Risk Factors of Healthcare Workers With Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Retrospective Cohort Study in a Designated Hospital of Wuhan in China

Risk of COVID-19 in Health Professionals: A Case-Control Study, Portugal

Introduction

Health professionals face higher occupational exposure to SARS-CoV-2. We aimed to estimate the risk of COVID-19 test positivity in health professionals compared to non-health professionals.

Methods

We conducted a test-negative case-control study using Portuguese national surveillance data (January to May 2020). Cases were suspected cases who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2; controls were suspected cases who tested negative. We used multivariable logistic regression modelling to estimate the odds ratio of a positive COVID-19 test (RT-PCR; primary outcome), comparing health professionals and non-health professionals (primary exposure), and adjusting for the confounding effect of demographic, clinical, and epidemiological characteristics, and the modification effect of the self-reported epidemiological link (i.e., self-reported contact with a COVID-19 case or person with COVID-19-like symptoms).

Results

Health professionals had a 2-fold higher risk of a positive COVID-19 test result (aOR = 1.89, 95% CI 1.69-2.11). However, this association was strongly modified by the self-report of an epidemiological link such that, among cases who did report an epidemiological link, being a health professional was a protective factor (aOR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.82-0.98).

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that health professionals might be primarily infected by unknown contacts, plausibly in the healthcare setting, but also that their occupational exposure does not systematically translate into a higher risk of transmission. We suggest that this could be interpreted in light of different types and timing of exposure, and variability in risk perception and associated preventive behaviours.

A Multi-center Retrospective Analysis of Healthcare Workers after COVID-19: Epidemiological and Clinical Features

Objective: Concerns regarding the high-level risk of infection among healthcare workers (HCWs) increased after COVID19 was declared as a pandemic in March 2020. Inadequate infection control owing to a shortage of personal protective equipment or an inconvenient usage of infection control measures may play a significant role in transmission to/among healthcare personnel. The study aimed to determine the characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 patients who are healthcare workers along with possible transmission routes of COVID-19 in four different healthcare facilities in Istanbul. Methods: All hospital records were reviewed retrospectively. Demographic and clinical characteristics of HCWs were documented, and all infected HCWs were subjected to a phone-based mini-questionnaire and three-dimensional test (TDT). All statistical analyses were done using statistical packages SPSS Demo Ver 22 (SPSS Inc. Chicago, IL, USA). Results: Clinical features of COVID-19 were similar to the general public’s characteristics. The most frequent symptoms were cough, fever, and headache. HCWs with the O blood group tend to have asymptomatic COVID-19 infection. Hospital workers other than medical professionals have a lack of convenience of infection control measures. The median duration of PCR negativity was 9 days. HCWs who had a sore throat at the beginning of COVID-19 have a longer PCR-positive duration. Conclusion: Understanding the clinical features or characteristics of asymptomatic COVID-19 carriers may aid in the implementation of a feasible screening program for early detection. It is strongly advised that proper infection control precautions, education, and auditing of nonclinical staff be implemented. As a result, transmission among healthcare workers can be avoided.

Promoting Mental Health in Healthcare Workers in Hospitals Through Psychological Group Support With Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing During COVID-19 Pandemic: An Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Psychological support was provided by the Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing Integrative Group Treatment Protocol (EMDR-IGTP) within the hospitals in the Northern Italy in favor of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of treatment in terms of (a) symptomatology reduction related to peri- and post-traumatic stress; (b) clinical improvement over time; and (c) the maintenance of the achieved outcome over time.

METHODS

The population was composed of healthcare workers who spontaneously requested psychological intervention in both the first and the second emergency waves. Statistical analyses were carried out to highlight the differences in Impact of Event-Revised (IES-R) and Post-Traumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI) before and after the group intervention.

RESULTS

In both the first and the second waves, pre-treatment values are higher than post-treatment values for all dimensions of the IES-R. The results show that there are no significant differences between the first and the second wave with regard to the treatment effect. Healthcare workers maintained positive changes over time despite their prolonged exposure to an emergency and the possibility of retraumatization at the onset of a new emergency phase, irrespective of their working place. Healthcare workers who were treated in the first wave showed at the beginning of the second emergency wave less vulnerability and more resilience than those who were treated only in the second wave.Pre-treatment scores of healthcare workers affected by COVID-19 are discussed.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 had a significant impact on the well-being of healthcare workers who were working in hospitals. Psychological support in case of emergency is needed.

A SARS-CoV-2 Infection High-Uptake Program on Healthcare Workers and Cancer Patients of the National Cancer Institute of Naples, Italy

BACKGROUND

From the beginning of 2020, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) quickly spread worldwide, becoming the main problem for the healthcare systems. Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at higher risk of infection and can be a dangerous vehicle for the spread of the virus. Furthermore, cancer patients (CPs) are a vulnerable population, with an increased risk of developing severe and lethal forms of Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19). Therefore, at the National Cancer Institute of Naples, where only cancer patients are treated, a surveillance program aimed to prevent the hospital access of SARS-CoV-2 positive subjects (HCWs and CPs) was implemented. The study aims to describe the results of the monitoring activity for the SARS-CoV-2 spread among HCWs and CPs, from March 2020 to March 2021.

METHODS

This surveillance program included a periodic sampling through nasopharyngeal molecular swabs for SARS-CoV-2 (Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction, RT-PCR). CPs were submitted to the molecular test at least 48 h before hospital admission. Survival analysis and multiple logistic regression models were performed among HCWs and CPs to assess the main SARS-CoV-2 risk factors.

RESULTS

The percentages of HCWs tested with RT-PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2, according to the first and the second wave, were 79.7% and 91.7%, respectively, while the percentages for the CPs were 24.6% and 39.6%. SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 20 (1.7%) HCWs of the 1204 subjects tested during the first wave, and in 127 (9.2%) of 1385 subjects tested in the second wave (p < 0.001); among CPs, the prevalence of patients tested varied from 100 (4.6%) during the first wave to 168 (4.9%) during the second wave (p = 0.8). The multivariate logistic analysis provided a significant OR for nurses (OR = 2.24, 95% CI 1.23-4.08, p < 0.001) compared to research, administrative staff, and other job titles.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings show that the positivity rate between the two waves in the HCWs increased over time but not in the CPs; therefore, the importance of adopting stringent measures to contain the shock wave of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the hospital setting was essential. Among HCWs, nurses are more exposed to contagion and patients who needed continuity in oncological care for diseases other than COVID-19, such as suspected cancer.

COVID-19 infection and the broader impacts of the pandemic on healthcare workers

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) disease or COVID-19 pandemic is associated with more than 230 million cases and has challenged healthcare systems globally. Many healthcare workers (HCWs) have acquired the infection, often through their workplace, with a significant number dying. The epidemiology of COVID-19 infection in HCWs continues to be explored, with manifold exposure risks identified, leading to COVID-19 being recognised as an occupational disease for HCWs. The physical illness due to COVID-19 in HCWs is similar to the general population, with some HCWs experiencing a long-term illness, which may impact their ability to return to work. HCWs have also been affected by the immense workplace and psychosocial disruption caused by the pandemic. The impacts on the psychological well-being of HCWs globally have been profound, with high prevalence estimates for mental health symptoms, including emotional exhaustion. Globally, governments, healthcare organisations and employers have key responsibilities, including: to be better prepared for crises with comprehensive disaster response management plans, and to protect and preserve the health workforce from the physical and psychological impacts of the pandemic. While prioritising HCWs in vaccine rollouts globally has been critical, managing exposures and outbreaks occurring in healthcare settings remains challenging and continues to lead to substantial disruption to the health workforce. Safeguarding healthcare workforces during crises is critical as we move forward on the new path of 'COVID normal'.

Investigation of the relation between risk assessment of exposure and nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 transmission in healthcare workers: a prospective single-centre study

OBJECTIVES

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are among the risk groups for COVID-19. Determining transmission routes and risk levels during healthcare is of great importance in preventing nosocomial outbreaks. This study aimed to investigate the frequency of nosocomial transmission and factors affecting the transmission in HCW.

METHODS

HCWs admitted to the infectious diseases outpatient clinic due to contact with a COVID-19 patient and diagnosed with SARS-COV-2 by reverse-transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) between 20 March 2020 and 30 June 2020 were included in the study.

RESULTS

A total of 822 HCWs with 295 low, 284 intermediate and 243 high-risk exposures were included in the study. 27.1% of the HCWs were male, and the median age was 31.9 years (20-62). 89.5% of these patients were directly in charge of patient care. Of the index cases contacted, 72.6% were HCW, and 27.4% were non-HCW patients. Most of the risky exposure (51.7%) occurred in nurses. The occurrence frequency of high-risk exposure was lower in those assigned to direct patient care when compared with the occurrence frequency of moderate-risk or low-risk exposures (76.5%, 94.7, 95.3, respectively p<0.001). In most high-risk exposures (220/253), the index cases were HCWs (p<0.001). Symptoms were detected in 311 of the HCWs (37.8%) during the follow-up. The median time to perform SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR was 5.3 days (IQR) after the last risky exposure. In multivariate analysis, SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positivity was 5.65 times higher in HCWs not directly involved in patient care than HCWs who are not involved in patient care (95% CI 2.437 to 13.111; p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides particularly useful information on post-exposure COVID-19 follow-up and management of working schedules and procedures of HCWs.

Assessment of Risk Factors for Coronavirus Disease-2019 in Healthcare Workers: A Case–Control Study

Background and aims

With the rise of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) cases globally, the infection among frontline healthcare workers (HCWs) escalates many folds. There is, however, limited literature from low middle-income countries regarding risk factors for COVID-19 infection in HCWs. We conducted a case–control study to evaluate the risk factors of COVID-19 infection to HCWs.

Materials and methods

This case–control study was conducted in a designated COVID-19 hospital. Eighty-one HCWs involved in direct care of COVID-19 patients, identified as cases, and 266 were recruited as controls. Telephonic interviews with participants were conducted, and information regarding demographic variables, chemoprophylaxis, exposure to infected patients, and adherence to infection prevention and control (IPC) measures was collected.

Results

We observed a statistically significant difference in the number of times training session for IPC measures attended by HCWs (p = 0.02), performance of aerosol-generating medical procedures (AGMPs) (p <0.001), practices of donning and doffing of personal protective equipment (PPE) (p <0.001), hand hygiene (p <0.001), and decontamination of highly touched surfaces (p <0.001). Logistic regression analysis revealed if the decontamination of highly touched surfaces is decreased by one unit, the odds of getting COVID-19 infection is multiplied by a factor of 0.41 and AGMPs decrease the risk of being a case by 0.76.

Conclusion

This study highlighted that inadequate observation of IPC methods increases the risk of COVID-19 infection to frontline HCWs, whereas performance of AGMPs does not enhance the risk. In this study, HCWs undertaking an AGMP, because of concern of acquiring infection, were more diligent during procedures and hence had lesser infection.

How to cite this article

Kerai S, Singh R, Saxena KN, Desai SD. Assessment of Risk Factors for Coronavirus Disease-2019 in Healthcare Workers: A Case–Control Study. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(1):76–84.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection among healthcare workers in a tertiary public hospital in Curitiba, Brazil

BACKGROUND:

We aimed to describe the clinical characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among healthcare workers (HCWs) in Curitiba, Brazil.

METHODS:

Upper respiratory samples from 1077 HCWs were tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction from June 16, 2020 to December 9, 2020.

RESULTS:

Overall, 32.7% of HCWs were infected. The positivity rates in symptomatic and asymptomatic HCWs were 39.2% and 15.9%, respectively. Hospital departments categorized as high-risk for exposure had the highest number of infected HCWs.

CONCLUSIONS:

Early diagnosis and isolation of infected HCWs remain key in controlling SARS-CoV-2 transmission because HCWs in close contact with COVID-19 patients are more likely to be infected than those who are not.

Modes de transmission du SARS-CoV-2 : que sait-on actuellement ?

Des progrès remarquables ont été obtenus dans notre compréhension de la transmission du SARS-CoV-2 et la réduction de sa propagation. La prise en compte du risque majeur des formes asymptomatiques par le port universel du masque est une de ces avancées. Les données épidémiologiques (taux d'attaque et R₀) ainsi que l'accumulation de données en contexte clinique suggèrent une similitude de transmission du SARS-CoV-2 avec celle des autres virus respiratoires comme la grippe ou le SARS-CoV-1, un mode de transmission principal direct de personne à personne, à courte distance par les gouttelettes. La transmission aéroportée est possible mais rare, et ne semble se produire que dans des circonstances opportunistes, notamment lors de procédures médicales sur la sphère respiratoire de patients infectés, ou dans des conditions d'excrétion virale élevée en zone confinée mal ventilée. L'hygiène des mains et le port du masque sont les deux armes essentielles de prévention dans le contexte de la COVID-19.

Severe COVID-19-associated sepsis is different from classical sepsis induced by pulmonary infection with carbapenem-resistant klebsiella pneumonia (CrKP)

PURPOSE

COVID-19 is also referred to as a typical viral septic pulmonary infection by 2019-nCoV. However, little is known regarding its characteristics in terms of systemic inflammation and organ injury, especially compared with classical bacterial sepsis. This article aims to investigate the clinical characteristics and prognosis between COVID-19-associated sepsis and classic bacterial-induced sepsis.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, septic patients with COVID-19 in the intensive care unit (ICU) of a government-designed therapy center in Shenzhen, China between January 14, 2020 and March 10, 2020, and septic patients induced by carbapenem-resistant klebsiella pneumonia (CrKP) admitted to the ICU of the Second People's Hospital of Shenzhen, China between January 1, 2014 and October 30, 2019 were enrolled. Demographic and clinical parameters including comorbidities, critical illness scores, treatment, and laboratory data, as well as prognosis were compared between the two groups. Risk factors for mortality and survival rate were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression and survival curve, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 107 patients with COVID-19 and 63 patients with CrKP were enrolled. A direct comparison between the two groups demonstrated more serious degrees of primary lung injury following 2019-nCoV infection (indicated by lower PaO₂/FiO₂), but milder systemic inflammatory response, lower sequential organ failure assessment score and better functions of the organs like heart, liver, kidney, coagulation, and circulation. However, the acquired immunosuppression presented in COVID-19 patients was more severe, which presented as lower lymphocyte counts (0.8×10⁹/L vs. 0.9×10⁹/L). Moreover, the proportion of COVID-19 patients treated with corticosteroid therapy and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was larger compared with CrKP patients (78.5% vs. 38.1% and 6.5% vs. 0, respectively) who required less invasive mechanical ventilation (31.6% vs. 54.0%). The incidence of hospitalized mortality and length of ICU stay and total hospital stay were also lower or shorter in viral sepsis (12.1% vs. 39.7%, 6.5 days vs. 23.0 days and 21.0 days vs. 33.0 days, respectively) (all p < 0.001). Similar results were obtained after being adjusted by age, gender, comorbidity and PaO2/FiO2. Lymphocytopenia and high acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II scores were common risk factors for in-hospital death. While the death cases of COVID-19 sepsis mostly occurred at the later stages of patients' hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

Critical COVID-19 shares clinical characteristics with classical bacterial sepsis, but the degree of systemic inflammatory response, secondary organ damage and mortality rate are less severe. However, following 2019-nCoV infection, the level of immunosuppression may be increased and thus induce in more death at the later stage of patients' hospitalstay.

Infection and Severity of COVID-19 Infection Among Healthcare Workers: A Report from Egypt

Backgrounds & Aim: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a severe acute respiratory syndrome caused by Coronavirus. Knowledge of the fate of infection and risk factors among health care workers is essential to enforce special infection control measures. We aimed to determine the percentage of COVID-19 infection and the associated risk factors as well as the predictors of COVID- 19 among health care workers in Assiut University Hospital.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was performed that included one hundred health care workers that were confirmed by PCR to be COVID-19 cases admitted to Assiut University Hospital over six months between May 2020 and November 2020. All participants were subjected to thorough history taking and full clinical examination as well as investigations.

RESULTS

Out of the 100 HCWs enrolled in the study, 52% were males, 26% were obese, 68% were doctors, and 38% were from the medical department. Fourteen percent of healthcare workers were admitted to ICU, of which 93% were cured. The predictors for severity of cases were as follows: being a doctor OR (6.804) P=0.037, old age OR (1.179) P=0.000, and hospital stay OR (0.838) P=0.015.

CONCLUSION

Health care workers are at risk for severe COVID-19 infection. Being a doctor, old age, and duration of hospitalization were the predictors for the severity of cases of health care workers.

Occupational health surveillance of healthcare workers during COVID 19 pandemic: a narrative review

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Current literature has increasingly highlighted the risk of spreading the SARS-COV-2 infection in healthcare settings and showed the need for occupational health surveillance of HCWs during the current epidemiological emergency from COVID-19, as a preventive measure to minimize the spread of the infection. The purpose of this narrative review was to evaluate the literature and discover what the latest developments are about the management of the occupational health surveillance of healthcare workers (HCWs) during COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

We searched for publications in MEDLINE, Pubmed and Google Scholar using selected keywords. Each article was reviewed and categorized into one or more of the following three categories based on its subject matter: early diagnosis of COVID-19 in HCWs, detection of worker susceptibility to severe COVID-19, medical examination of HCWs returning to work after COVID-19.

RESULTS

Selected articles showed the RT-PCR test for Sars-CoV-2 as the gold standard to enable rapid identification of infected HCWs; an effective schedule of occupational health surveillance allows the identification of the susceptibility of the workers to severe Covid-19 and protect HCWs returning to work from the disease.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of the present narrative review show the need to strenghten the occupational health surveillance of HCWs during the current COVID-19 pandemic, with the aim not only to contain the spread of the infection in healthcare settings, but also to protect HCWs coming back to work after the disease.

SARS-CoV-2 infection: efficacy of extensive vaccination of the healthcare workforce in a large Italian hospital

BACKGROUND

A prospective observational study involved 13,787 Health Care Workers (HCWs) of a large hospital to assess the effectiveness of a SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine.

METHODS

The daily incidence of infections was estimated from 1st October 2020 to 30th April 2021 and compared with that of the province of Turin (2.26 million). In the middle of this period, a mass vaccination began among HCW, and its effect was assessed.

RESULTS

In the first half-period, 1,163 positive HCWs were observed, the average daily incidence rate per 100,000 being 79.58 (± 15.58; 95% CI) compared to 38.54 (± 5.96; 95% CI) in the general population (p<0.001). The vaccination campaign immunized 9,843 HCWs; among them, the average daily incidence was 14.23 (± 2.73; 95% CI) compared to 34.2 (± 2.95; 95% CI) in the province (p<0.001). Among fully vaccinated HCW, 59 cases were observed, giving rise to an incidence of 6.3 (± 2.66; 95% CI) much lower than in the province (p<0.001). In the second half of the observation period, the RR for HCWs compared to the province dropped from 2.07 (1.96 - 2.18; 95% CI; p<0.001) to 0.5 (0.42 - 0.58; 95% CI; p<0.001) and to 0.17 (0.13 - 0.22; 95% CI; p<0.001) for unvaccinated and vaccinated HCWs, respectively. The RR of vaccinate HCW was 0.43 (0.31 - 0.58; 95% CI; p<0.001) compared to unvaccinated. In the second half of the observation period, unvaccinated HCWs had a RR of 0.21 (0.18 - 0.25; 95% CI; p<0.001) as compared to the first one. A linear regression model (R2 = 0.87) showed that every percent increase in vaccinated HCWs lowered daily incidence by 0.94 (0.86 - 1.02; IC 95%; p<0.001). Vaccinated HCWs had a RR of 0.09 (0.07 - 0.12; 95% CI; p<0.001) compared to unvaccinated HCWs, which led to estimated effectiveness of the two-dose vaccine of 91 % (± 3 %; CI 95%) similar to that reported by the manufacturer.

Sleep Duration as the Main Indicator of Self-Rated Wellness and Health among Healthcare Workers Involved in the COVID-19 Pandemic

Objective: This study was performed during the COVID-19 pandemic to better understand the indicators of self-rated wellness and health among healthcare workers. Methods: Sleep pattern, mood status, nutritional condition, physical activity, habits and the subjective wellness and health index of the healthcare workers of a university affiliated hospital were surveyed. Paired t-tests were performed to compare the participants’ quality of life before and after the outbreak of COVID-19. Multivariable linear regression models with a backward elimination stepwise process determined the parameters that significantly correlated with self-reported wellness and health. Results: Of the 200 healthcare workers who participated in this study, 119 (60%) were female and 81 (40%) were male, with a mean (SD) age of 28.8 (5.9) years. We found that the COVID-19 pandemic significantly changed many lifestyle factors compared to the pre-pandemic states. The scores of sleep quality, mood status, pre-planned physical activity and social activity were reduced by 30%, 40%, 50% and 70%, respectively. The average night sleep duration before the pandemic was 7 h and 22 min, whereas during the pandemic it decreased to 6 h and 44 min, a debt of 38 min in sleep duration every night. As found by multivariable regression modelling, self-reported wellness and health before the pandemic period was associated with wake-up time, mood status, physical activity and diet. During the pandemic period, in addition to these variables, night sleep duration (β = 0.049, p = 0.049) and nap duration (β = 0.009, p = 0.01) were left in the final multivariable model and correlated significantly with the wellness and health index. Conclusion: COVID-19 has detrimentally affected healthcare workers’ well-being and quality of life. Sleep duration was the main factor correlated with subjective wellness and health index during the current COVID-19 pandemic.

Exposure risk and COVID-19 infection among frontline health-care workers: A single tertiary care centre experience

Background

There is limited data on frontline health-care workers and risk of COVID-19 from the developing nations. It is imperative to identify those at higher risk to prevent further transmission. We assessed the relationship between exposure risk and COVID-19 among front-line health-care workers who were primary contacts of a COVID-19 patient.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted among front-line health-care workers in a tertiary care hospital who were exposed to a COVID-19 patient. Information on demographic factors, medical history, exposure related factors and subsequently COVID-19 lab reports were collected. An exposure risk assessment designed collating various exposure related factors categorized the participants into those with high and low risk. We used logistic regression to estimate the odds ratio of our primary outcome, a positive COVID-19 test when the independent variables were exposure risk, age, gender and occupation.

Results

Among1858 frontline workers who were primary contacts of a COVID-19 patient at the hospital, 106 (5.7%) incident reports of a positive COVID-19 test were recorded. None of the exposure related factors had any significant association with a positive COVID-19 test. However, high exposure risk category was significantly associated with COVID-19 positive test at the end of quarantine.

Conclusion

COVID-19 was more frequent among front-line health-care workers who belonged to high exposure category. Education at different levels of service delivery at hospitals is required for best practice in order to prevent COVID-19 among health care providers. There is need to develop additional strategies to ensure that the information is translated in to practice.

Patterns and predictors of sick leave among Swedish non-hospitalized healthcare and residential care workers with Covid-19 during the early phase of the pandemic

Healthcare and residential care workers represent two occupational groups that have, in particular, been at risk of Covid-19, its long-term consequences, and related sick leave. In this study, we investigated the predictors of prolonged sick leave among healthcare and residential workers due to non-hospitalized Covid-19 in the early period of the pandemic. This study is based on a patient register (n = 3209) and included non-hospitalized healthcare or residential care service workers with a positive RT- PCR for SARS-CoV-2 (n = 433) between March and August 2020. Data such as socio-demographics, clinical characteristics, and the length of sick leave because of Covid-19 and prior to the pandemic were extracted from the patient’s electronic health records. Prolonged sick leave was defined as sick leave ≥ 3 weeks, based on the Swedish pandemic policy. A generalized linear model was used with a binary distribution, adjusted for age, gender, and comorbidity in order to predict prolonged sick leave. Of 433 (77% women) healthcare and residential care workers included in this study, 14.8% needed longer sick leave (> 3 weeks) due to Covid-19. Only 1.4% of the subjects were on sick leave because of long Covid. The risk of sick leave was increased two-fold among residential care workers (adjusted RR 2.14 [95% CI 1.31–3.51]). Depression/anxiety (adjusted RR 2.09 [95% CI 1.31–3.34]), obesity (adjusted RR 1.96 [95% CI 1.01–3.81]) and dyspnea at symptom onset (adjusted RR 2.47 [95% CI 1.55–3.92]), sick leave prior to the pandemic (3–12 weeks) (adjusted RR 2.23 [95% CI 1.21–4.10]) were associated with longer sick leave. From a public health perspective, considering occupational category, comorbidity, symptoms at onset, and sick leave prior to the pandemic as potential predictors of sick leave in healthcare may help prevent staff shortage.

Psychosocial support for providers working high-risk exposure settings during a pandemic: A critical discussion

Psychological first aid is a form of support designed to lessen disaster-related distress. In a pandemic, providers may need such support but with the high risk of exposure, such a program is offered only virtually. The research is scant for traditional post-disaster support and non-existent for virtual; therefore, by using related research this discussion considers the likelihood of providers accessing and benefiting from this program. The virtual platform is heralded as the responsible way to provide support in a pandemic but this standard may be ineffective and is inherently inequitable. As a global event, pandemics require containment strategies applicable on an international level; therefore, psychosocial support should also be developed with an international audience in mind. Online psychosocial support falls short of being such a strategy as it incorrectly assumes global internet access. Many low-income areas such as Sub-Saharan Africa will need support strategies which compliment local frontline staff and fit with community-driven initiatives, whereas wealthier countries may use a combination of onsite and online support. Provider psychosocial support needs in a pandemic, if articulated, are globally similar but how this support is offered requires contextually sensitive considerations not yet found in the literature.

Knowledge and attitude of dental professionals toward COVID-19 in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: a cross-sectional survey

Background

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is a life-threatening global pandemic. The dental profession is considered a high-risk group in the transmission of the responsible virus.

Objective

To assess the knowledge and attitude among dental professionals in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional study of dental graduates, interns, postgraduates, and dental faculty from May to July 2020. A standardized questionnaire was developed to assess knowledge and attitude of 650 participants. The questionnaire comprised 14 questions to assess general knowledge about COVID-19, 11 questions regarding knowledge about prevention of COVID-19 in dental practice, and 10 questions regarding the attitude toward preventing COVID-19.

Results

Among the study population, only 376 (57.8%) knew the causative virus for COVID-19. Only 425 (65.3%) knew about rinsing the mouth with an antimicrobial solution or 1% hydrogen peroxide before the dental procedure. Regarding the hand hygiene guidelines, 357 (54.9%) had knowledge of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and 377 (58.0%) about World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines. At the time of our survey, 72% of the participants showed sufficient knowledge, while 28% had low or insufficient knowledge about COVID-19.

Conclusion

While there was a lack of knowledge among dental professionals in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia about COVID-19, there was an excellent positive attitude toward preventing disease. Greater awareness is needed to control the spread of this disease.

2021 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations: Summary From the Basic Life Support; Advanced Life Support; Neonatal Life Support; Education, Implementation, and Teams; First Aid Task Forces; and the COVID-19 Working Group

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation initiated a continuous review of new, peer-reviewed published cardiopulmonary resuscitation science. This is the fifth annual summary of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations; a more comprehensive review was done in 2020. This latest summary addresses the most recently published resuscitation evidence reviewed by International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task force science experts. Topics covered by systematic reviews in this summary include resuscitation topics of video-based dispatch systems; head-up cardiopulmonary resuscitation; early coronary angiography after return of spontaneous circulation; cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the prone patient; cord management at birth for preterm and term infants; devices for administering positive-pressure ventilation at birth; family presence during neonatal resuscitation; self-directed, digitally based basic life support education and training in adults and children; coronavirus disease 2019 infection risk to rescuers from patients in cardiac arrest; and first aid topics, including cooling with water for thermal burns, oral rehydration for exertional dehydration, pediatric tourniquet use, and methods of tick removal. Members from 6 International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task forces have assessed, discussed, and debated the quality of the evidence, according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria, and their statements include consensus treatment recommendations or good practice statements. Insights into the deliberations of the task forces are provided in Justification and Evidence-to-Decision Framework Highlights sections. In addition, the task forces listed priority knowledge gaps for further research.

Analysis of Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes for Crisis Management during the Four Waves of the COVID-19 Pandemic

This study aims to analyze the patient characteristics and factors related to clinical outcomes in the crisis management of the COVID-19 pandemic in a field hospital. We conducted retrospective analysis of patient clinical data from March 2020 to August 2021 at the first university-based field hospital in Thailand. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate the factors associated with the field hospital discharge destination. Of a total of 3685 COVID-19 patients, 53.6% were women, with the median age of 30 years. General workers accounted for 97.5% of patients, while 2.5% were healthcare workers. Most of the patients were exposed to coronavirus from the community (84.6%). At the study end point, no patients had died, 97.7% had been discharged home, and 2.3% had been transferred to designated high-level hospitals due to their condition worsening. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, older patients with one or more underlying diseases who showed symptoms of COVID-19 and whose chest X-rays showed signs of pneumonia were in a worse condition than other patients. In conclusion, the university-based field hospital has the potential to fill acute gaps and prevent public agencies from being overwhelmed during crisis events.

Prevalence of severe adverse events among health professionals after receiving the first dose of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 coronavirus vaccine (Covishield) in Togo, March 2021

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines can cause adverse events that can lead to vaccine hesitancy. This study aims at estimating the prevalence of severe adverse events (SAEs) and their associated factors among health professionals vaccinated with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in Togo.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted from March 13th to 19th, 2021 in Togo among health professionals who received the first dose of the vaccine. An online self-administered questionnaire was used to collect sociodemographic and vaccination data. SAEs were defined as one resulting in hospitalization, medical consultation, or inability to work the day following the administration of the vaccine. Data analysis were performed using R© 4.0.1 software, and a 5% significance level was considered.

Results

A total of 1,639 health professionals (70.2% male) with a median age of 32 (interquartile range: 27-40) were enrolled. At least one adverse event was reported among 71.6% of participants (95% CI = [69.3-73.8]). The most commonly reported adverse events were injection site pain (91.0%), asthenia (74.3%), headache (68.7%), soreness (55.0%), and fever (47.5%). An increased libido was also reported in 3.0% of participants. Of the participants who experienced adverse events, 18.2% were unable to go to work the day after vaccination, 10.5% consulted a medical doctor, and 1.0% were hospitalized. The SAEs’ prevalence was 23.8% (95% CI = [21.8-25.9]). Being <30 years (AOR = 5.54; p<0.001), or 30-49 years (AOR = 3.62; p<0.001) and being female (AOR = 1.97; p<0.001) were associated with SAEs.

Conclusions

High prevalence of SAEs have been observed in health professionals in Togo after ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccination especially in young people and females. However, these data are reassuring as they inform on COVID-19 vaccines’ SAE management. Systematic prescription of antalgics or antipyretics could be proposed to young people who get vaccinated.

Infection prevention strategies are highly protective in COVID-19 units while main risks to healthcare professionals come from coworkers and the community

Background

Early evaluations of healthcare professional (HCP) COVID-19 risk occurred during insufficient personal protective equipment and disproportionate testing, contributing to perceptions of high patient-care related HCP risk. We evaluated HCP COVID-19 seropositivity after accounting for community factors and coworker outbreaks.

Methods

Prior to universal masking, we conducted a single-center retrospective cohort plus cross-sectional study. All HCP (1) seen by Occupational Health for COVID-like symptoms (regardless of test result) or assigned to (2) dedicated COVID-19 units, (3) units with a COVID-19 HCP outbreak, or (4) control units from 01/01/2020 to 04/15/2020 were offered serologic testing by an FDA-authorized assay plus a research assay against 67 respiratory viruses, including 11 SARS-CoV-2 antigens. Multivariable models assessed the association of demographics, job role, comorbidities, care of a COVID-19 patient, and geocoded socioeconomic status with positive serology.

Results

Of 654 participants, 87 (13.3%) were seropositive; among these 60.8% (N = 52) had never cared for a COVID-19 patient. Being male (OR 1.79, CI 1.05–3.04, p = 0.03), working in a unit with a HCP-outbreak unit (OR 2.21, CI 1.28–3.81, p < 0.01), living in a community with low owner-occupied housing (OR = 1.63, CI = 1.00–2.64, p = 0.05), and ethnically Latino (OR 2.10, CI 1.12–3.96, p = 0.02) were positively-associated with COVID-19 seropositivity, while working in dedicated COVID-19 units was negatively-associated (OR 0.53, CI = 0.30–0.94, p = 0.03). The research assay identified 25 additional seropositive individuals (78 [12%] vs. 53 [8%], p < 0.01).

Conclusions

Prior to universal masking, HCP COVID-19 risk was dominated by workplace and community exposures while working in a dedicated COVID-19 unit was protective, suggesting that infection prevention protocols prevent patient-to-HCP transmission.

Article summary

Prior to universal masking, HCP COVID-19 risk was dominated by workplace and community exposures while working in a dedicated COVID-19 unit was protective, suggesting that infection prevention protocols prevent patient-to-HCP transmission.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13756-021-01031-5.

SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in high-risk health care workers in a Belgian general hospital: evolution from the first wave to the second

Health care workers (HCWs) are at the frontline for combatting the ongoing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. To describe recent or past infections, the novel development of serological assays enabled the assessment of the immune response developed in coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Here, we investigate SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in high-risk HCWs in a Belgian general hospital after both the first and the second waves. Three different immunoassays were used to determine immune response to SARS-CoV-2 in volunteer HCWs who worked in at least one COVID-19-dedicated ward [emergency department, intensive care unit (ICU) and internal medicine department] in our institution from 8 May 2020 to 19 May 2020 (n = 267) and from 18 January 2021 to 8 February 2021 (n = 189). Risk factors for seropositivity were also assessed using a questionnaire filled out by all participants. We report a steep increase in seroprevalence after the second wave and report a higher seropositivity in HCWs than in the general population. Furthermore, we show that ICU personnel and especially nurses exhibit a proportionally lower SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence. This study documents the rapid increase in SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in highly exposed HCWs in a context of high viral circulation prior to vaccination campaigns. Most importantly, it suggests a lower occupational risk in ICU and illustrates the role of diagnostic labeling and use of personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Epidemiological Characteristics of Sporadic Nosocomial COVID-19 Infections From June 2020 to June 2021 in China: An Overview of Vaccine Breakthrough Infection Events

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has wreaked havoc on millions of people around the world. Although China quickly brought the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) under control, there have been several sporadic outbreaks in different regions of China since June 2020. This article described the chronological nosocomial COVID-19 infection events related to several sporadic outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2 in different regions of China. We have reported epidemiological characteristics and management measures of sporadic nosocomial COVID-19 infections from June 2020 to June 2021 and specially focused on the domestic COVID-19 breakthrough infection in China, such as domestic COVID-19 breakthrough infection—a vaccinated healthcare professional working in the isolation ward of a designated COVID-19 hospital.

Investigating Adherence to COVID-19 Vaccination and Serum Antibody Concentration among Hospital Workers-The Experience of an Italian Private Hospital

SARS-CoV-2 transmission has been high, especially among healthcare workers worldwide during the first wave. Vaccination is recognized as the most effective approach to combat the pandemic, but hesitation to get vaccinated represents an obstacle. Another important issue is the duration of protection after administration of the full vaccination cycle. Based on these premises, we conducted a study to evaluate vaccination adherence and the anti-S antibodies levels among hospital workers, from January to March, 2021. To assess adherence, an anonymous questionnaire was used. Anti-S antibody levels were obtained from the monitoring serological sample database. In total, 56.2% of the unvaccinated people did not report a previous infection from COVID-19. Among those who have not been vaccinated, 12.5% showed distrust against the vaccine, 8.3% stated to have received contraindications to the vaccination, and 6.3% did not report any choice. Analyzing anti-S antibody levels, only one person was found to have a value below the lower cut-off, two weeks, and three months after receiving their second dose. One was below the cut-off after two weeks, and then above the same cut-off after three months. The results of our survey should be seen as a stimulus to further sensitize hospital staff to the importance of vaccination and pay attention to anti-S antibody levels monitoring.

Hospital-Acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection among patients admitted to a university hospital

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has become a public health emergency, as it is a highly contagious disease, health services had to adapt to the high demand for hospitalizations in order to contain hospital outbreaks. We aimed to identify the impact of nosocomial transmission of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 among inpatients at a university hospital in São Paulo, Brazil. Among 455 inpatients diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 in March–May, 2020, nosocomial infection was implicated in 42 (9.2%), of whom 23 (54.7%) died. becoming routine, especially when community transmission occur with high levels of incidence. It was possible to observe with this study that the nosocomial transmission by SARS-CoV-2 was present even with these measures instituted, and some of the damages caused by these infections are intangible.

COVID-19 exposure in SARS-CoV-2-seropositive hospital staff members during the first pandemic wave at Strasbourg University Hospital, France

Objectives

Strasbourg University Hospital faced an important COVID-19 first wave from early March 2020. We performed a longitudinal prospective cohort study to describe clinical and virological data, exposure history to COVID-19, and adherence to strict hygiene standards during the first pandemic wave in 1497 workers undergoing a SARS-CoV-2 serological test at our hospital, with a follow up of serology result three months later.

Patients and Methods

A total of 1497 patients were enrolled from April 6 to May 7, 2020. Antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 was measured, and COVID-19 exposure routes were analyzed according to SARS-CoV-2 serological status.

Results

A total of 515 patients (34.4%) were seropositive, mainly medical students (13.2%) and assistant nurses (12.0%). A history of COVID-19 exposure in a professional and/or private setting was mentioned by 83.1% of seropositive subjects (P < 0.05; odds ratio [OR]: 2.5; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.8–3.4). COVID-19 exposure factors associated with seropositive status were non-professional exposure (OR: 1.9, 95% CI: 1.3–2.7), especially outside the immediate family circle (OR: 2.2, 95% CI: 1.2–3.9) and contact with a COVID-19 patient (OR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.1–2.2). Among professionally exposed workers, systematic adherence to strict hygiene standards was well observed, except for the use of a surgical mask (P < 0.05, OR: 1.9, 95% CI: 1.3–2.8). Of those who reported occasionally or never wearing a surgical mask, nurses (25.7%), assistant nurses (16.2%), and medical students (11.7%) were predominant.

Conclusion

Infection of staff members during the first pandemic wave in our hospital occurred after both professional and private COVID-19 exposure, underlining the importance of continuous training in strict hygiene standards.

2021 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations: Summary From the Basic Life Support; Advanced Life Support; Neonatal Life Support; Education, Implementation, and Teams; First Aid Task Forces; and the COVID-19 Working Group

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation initiated a continuous review of new, peer-reviewed published cardiopulmonary resuscitation science. This is the fifth annual summary of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations; a more comprehensive review was done in 2020. This latest summary addresses the most recently published resuscitation evidence reviewed by International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task force science experts. Topics covered by systematic reviews in this summary include resuscitation topics of video-based dispatch systems; head-up cardiopulmonary resuscitation; early coronary angiography after return of spontaneous circulation; cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the prone patient; cord management at birth for preterm and term infants; devices for administering positive-pressure ventilation at birth; family presence during neonatal resuscitation; self-directed, digitally based basic life support education and training in adults and children; coronavirus disease 2019 infection risk to rescuers from patients in cardiac arrest; and first aid topics, including cooling with water for thermal burns, oral rehydration for exertional dehydration, pediatric tourniquet use, and methods of tick removal. Members from 6 International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task forces have assessed, discussed, and debated the quality of the evidence, according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria, and their statements include consensus treatment recommendations or good practice statements. Insights into the deliberations of the task forces are provided in Justification and Evidence-to-Decision Framework Highlights sections. In addition, the task forces listed priority knowledge gaps for further research.

Magnifying the importance of collecting race, ethnicity, industry and occupation data during covid-19 pandemic

The contagiousness of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) led to the imposition of historical lockdowns in various countries. No scientific mind could have made accurate projections of the tremendous impact that COVID-19 would have on nations, communities, and the global-wide economy. Meanwhile, millions of workers have lost their jobs, while healthcare workers are overwhelmed and are reaching a state of mental and physical exhaustion. With the uncontrollable spread, researchers have been working to identify factors associated with COVID-19. In this regard, race, ethnicity, industry, and occupation have been found to be predominant factors of interest. However, unfortunately, the unavailability of such information has been a difficult reality. Since race, ethnicity, and employment are essential social determinants of health and could serve as potential risk-factors for COVID-19, collecting such information may offer important context for prioritising vulnerable groups. Thus, this perspective aims to highlight the importance and need for collecting race, ethnicity, and occupation-related data to track and treat the racial/ethnic groups that have been most strongly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Collecting such data will provide valuable insights and help public health officials recognise workplace-related outbreaks and evaluate the odds of various ethnic groups and professions contracting COVID-19.

[Nurses' Experience with Caring for COVID-19 Patients in a Negative Pressure Room Amid the Pandemic Situation]

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to explore nurses' experience with caring for COVID-19 patients in a negative pressure room amid the spread of the pandemic.

METHODS

This study was a qualitative research, and focus group interviews were used to collect data. Three focus groups comprising 19 nurses were interviewed from February 17 to 25, 2021. All interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim with the consent of the participants. The verbatim transcripts were scrutinized using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Two main themes emerged from the analysis: 'Struggling in an isolated space' and 'Limitations of nursing infrastructure and system'. The nurses caring for COVID-19 patients experienced anxiety and fear about the infection, physical exhaustion, emotional burnout, and a sense of duty as a nurse. They also acknowledged the lack of guidelines, increased task and burden, limitations of nursing care, and the demand for improving the limitations of the nursing system.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study demonstrate that nurses caring for COVID-19 patients encounter physical and emotional problems within the limited healthcare system. The study suggests that comprehensive interventions are needed for nurses. Furthermore, detailed guidelines, strengthening of nursing personnel, and improvements to the nursing system are vital to effectively cope with the pandemic. The government and medical institutions should be aware of the needs of nurses and what they are going through, and make efforts to improve the quality of life of healthcare workers and create a safe healthcare environment.

Occurrence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare personnel: results from an early systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

SARS-CoV-2 infection has become a global public health concern globally. Even though Healthcare Workers (HCWs) are supposedly at increased risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection, to date no pooled evidence has been collected.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched online electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, medRxiv.org for pre-prints) for all available contribution (up to May 20, 2019). Two Authors independently screened articles and extracted the data. The pooled prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 was analyzed using the random-effects model. The possible sources of heterogeneity were analyzed through subgroup analysis, and meta-regression.

RESULTS

The overall pooled prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 was 3.5% (95%CI 1.8-6.6) for studies based on molecular assays, 5.5% (95%CI 2.1-14.1) for studies based on serological assays, and 6.5% (95%CI 2.5-15.6) for point-of-care capillary blood tests. Among subgroups, serological tests identified higher risk for SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity in physicians than in nurses (OR 1.436, 95%CI 1.026 to 2.008). Regression analysis indicated the possible presence of publication bias only for molecular tests (t -3.3526, p-value 0.002648).

CONCLUSIONS

The overall pooled prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 was lower than previously expected, but available studies were affected by significant heterogeneity, and the molecular studies by significant publication bias. Therefore, further high-quality research in the field is warranted.

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

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.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Spine Surgery in Central Europe: A Questionnaire-Based Study

OBJECTIVE

The severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) crisis led to many restrictions in daily life and protective health care actions in all hospitals to ensure basic medical supply. This questionnaire-based study among spinal surgeons in central Europe was generated to investigate the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and consecutively the differences in restrictions in spinal surgery units.

METHODS

An online survey consisting of 32 questions on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the related restrictions on spinal surgery units was created. Surgical fellows and consultants from neurosurgical, orthopedic, and trauma departments were included in our questionnaire-based study with the help of Austrian, German, and Swiss scientific societies.

RESULTS

In a total of 406 completed questionnaires, most participants reported increased preventive measurements at daily clinical work (split-team work schedule [44%], cancellation of elective and/or semielective surgeries [91%]), reduced occurrence of emergencies (91%), decreased outpatient work (45%) with increased telemedical care (73%) and a reduced availability of medical equipment (75%) as well as medical staff (30%). Although most physicians considered the political restrictive decisions to be not suitable, most considered the medical measures to be appropriate.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in comparable restrictive measures for spinal surgical departments in central Europe. Elective surgical interventions were reduced, providing additional resources reserved for severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2-positive patients. Although similar restrictions were introduced in most participants' departments, the supply of personal protective equipment and the outpatient care remained insufficient and should be re-evaluated intensively for future global health care crises.

Symptomatic post-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 infections in healthcare workers- A multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

During the COVID-19 vaccination program in India, the healthcare workers were given the first priority. There are concerns regarding the occurrence of breakthrough infections after vaccination. We aimed to investigate the effictiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in preventing and reducing the severity of post-vaccination infections.

METHODS

This retrospective test-negative case-control study examined 28342 vaccinated healthcare workers for symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections between January 16 to June 15, 2021. They worked at 43 Apollo Group hospitals in 24 Indian cities. These cohorts received either ChAdOx nCOV-19 (Recombinant) or the whole virion inactivated Vero cell vaccines. Various demographic, vaccination related and clinical parameters were evaluated.

RESULTS

Symptomatic symptomatic post-vaccination infections occurred in a small number of vaccinated cohorts (5.07%, p < 0.001), and these were predominantly mild and did not result in hospitalization (p < 0.0001), or death. Both vaccines provided similar protection, with symptomatic infections in 5.11% and 4.58%, following ChAdOx nCOV-19 (Recombinant) and the whole virion inactivated Vero cell vaccines, respectively (p < 0.001). Nursing and Clinical staff and cohorts >50 years contracted more infections (p < 0.001). Two-dose vaccination has significantly lower odds of developing symptomatic infection (0.83, 95%CI - 0.72 to 0.97). Maximum infections occurred during the peak of the second COVID-19 wave from mid-April to May 2021 (p < 0.001). No significant difference existed in the infection between sex, vaccine type, and the number of vaccine doses received (p ≥ 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Symptomatic infections occurred in a small percentage of healthcare workers after COVID vaccination. Vaccination protected them from not only infection but also severe disease.

Disaster relief supply chain design for personal protection equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic

The global epidemic caused by novel coronavirus continues to be a crisis in the world and a matter of concern. The way the epidemic has wreaked havoc on the international level has become difficult for the healthcare systems to supply adequately personal protection equipment for medical personnel all over the globe. In this paper, considering the COVID-19 outbreak, a multi-objective, multi-product, and multi-period model for the personal protection equipment demands satisfaction aiming to optimize total cost and shortage, simultaneously, is developed. The model is embedded with instances and validated by both modern and classic multi-objective metaheuristic algorithms. Moreover, the Taguchi method is exploited to set the metaheuristic into their best performances by finding their parameters' optimum level. Furthermore, fifteen test examples are designed to prove the established PPE supply chain model and tuned algorithms' applicability. Among the test examples, one is related to a real case study in Iran. Finally, metaheuristics are evaluated by a series of related metrics through different statistical analyses. It can be concluded from the obtained results that solution methods are practical and valuable to achieve the efficient shortage level and cost.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 Seropositivity in South-Central Uganda, During 2019 - 2021

Background: Globally, key subpopulations such as healthcare workers (HCWs) have a higher risk of contracting SARS-CoV-2. In Uganda, limited access to personal protective equipment amidst lack of clarity on the extent and pattern of the community disease burden may exacerbate this situation. We assessed SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence among high-risk sub-populations in South-central Uganda, including HCWs, persons within the general population previously reporting experiencing key COVID-19 like symptoms (fever, cough, loss of taste and smell) and archived plasma specimens collected between October 2019 â€" 18 th March 2020, prior to confirmation of COVID-19 in Uganda. Methods: From November 2020 - January 2021, we collected venous blood from HCWs at selected health facilities in South-Central Uganda and from population-cohort participants who reported specific COVID-19 like symptoms in a prior phone-based survey conducted (between May to August 2020) during the first national lockdown. Pre-lockdown plasma collected (between October 2019 and March 18 th , 2020) from individuals considered high risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection was retrieved. Specimens were tested for antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 using the CoronaChek TM rapid COVID-19 IgM/IgG lateral flow test assay. IgM only positive samples were confirmed using a chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA) (Architect AdviseDx SARS-CoV-2 IgM) which targets the spike protein. SARS-CoV-2 exposure was defined as either confirmed IgM, both IgM and IgG or sole IgG positivity. Results: The seroprevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in HCWs was 21.1% [95%CI: 18.2-24.2]. Of the phone-based survey participants, 11.9% [95%CI: 8.0-16.8] had antibodies to SARS-CoV-2. Among 636 pre-lockdown plasma specimens, 1.7% [95%CI: 0.9-3.1] were reactive. Conclusions: Findings suggest a high seroprevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 among HCWs and substantial exposure in persons presenting with specific COVID-19 like symptoms in the general population of South-central Uganda. Based on current limitations in serological test confirmation, it remains unclear whether pre-lockdown seropositivity implies prior SARS-CoV-2 exposure in Uganda.

Anaesthetic challenges in a child with perforated appendicitis and COVID-19 Co-Infection: A case report

Background

The deadly coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) wreaked havoc globally in early 2020 and caused lives to a standstill. Healthcare workers (HCW) handling patients infected with COVID-19 wore protective equipment to defend themselves from cross infection and curbing further spread. Nevertheless, these do hamper their dexterity, especially during surgical procedures.

Case presentation

A child presented to our centre needing an emergency open appendicectomy during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in June 2021. Prior to the surgery, her initial test for COVID-19 was negative but subsequently became positive on the second test. Fortunately, all HCW during the care for the patient, donned full personal protective equipment (PPE), and avoided cross-infection.

Discussion

HCW handling patients with COVID-19 should wear adequate PPE to. However, these pose detrimental effects to their dexterity during routine care of such patients. Good teamwork and communication among HCW and parents are important during the safe management of a young child with COVID-19.

Conclusion

HCW should have low index of suspicion of COVID-19 in children with upper respiratory tract infection. Prompt and pro-active measures should be rapidly taken to prevent exposure and co-infection. Wearing multi layers of PPE do negatively affect the mood and agility of HCW handling young children with COVID-19. Thus, they should practice good team work, receive regular simulation and scenario-based training to be better prepared for pressurised situations.

•

Challenges faced during management of a child in a resource limited nation during COVID-19 pandemic.

•

Healthcare workers are at risks of contracting COVID-19 infections from patients.

•

Various methods were implemented to curb the spread of COVID-19 in the operating theatre and hospital.

SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in healthcare workers of a teaching hospital in a highly endemic region in the Netherlands after the first wave: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

To study the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among hospital healthcare workers after the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, and provide more knowledge in the understanding of the relationship between infection, symptomatology and source of infection.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional study in healthcare workers.

SETTING

Northern Limburg, the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

All employees of VieCuri Medical Center (n=3300) were invited to enrol in current study. In total 2507 healthcare workers participated.

INTERVENTION

Between 22 June 2020 and 3 July 2020, participants provided venous blood samples voluntarily, which were tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies with the Wantai SARS-CoV-2 Ig total ELISA test. Work characteristics, exposure risks and prior symptoms consistent with COVID-19 were gathered through a survey.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Proportion of healthcare workers with positive SARS-CoV-2 serology.

RESULTS

The overall seroprevalence was 21.1% (n=530/2507). Healthcare workers between 17 and 30 years were more likely to have SARS-CoV-2 antibodies compared with participants >30 years. The probability of having SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was comparable for healthcare workers with and without direct patient (OR 1.42, 95% CI 0.86 to 2.34) and COVID-19 patient contact (OR 1.62, 95% CI 0.80 to 3.33). On the contrary, exposure to COVID-19 positive coworkers (OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.93) and household members (OR 6.09, 95% CI 2.23 to 16.64) was associated with seropositivity. Of those healthcare workers with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, 16% (n=85/530) had not experienced any prior COVID-19-related symptoms. Only fever and anosmia were associated with seropositivity (OR 1.90, 95% CI 1.42 to 2.55 and OR 10.51, 95% CI 7.86 to 14.07).

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare workers caring for hospitalised COVID-19 patients were not at an increased risk of infection, most likely as a result of taking standard infection control measures into consideration. These data show that compliance with infection control measures is essential to control secondary transmission and constrain the spread of the virus.

The Interactive Effect of COVID-19 Risk and Hospital Measures on Turnover Intentions of Healthcare Workers: A Time-Lagged Study

COVID-19 has led to a global health emergency worldwide. As a result, healthcare workers undergo distress mainly due to the perceived risk of contracting the virus. Such stress might cause them to leave their jobs. In this context, the current study: (1) introduced the concept of perceived risk of COVID-19 and measured it by adapting and validating an existing scale available on the risk of infectious diseases and (2) investigated its outcomes, underlying mechanisms, and boundary conditions for healthcare workers. With the support of conservation of resources theory, the current study aimed to investigate the association between perceived risk of COVID-19 and turnover intentions among healthcare workers, particularly Doctors, nurses, and paramedics staff. This study also aimed to investigate the mediating role of perceived fear of COVID-19 between perceived risk of COVID-19 and turnover intention. The current study also aimed to examine the buffering role that perceptions of hospital measures against COVID-19 could have on diminishing workers’ turnover intentions. Data were collected through a three time-lag email survey of healthcare workers in Pakistan (N = 178) who currently provide treatment to COVID-19 patients. The results supported the hypothesis that perceived risk of COVID-19 enhances fear of COVID-19 among healthcare workers and, consequently, their turnover intentions. Perceptions of hospital measures against COVID-19 weaken the relationship between perceived risk of COVID-19 and fear of COVID-19, which reduces turnover intentions of health care workers. The current study offers implications for theory, practitioners, and society.

Mental health and resilience during the coronavirus pandemic: A machine learning approach

Objective

This study explored risk and resilience factors of mental health functioning during the coronavirus disease (COVID‐19) pandemic.

Methods

A sample of 467 adults (M age = 33.14, 63.6% female) reported on mental health (depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder [PTSD], and somatic symptoms), demands and impacts of COVID‐19, resources (e.g., social support, health care access), demographics, and psychosocial resilience factors.

Results

Depression, anxiety, and PTSD rates were 44%, 36%, and 23%, respectively. Supervised machine learning models identified psychosocial factors as the primary significant predictors across outcomes. Greater trauma coping self‐efficacy and forward‐focused coping, but not trauma‐focused coping, were associated with better mental health. When accounting for psychosocial resilience factors, few external resources and demographic variables emerged as significant predictors.

Conclusion

With ongoing stressors and traumas, employing coping strategies that emphasize distraction over trauma processing may be warranted. Clinical and community outreach efforts should target trauma coping self‐efficacy to bolster resilience during a pandemic.

Impact of social contacts on SARS-CoV-2 exposure among healthcare workers

BACKGROUND

Healthcare workers (HCWs) have an increased risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection due to occupational exposure. Strict measures generally focus on the patient-to-HCW contacts. However, interactions between the HCWs also pose a high risk for SARS-CoV-2 exposure.

AIMS

This study was aimed to investigate the effect of social contacts on the level of SARS-CoV-2 exposure risk among workers by broadening the current risk assessment algorithm.

METHODS

Contact tracing records of the workers in a large university hospital between 19th March and 31st December 2020 were analysed. Multivariate conditional logistic regression models were estimated to evaluate factors associated with high-risk exposure for contacts among workers.

RESULTS

Of the 329 exposed clusters, 260 (79%) were HCW-to-HCW contacted clusters. High-risk exposure was higher in the HCW-to-HCW contacts (44%), when compared to the patient-to-HCW contacts (5%) (P < 0.001). A total of 1827 HCWs contacted a laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-positive co-worker. Among the HCW-to-HCW contacts, high-risk exposure was higher in the support staff (49%, P < 0.001), in non-patient care settings (47%, P < 0.001) and in the social contacts (57%, P < 0.001). Social contacts between workers increased the high-risk exposure (adjusted odds ratio: 3.50, 95% confidence interval 2.62-4.69) in multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant association between social contacts among workers and high-risk exposure of SARS-CoV-2 was observed. The results of the study emphasize the need for policies regarding the improved protection of HCWs in social settings in addition to patient care services.

Organizational factors associated with health worker protection during the COVID-19 pandemic in four provinces of South Africa

BACKGROUND

Health workers, in short supply in many low-and-middle-income countries, are at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. This study aimed to assess how South Africa, prepared to protect its health workers from SARS-CoV-2 infection.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study design applying participatory action research in four provinces of South Africa. A semi-structured questionnaire and a qualitative observational HealthWISE walkthrough risk assessment was carried out to collect data on occupational safety and health (OSH) systems in 45 hospitals across four provinces to identify factors associated with health worker protection. Adapting the International Labour Organization (ILO) and World Health Organization (WHO) HealthWISE tool, we compiled compliance scores through walkthrough surveys. We used logistic regression to analyze the relationship between readiness indicators and the actual implementation of protective measures.

RESULTS

We found that health facilities in all four provinces had SARS-CoV-2 plans for the general population but no comprehensive OHS plan for health workers. Provincial Departments of Health (PDoH) varied in how they were organized to respond: Provinces A and D had an OSH SARS-CoV-2 provincial coordinating team and a dedicated budget for occupational health; Province A had an occupational health doctor and nurse; while Province B had an occupational health nurse; Province A and D PDoHs had functional OSH committees; and Province D had conducted some health risk assessments specific to SARS-CoV-2. However, none of the assessed health facilities had an acceptable HealthWISE compliance score (≥ 75%) due to poor ventilation and inadequate administrative control measures. While the supply of personal protective equipment was adequate, it was often not worn properly. Our study found that having an OSH SARS-CoV-2 policy was significantly associated with higher personal protective equipment and ventilation scores. In addition, our analysis showed that hospitals with higher compliance scores had significantly lower infection rates (IRR 0.98; 95% CI: 0.97, 0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite some initial preparedness, greater effort to protect health workers is still warranted. Low-and-middle-income countries may need to pay more attention to OSH systems and consider using tools, such as ILO/WHO HealthWISE tool, to protect health workers' health.

Risk assessment for COVID-19 transmission at household level in sub-Saharan Africa: evidence from DHS

Household habitat conditions matter for diseases transmission and control, especially in the case of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19). These conditions include availability and adequacy of sanitation facilities, and number of persons per room. Despite this, little attention is being paid to these conditions as a pathway to understanding the transmission and prevention of COVID-19, especially in Africa, where household habitat conditions are largely suboptimal. This study assesses household sanitation and isolation capacities to understand the COVID-19 transmission risk at household level across Africa. We conducted a secondary analysis of the Demographic and Health Surveys of 16 African countries implemented between 2015 and 2018 to understand the status of households for prevention of COVID-19 transmission in home. We assessed handwashing capacity and self-isolation capacity using multiple parameters, and identified households with elderly persons, who are most at risk of the disease. We fitted two-level random intercept logit models to explore independent relationships among the three indicators, while controlling for the selected explanatory variables. Handwashing capacity was highest in Tanzania (48.2%), and lowest in Chad (4.2%), varying by household location (urban or rural), as well as household wealth. Isolation capacity was highest in South Africa (77.4%), and lowest in Ethiopia (30.9%). Senegal had the largest proportion of households with an elderly person (42.1%), while Angola (16.4%) had the lowest. There were strong, independent relationships between handwashing and isolation capacities in a majority of countries. Also, strong associations were found between isolation capacity and presence of older persons in households. Household capacity for COVID-19 prevention varied significantly across countries, with those having elderly household members not necessarily having the best handwashing or isolation capacity. In view of the age risk factors of COVID-19 transmission, and its dependence on handwashing and isolation capacities of households, each country needs to use the extant information on its risk status to shape communication and intervention strategies that will help limit the impact of the disease in its population across Africa.

Behaviours and experiences of nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic in Turkey: A mixed methods study

AIM

The aim of this work is to present behaviours and experiences of nurses in Turkey during the current coronavirus pandemic.

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus pandemic leads to difficulties for most health care workers, especially for nurses who mostly accompany patients and are on the front line.

METHODS

In the study, a parallel mixed pattern converging quantitative and qualitative research methods was used.

RESULTS

The model revealed that 41 years old or older, diabetic, female, single professionals, working in the pandemic department took more personal measures. Five main themes appeared regarding the experiences of the nurses during the pandemic period: (1) psychological and mental strain; (2) personal protective equipment; (3) organizational, physical, and social strains; (4) change in professional values; (5) turning the crisis into an opportunity.

CONCLUSIONS

Personal measures are associated with the risk status. There is a need to protect nurses with significant measures by providing psychosocial support, meeting their basic needs, and preventing all complications likely to occur due to increasing workload.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT

More efforts should be made to ensure good work, fair treatment, no tolerance for discrimination, and equal compensation conditions.

The Silent Pandemic: The Psychological Burden on Frontline Healthcare Workers during COVID-19

This narrative review explores the full scope of harmful psychological effects of the COVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease of 2019) pandemic on FLHCWs (Frontline healthcare workers). Additionally, we highlight the risk factors for worse outcomes. A literature review identified 24 relevant papers included in this synthesis. The majority of studies reported a high number of mental health conditions in HCWs (Healthcare workers) overall. Working in the frontline setting was repeatedly identified as an independent risk factor for poorer mental health. Additional risk factors, such as gender, occupational pressure, and low level of support from hospital administration, family, and the community, were also commonly identified. In the past, defined interventions have been shown to mitigate the psychological impact of high-stress situations on frontline workers. This review is aimed at identifying individuals at higher risk to help effectively target preventative measures in future stress situations in our healthcare system.

In Vitro Evaluation of the Virucidal Activity of Different Povidone-Iodine Formulations Against Murine and Human Coronaviruses

Introduction

Polyvinylpyrrolidone–iodine (PVP-I) demonstrates broad-spectrum anti-infective activity and is available in different formulations for oral rinse and topical use in medical and personal care settings. The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has underscored the need to supplement available preventive strategies.

Methods

We assessed virucidal activity of PVP-I formulations, including 0.5% (w/v) solution, 5.0% (w/v) solution, 7.5% (w/v) scrub, and 10.0% (w/v) solution, versus placebos when challenged with coronaviruses in two in vitro studies. Murine coronavirus strain A59 (American Type Culture Collection [ATCC]^® VR-764™), human coronavirus strain OC43 (ZeptoMetrix Corp. #0810024CF), human coronavirus strain NL63 (ZeptoMetrix Corp. #0810228CF), and human coronavirus strain 229E (ATCC^® VR-740™) were used as surrogates for SARS-CoV-2. Both studies used the American Society for Testing and Materials in vitro time-kill method.

Results

All active PVP-I formulations in study 1 demonstrated virucidal activity at 15 s, with mean log₁₀ reduction of greater than 4.56 or greater than 99.99% inactivation; a cytotoxic effect against the National Collection of Type Cultures clone 1469 host cells was observed with 5.0% (w/v) solution, 7.5% (w/v) scrub, and 10.0% (w/v) solution. Active PVP-I formulations in study 2 demonstrated effective virucidal activity against coronaviruses in less than 15 s; log₁₀ reduction in viral titer for each coronavirus strain was consistently higher for 10.0% (w/v) solution and 0.5% (w/v) solution versus 7.5% (w/v) scrub.

Conclusion

Both studies demonstrated in vitro virucidal activity of PVP-I formulations when challenged with SARS-CoV-2 surrogate coronaviruses. Although promising, further investigations are needed to evaluate SARS-CoV-2 inactivation.

COVID-19 Critical Care Simulations: An International Cross-Sectional Survey

Objective: To describe the utility and patterns of COVID-19 simulation scenarios across different international healthcare centers. Methods: This is a cross-sectional, international survey for multiple simulation centers team members, including team-leaders and healthcare workers (HCWs), based on each center's debriefing reports from 30 countries in all WHO regions. The main outcome measures were the COVID-19 simulations characteristics, facilitators, obstacles, and challenges encountered during the simulation sessions. Results: Invitation was sent to 343 simulation team leaders and multidisciplinary HCWs who responded; 121 completed the survey. The frequency of simulation sessions was monthly (27.1%), weekly (24.8%), twice weekly (19.8%), or daily (21.5%). Regarding the themes of the simulation sessions, they were COVID-19 patient arrival to ER (69.4%), COVID-19 patient intubation due to respiratory failure (66.1%), COVID-19 patient requiring CPR (53.7%), COVID-19 transport inside the hospital (53.7%), COVID-19 elective intubation in OR (37.2%), or Delivery of COVID-19 mother and neonatal care (19%). Among participants, 55.6% reported the team's full engagement in the simulation sessions. The average session length was 30-60 min. The debriefing process was conducted by the ICU facilitator in (51%) of the sessions followed by simulation staff in 41% of the sessions. A total of 80% reported significant improvement in clinical preparedness after simulation sessions, and 70% were satisfied with the COVID-19 sessions. Most perceived issues reported were related to infection control measures, followed by team dynamics, logistics, and patient transport issues. Conclusion: Simulation centers team leaders and HCWs reported positive feedback on COVID-19 simulation sessions with multidisciplinary personnel involvement. These drills are a valuable tool for rehearsing safe dynamics on the frontline of COVID-19. More research on COVID-19 simulation outcomes is warranted; to explore variable factors for each country and healthcare system.

Exposure of Ophthalmologists to Patients' Exhaled Droplets in Clinical Practice: A Numerical Simulation of SARS-CoV-2 Exposure Risk

Background: Lack of quantification of direct and indirect exposure of ophthalmologists during ophthalmic diagnostic process makes it hard to estimate the infectious risk of aerosol pathogen faced by ophthalmologists at working environment. Methods: Accurate numerical models of thermal manikins and computational fluid dynamics simulations were used to investigate direct (droplet inhalation and mucosal deposition) and indirect exposure (droplets on working equipment) within a half-minute procedure. Three ophthalmic examination or treatment scenarios (direct ophthalmoscopic examination, slit-lamp microscopic examination, and ophthalmic operation) were selected as typical exposure distance, two breathing modes (normal breathing and coughing), three levels of ambient RH (40, 70, and 95%) and three initial droplet sizes (50, 70, and 100 μm) were considered as common working environmental condition. Results: The exposure of an ophthalmologist to a patient's expiratory droplets during a direct ophthalmoscopic examination was found to be 95 times that of a person during normal interpersonal interaction at a distance of 1 m and 12.1, 8.8, and 9.7 times that of an ophthalmologist during a slit-lamp microscopic examination, a surgeon during an ophthalmic operation and an assistant during an ophthalmic operation, respectively. The ophthalmologist's direct exposure to droplets when the patient cough-exhaled was ~7.6 times that when the patient breath-exhaled. Compared with high indoor RH, direct droplet exposure was higher and indirect droplet exposure was lower when the indoor RH was 40%. Conclusion: During the course of performing ophthalmic examinations or treatment, ophthalmologists typically face a high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection by droplet transmission.