also essential to adopt specific protocols to avoid a new wave of infections.


Diagnosis ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Camilla Mattiuzzi ◽  
Brandon M. Henry ◽  
Giuseppe Lippi

AbstractAlthough the most effective strategy for preventing or containing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreaks relies on early diagnosis, the paramount and unprecedented number of tests needed to fully achieve this target is overwhelming worldwide testing supply and capacity. Molecular detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in nasopharyngeal swabs is still considered the reference diagnostic approach. Nonetheless, identification of SARS-CoV-2 proteins in upper respiratory tract specimens and/or saliva by means of rapid (antigen) immunoassays is emerging as a promising screening approach. These tests have some advantages compared to molecular analysis, such as point of care availability, no need of skilled personnel and dedicated instrumentation, lower costs and short turnaround time. However, these advantages are counterbalanced by lower diagnostic sensitivity compared to molecular testing, which would only enable to identifying patients with higher SARS-CoV-2 viral load. The evidence accumulated to-date has hence persuaded us to develop a tentative algorithm, which would magnify the potential benefits of rapid antigen testing in SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics.


Author(s):  
Giuseppe Vetrugno ◽  
Daniele Ignazio La Milia ◽  
Floriana D’Ambrosio ◽  
Marcello Di Pumpo ◽  
Roberta Pastorino ◽  
...  

Healthcare workers are at the forefront against COVID-19, worldwide. Since Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli (FPG) IRCCS was enlisted as a COVID-19 hospital, the healthcare workers deployed to COVID-19 wards were separated from those with limited/no exposure, whereas the administrative staff were designated to work from home. Between 4 June and 3 July 2020, an investigation was conducted to evaluate the seroprevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) immunoglobulin (IgG) antibodies among the employees of the FPG using point-of-care (POC) and venous blood tests. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were determined with reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction on nasal/oropharyngeal swabs as the diagnostic gold standard. The participants enrolled amounted to 4777. Seroprevalence was 3.66% using the POC test and 1.19% using the venous blood test, with a significant difference (p < 0.05). The POC test sensitivity and specificity were, respectively, 63.64% (95% confidence interval (CI): 62.20% to 65.04%) and 96.64% (95% CI: 96.05% to 97.13%), while those of the venous blood test were, respectively, 78.79% (95% CI: 77.58% to 79.94%) and 99.36% (95% CI: 99.07% to 99.55%). Among the low-risk populations, the POC test’s predictive values were 58.33% (positive) and 98.23% (negative), whereas those of the venous blood test were 92.86% (positive) and 98.53% (negative). According to our study, these serological tests cannot be a valid alternative to diagnose COVID-19 infection in progress.


Life ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 561
Author(s):  
Mariana Ulinici ◽  
Serghei Covantev ◽  
James Wingfield-Digby ◽  
Apostolos Beloukas ◽  
Alexander G. Mathioudakis ◽  
...  

While molecular testing with real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) remains the gold-standard test for COVID-19 diagnosis and screening, more rapid or affordable molecular and antigen testing options have been developed. More affordable, point-of-care antigen testing, despite being less sensitive compared to molecular assays, might be preferable for wider screening initiatives. Simple laboratory, imaging and clinical parameters could facilitate prognostication and triage. This comprehensive review summarises current evidence on the diagnostic, screening and prognostic tests for COVID-19.


Micromachines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (8) ◽  
pp. 882
Author(s):  
M. Munzer Alseed ◽  
Hamzah Syed ◽  
Mehmet Cengiz Onbasli ◽  
Ali K. Yetisen ◽  
Savas Tasoglu

Civil wars produce immense humanitarian crises, causing millions of individuals to seek refuge in other countries. The rate of disease prevalence has inclined among the refugees, increasing the cost of healthcare. Complex medical conditions and high numbers of patients at healthcare centers overwhelm the healthcare system and delay diagnosis and treatment. Point-of-care (PoC) testing can provide efficient solutions to high equipment cost, late diagnosis, and low accessibility of healthcare services. However, the development of PoC devices in developing countries is challenged by several barriers. Such PoC devices may not be adopted due to prejudices about new technologies and the need for special training to use some of these devices. Here, we investigated the concerns of end users regarding PoC devices by surveying healthcare workers and doctors. The tendency to adopt PoC device changes is based on demographic factors such as work sector, education, and technology experience. The most apparent concern about PoC devices was issues regarding low accuracy, according to the surveyed clinicians.


2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
G Del Castillo ◽  
A Castrofino ◽  
F Grosso ◽  
A Barone ◽  
L Crottogini ◽  
...  

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 &gt; 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 &lt;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.


Author(s):  
Anja Šterbenc ◽  
Viktorija Tomič ◽  
Urška Bidovec Stojković ◽  
Katja Vrankar ◽  
Aleš Rozman ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Sara Carazo ◽  
Denis Laliberté ◽  
Jasmin Villeneuve ◽  
Richard Martin ◽  
Pierre Deshaies ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT Objectives: To estimate the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate and the secondary attack rate among healthcare workers (HCWs) in Quebec, the most affected province of Canada during the first wave; to describe the evolution of work-related exposures and infection prevention and control (IPC) practices in infected HCWs; and to compare the exposures and practices between acute care hospitals (ACHs) and long-term care facilities (LTCFs). Design: Survey of cases Participants: Quebec HCWs from private and public institutions with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 diagnosed between 1st March and 14th June 2020. HCWs ≥18 years old, having worked during the exposure period and survived their illness were eligible for the survey. Methods: After obtaining consent, 4542 HCWs completed a standardized questionnaire. COVID-19 rates and proportions of exposures and practices were estimated and compared between ACHs and LTCFs. Results: HCWs represented 25% (13,726/54,005) of all reported COVID-19 cases in Quebec and had an 11-times greater rate than non-HCWs. Their secondary household attack rate was 30%. Most affected occupations were healthcare support workers, nurses and nurse assistants, working in LTCFs (45%) and ACHs (30%). Compared to ACHs, HCWs of LTCFs had less training, higher staff mobility between working sites, similar PPE use but better self-reported compliance with at-work physical distancing. Sub-optimal IPC practices declined over time but were still present at the end of the first wave. Conclusion: Quebec HCWs and their families were severely affected during the first wave of COVID-19. Insufficient pandemic preparedness and suboptimal IPC practices likely contributed to high transmission in both LTCFs and ACHs.


2018 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 765-771 ◽  
Author(s):  
E N Kisangau ◽  
A Awour ◽  
B Juma ◽  
D Odhiambo ◽  
T Muasya ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Hepatitis B virus (HBV) is a vaccine-preventable infection that can spread in healthcare setting. Data on HBV infections and vaccine in African healthcare workers (HCWs) are limited. We estimated HBV infection prevalence, hepatitis B vaccination status and identified factors associated with vaccination in one Kenyan county. Methods Randomly selected HCWs completed a questionnaire about HBV exposure and self-reported immunization histories, and provided blood for testing of selected HBV biomarkers to assess HBV infection and vaccination status: HBV core antibodies (anti-HBc), HBV surface antigen (HBsAg) and HBV surface antibodies (anti-HBs). Prevalence odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated to identify factors associated with vaccination. Results Among 312 HCWs surveyed, median age was 31 years (range: 19–67 years). Of 295 blood samples tested, 13 (4%) were anti-HBc and HBsAg-positive evidencing chronic HBV infection; 139 (47%) had protective anti-HBs levels. Although 249 (80%) HCWs received ≥1 HBV vaccine dose, only 119 (48%) received all three recommended doses. Complete vaccination was more likely among those working in hospitals compared to those working in primary healthcare facilities (OR = 2.5; 95% CI: 1.4–4.3). Conclusion We recommend strengthening county HCW vaccination, and collecting similar data nationally to guide HBV prevention and control.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document