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

A grounded theory of clinical nurses' process of coping during COVID-19

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To explore clinical nurses' process of coping during COVID-19 and develop a grounded theory that can be used by leaders to support clinical nurses during a disaster.

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has provoked widespread disruption to clinical nurses' work. It is important to understand clinical nurses' processes of coping during disasters to support the nursing workforce during events such as global pandemics.

DESIGN

We employed the Corbin and Strauss variant of grounded theory methodology, informed by symbolic interactionism, and applied the EQUATOR guidelines for qualitative research publication (COREQ).

METHODS

Data collection entailed semi-structured interviews with experienced clinical nurses (n =20) across diverse settings. We analysed data by identifying key points in the nurses' coping processes inductively building concepts around these points.

RESULTS

The predictor of nurses' outcomes in this grounded theory was their confidence in their ability to cope during the pandemic. When nurses lacked confidence, they experienced working in the context of acute COVID-a state of chaos and anxiety, with negative consequences for nurses. However, when nurses were confident in their abilities to cope with the pandemic, they experienced working in the context of chronic COVID, a calmer state of acceptance. There were many workplace factors that influenced nurses' confidence, including adequacy of personal protective equipment, clear information and guidance, supportive leadership, teamwork and adequate staffing.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding clinical nurses' experience of coping during COVID-19 is essential to maintain the nursing workforce during similar disasters.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Nurse leaders can target areas that support nurses' confidence, such as adequate PPE and staffing. In turn, increased confidence enables clinical nurses to cope during disasters such as a global pandemic.

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in health care workers of a teaching hospital in Belgium: self-reported occupational and household risk factors for seropositivity

This study aims to evaluate SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence among health care workers (HCWs) and to assess self-reported risk factors for seropositivity. A total of 3255 HCWs were included and the overall seroprevalence was 7.8%. The likelihood of seropositivity was higher in participants reporting any COVID-19 symptoms within the last 4 months (OR 8.32, 95% CI 5.83-11.88, P < 0.001). Being a female HCW (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.11–2.32, P < 0.01), having a cohabitant who was infected with SARS-CoV-2 (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.78–3.66 P < 0.001) or a cohabitant who was a nursing home caregiver (OR 3.71, 95% CI 1.59–8.65, P = 0.002) were independently associated with an increased risk of seropositivity. Working in a COVID-19 unit (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.21–2.23, P < 0.001) and being exposed to a SARS-CoV-2 infected co-worker (OR 1.30,95% CI 0.97–1.74, P = 0.016) resulted in higher seropositivity rate. Even if in-hospital exposure may play a significant role, increased infection risk is most likely attributable to household contact.

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Among Frontline Healthcare Personnel During the First Month of Caring for Patients With COVID-19-Nashville, Tennessee

Among 249 healthcare personnel who worked in hospital units with COVID-19 patients for 1 month, 19 (7.6%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Only 11 (57.9%) of the 19 personnel with positive serology reported symptoms of a prior illness, suggesting asymptomatic healthcare personnel could be an important source of SARS-CoV-2 transmission.

Could thermodynamics and heat and mass transfer research produce a fundamental step advance toward and significant reduction of SARS-COV-2 spread?

We are living an extraordinary season of uncertainty and danger, which is caused by SARS-Cov-2 infection and consequent COVID-19 infection. This preliminary study comes from both a mix of entrepreneurial experience and scientific research. It is aimed by the exigency to reach a new and more effective analysis of the risks on the filed and to reduce them inside a necessary cooperation process which may regard both research and some of the economic activities which are damaged by passive protection measures such as indiscriminate lockdowns. This global emergency requires specific efforts by any discipline that regards specific problems which need to be solved urgently. The characteristic airborne diffusion patterns of COVID-19 shows that the airborne presence of viruses depends on multiple factors which include the dimension of microdroplets emitted by a contagious person, the atmospheric temperature and humidity, the presence of atmospheric particulate and pollution, which may act as a transport vehicle for the virus. The pandemic diffusion shows a particular correlation with the air quality and levels of atmospheric pollution. Specific problems need to solved to understand better the virus, its reliability, diffusion, replication, how it attacks the persons and the conditions, which drives to both positive and deadly evolution of the illness. Most of these problems may benefit from the contribution from both heat and mass transfer and the unsteady thermodynamics of living systems which evolves according to constructal law. After the bibliographic research on the virus, emissive and spread modes, and consequent today adopted protection, a detailed analysis of the contributions which may be assessed by research in thermodynamics, heat and mass transfer, technical and chemical physics. Some possible areas of research have been identified and discussed to start an effective mobilization which may support the effort of the research toward a significant reduction of the impacts of the pandemic infection and the economic risks of new generalized lockdowns.

Quantification of Occupational and Community Risk Factors for SARS-CoV-2 Seropositivity Among Health Care Workers in a Large U.S. Health Care System

BACKGROUND

Identifying occupational risk factors for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among health care workers (HCWs) can improve HCW and patient safety.

OBJECTIVE

To quantify demographic, occupational, and community risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity among HCWs in a large health care system.

DESIGN

A logistic regression model was fitted to data from a cross-sectional survey conducted in April to June 2020, linking risk factors for occupational and community exposure to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity.

SETTING

A large academic health care system in the Atlanta, Georgia, metropolitan area.

PARTICIPANTS

Employees and medical staff members elected to participate in SARS-CoV-2 serology testing offered to all HCWs as part of a quality initiative and completed a survey on exposure to COVID-19 and use of personal protective equipment.

MEASUREMENTS

Demographic risk factors for COVID-19, residential ZIP code incidence of COVID-19, occupational exposure to HCWs or patients who tested positive on polymerase chain reaction test, and use of personal protective equipment as potential risk factors for infection. The outcome was SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity.

RESULTS

Adjusted SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity was estimated to be 3.8% (95% CI, 3.4% to 4.3%) (positive, n = 582) among the 10 275 HCWs (35% of the Emory Healthcare workforce) who participated in the survey. Community contact with a person known or suspected to have COVID-19 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.9 [CI, 1.4 to 2.6]; 77 positive persons [10.3%]) and community COVID-19 incidence (aOR, 1.5 [CI, 1.0 to 2.2]) increased the odds of infection. Black individuals were at high risk (aOR, 2.1 [CI, 1.7 to 2.6]; 238 positive persons [8.3%]).

LIMITATIONS

Participation rates were modest and key workplace exposures, including job and infection prevention practices, changed rapidly in the early phases of the pandemic.

CONCLUSION

Demographic and community risk factors, including contact with a COVID-19-positive person and Black race, are more strongly associated with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity among HCWs than is exposure in the workplace.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Emory COVID-19 Response Collaborative.

Prevalence of COVID-19 in health professionals and occupational psychosocial risks

INTRODUCTION

Health professionals who provide clinical care are exposed to patients potentially infected by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 SARS-CoV-2), namely physicians and nurses; consequently, these professionals face higher risks of infection.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to describe the prevalence of coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) cases among health professionals and the frequencies of risk factors and psychosocial risk.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional study targeted at health professionals working in Portugal during the current COVID-19 pandemic. Data were obtained through a self-administered questionnaire available online at the websites of medical and nursing boards, among other sources. We performed a univariate analysis, calculating absolute and relative frequencies, and a bivariate analysis with a Pearson's chi-squared test.

RESULTS

We studied 4,212 health professionals, of which 36.7% (n = 1,514) worked in areas dedicated to the treatment of sick or suspected COVID-19 patients. Of these, 2.11% tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Among all participants, 76.7% and 79.1% presented moderate to severe levels of fatigue and anxiety, respectively. Fatigue levels were significantly higher in professionals working in areas dedicated to the treatment of patients with COVID-19 (80.5% p = 0.01), but this difference was not observed regarding anxiety (79.5% p = 0.681).

CONCLUSIONS

The percentage of health professionals who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 was 2.11%. The reported high levels of fatigue and anxiety should determine a better protection of the health and safety of those who provide health care in the current pandemic.

Screening and Confirmatory Testing for SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies: Comparison of Health and Non-Health Workers in a Nationwide Healthcare Organization in Central Europe

Despite being located close to the European epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy, Austria has managed to control the first wave. In Austria, the largest health insurance fund covers 7 million people and has 12,000 employees, including 3700 healthcare workers (HCW). For patient and staff safety, transmission control measures were implemented and mass testing of employees for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was conducted. An IgG SARS-CoV-2 rapid test on fingerstick blood was used as a screening test (ST), followed by serologic studies with 3 different immunoassays and confirmatory testing by a neutralization test (NT). Among 7858 employees, 144 had a positive ST and 88 were confirmed by a NT (1.12%, CI: 0.9–1.38%). The positive predictive value (PPV) of the ST was 69.3% (CI: 60.5–77.2). Interestingly, 40% of the NT positive serum samples were tested negative in all 3 immunoassays. Of the total sample, 2242 HCW (28.5%) were identified. Unexpectedly, there was no difference in the prevalence of NT positives in HCW compared to non-HCW (23/2242 vs. 65/5301, p = 0.53). SARS-CoV-2 antibody prevalence was not increased among HCW. Although HCW are at potentially increased risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection, transmission control measures in healthcare facilities appear sufficient to limit transmission of infection.

The experience of the health care workers of a severely hit SARS-CoV-2 referral Hospital in Italy: incidence, clinical course and modifiable risk factors for COVID-19 infection

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the health care workers (HCWs) at the frontline have been largely exposed to infected patients, running a high risk of being infected by the SARS-CoV-2 virus.Since limiting transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in health care setting is crucial to avoid the community spread of SARS-CoV-2, we want to share our experience as an early hit hospital where standard infection control practices have been conscientiously applied and effective. We believe that our example, as first and hardest hit country, might be a warning and aid not only for those who have been hit later, but also for a second fearful wave of contagion. In addition, we want to offer an insight on modifiable risk factors for HWs-related infection.

METHODS

Demographic, lifestyle, work-related and comorbidities data of 1447 HCWs, which underwent a nasopharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2, were retrospectively collected. For the 164 HCWs positive for SARS-CoV-2, data about safety in the workplace, symptoms and clinical course of COVID-19 were also collected. Cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was estimated. Risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection were assessed using a multivariable Poisson regression.

RESULTS

The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among the screened HCWs was 11.33% (9.72-13.21). Working in a COVID-19 ward, being a former smoker (versus being a person who never smoked) and BMI was positively associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, whereas being a current smoker was negatively associated with this variable.

CONCLUSIONS

Assuming an equal accessibility and proper use of personal protective equipment of all the HCWs of our Hospital, the great and more prolonged contact with COVID-19 patients remains the crucial risk factor for SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, increased and particular care needs to be focused specifically on the most exposed HCWs groups, which should be safeguarded. Furthermore, in order to limit the risk of asymptomatic spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the HCWs mild symptoms of COVID-19 should be considered when evaluating the potential benefits of universal staff testing.

Prevention and control measures of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in low-risk departments: The spine surgery department example

As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) spreads globally, hospital departments will need take steps to manage their treatment procedures and wards. The preparations of high-risk departments (infection, respiratory, emergency, and intensive care unit) were relatively well within this pandemic, while low-risk departments may be unprepared. The spine surgery department in The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University in Hefei, China, was used as an example in this study. The spine surgery department took measures to manage the patients, medical staff and wards to avoid the cross-infection within hospital. During the outbreak, no patients or healthcare workers were infected, and no treatment was delayed due to these measures. The prevention and control measures effectively reduced the risk of nosocomial transmission between health workers and patients while providing optimum care. It was a feasible management approach that was applicable to most low-risk and even high-risk departments.

Development and validation of a questionnaire for assessing preventive practices and barriers among health care workers in COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVES

COVID-19 has affected thousands of health care workers worldwide. Suboptimal infection control practices have been identified as important risk factors. The objective of this study was to develop and validate a questionnaire to holistically assess the preventive practices of health care workers related to COVID-19 and identify the reasons for shortcomings therein.

METHODS

The development of the questionnaire involved item generation through literature review, focus group discussions and in-depth interviews with health care workers and experts, followed by validation through expert opinion, pilot testing and survey. A cross-sectional survey on 147 healthcare workers was done using an online platform and/or interviews in August 2020 in New Delhi, India. Exploratory factor analysis using principal component extraction with varimax rotation was performed to establish construct validity. Internal consistency of the tool was tested using Cronbach's alpha coefficient.

RESULTS

The developed questionnaire consists of two sections: Section A contains 29 items rated on a five-point Likert scale to assess preventive practices and Section B contains 27 semi-structured items to assess reasons for suboptimal practices. The first section has good validity (CVR = 0.87, S-CVI/Av = 0.978) and internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha coefficient = 0.85) CONCLUSIONS: This questionnaire is a valid and reliable tool for holistic assessment of preventive practices and barriers to it among health care workers. It will be useful to identify vulnerable practices and sections in health care settings which would assist policymakers in designing appropriate interventions for infection prevention and control. This will also be useful in future pandemics of similar nature.

Infection control in dental health care during and after the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak

COVID-19 is an emerging infectious disease caused by the widespread transmission of the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. Some of those infected become seriously ill. Others do not show any symptoms, but can still contribute to transmission of the virus. SARS-CoV-2 is excreted in the oral cavity and can be spread via aerosols. Aerosol generating procedures in dental health care can increase the risk of transmission of the virus. Due to the risk of infection of both dental healthcare workers and patients, additional infection control measures for all patients are strongly recommended when providing dental health care. Consideration should be given to which infection control measures are necessary when providing care in both the current situation and in the future.

SARS-CoV-2 Seropositivity among Dental Staff and the Role of Aspirating Systems

INTRODUCTION

Health care workers (HCWs) are at a high risk of infection owing to occupational exposure to patients and virus-contaminated surfaces.

OBJECTIVES

The study was aimed to reveal and compare the seroprevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among patient-facing HCWs across 3 dental clinics equipped with different types of aspirating systems.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included 157 HCWs (43.58 ± 1.66 y) from 3 dental clinics in Ekaterinburg (Russian Federation) who reported to work during the coronavirus disease pandemic. All HCWs underwent serological testing once a week to detect immunoglobulin G and M antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2. The V6000 aspirating system with a vacuum controller (dry or semidry mode) and high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters was used at clinics A and B, and the aspirated aerosol and air were evacuated and dissipated into the atmosphere. The VS900 aspirating vacuum pump without HEPA filters was used at clinic C. The aspirated aerosol and air were evacuated and dissipated into the operatories. All dental clinics followed the same recommendations for dental patient management and types of personal protective equipment used.

RESULTS

The estimated prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was 11.5% (19 HCWs) over a 5-mo follow-up (May to August 2020). The prevalence of infection was unaffected by sex or the role of the member in the dental team (dentist/dental assistant). The prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection (+) was significantly higher at clinic C (equipped with an aspirating vacuum pump without HEPA filters) than at other clinics.

CONCLUSION

The type of aspirating system used and the presence of HEPA filters could affect the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection across dental clinics. Therefore, we recommend the use of aspirating systems installed with HEPA filters, which evacuate and dissipate aerosols into specialized areas.

KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER STATEMENT

This report confirms that dentists, being patient-facing HCWs, are at a high risk of acquiring the SARS-CoV-2 infection and identifies gaps in the protection of patients and staff in dental settings.

COVID-19 as an occupational disease

The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 permeates all aspects of society worldwide. Initial medical reports and media coverage have increased awareness of the risk imposed on healthcare workers in particular, during this pandemic. However, the health implications of COVID-19 for the global workforce are multifaceted and complex, warranting careful reflection and consideration to mitigate the adverse effects on workers worldwide. Accordingly, our review offers a framework for considering this topic, highlighting key issues, with the aim to prompt and inform action, including research, to minimize the occupational hazards imposed by this ongoing challenge. We address respiratory disease as a primary concern, while recognizing the multisystem spectrum of COVID-19-related disease and how clinical aspects are interwoven with broader socioeconomic forces.

Experiences of frontline Pakistani emigrant physicians combating COVID-19 in the United Kingdom: a qualitative phenomenological analysis

Background

This study aims to explore the experiences, beliefs, feelings, and challenges faced by Pakistani migrant doctors working in the United Kingdom in times of the COVID-19 pandemic. The qualitative study aims to explore the lived experiences, beliefs, feelings, and challenges faced by Pakistani migrant physicians working in the United Kingdom during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

An exploratory phenomenological approach was used to collate data on experiences expressed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Purposive and snowball sampling was used to target participants, which were doctors of Pakistani origin involved in the direct care and management of COVID-19 patients in different NHS hospitals of the United Kingdom. Semi-structured, in-depth telephonic interviews were conducted with study participants in May 2020. Data analysis was done parallel with data collection by using an inductive qualitative approach.

Results

We recruited ten frontline physicians. Four theme categories emerged from the data analysis: 1) Working across borders and cultures, 2) Role of beliefs for coping with stress and fear, 3) Passion and profession, and 4) Scaffolding the Pakistani health system. Overall, the results show that the participants received limited professional support, in terms of counseling and psychological rehabilitation. Instead, they had to use self-management strategies to cope with the situation.

Conclusion

The intensive work exhausted participants physically and emotionally. They were holding a lot of grief and hurt inside, but still, healthcare professionals showed the spirit of professional dedication to overcome difficulties. Although currently coping with their emotional problems, comprehensive professional support should be made available to cater to the wellbeing of frontline physicians.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-06308-4.

Impact of a New SARS-CoV-2 Variant on the Population: A Mathematical Modeling Approach

Several SARS-CoV-2 variants have emerged around the world, and the appearance of other variants depends on many factors. These new variants might have different characteristics that can affect the transmissibility and death rate. The administration of vaccines against the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) started in early December of 2020 and in some countries the vaccines will not soon be widely available. For this article, we studied the impact of a new more transmissible SARS-CoV-2 strain on prevalence, hospitalizations, and deaths related to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. We studied different scenarios regarding the transmissibility in order to provide a scientific support for public health policies and bring awareness of potential future situations related to the COVID-19 pandemic. We constructed a compartmental mathematical model based on differential equations to study these different scenarios. In this way, we are able to understand how a new, more infectious strain of the virus can impact the dynamics of the COVID-19 pandemic. We studied several metrics related to the possible outcomes of the COVID-19 pandemic in order to assess the impact of a higher transmissibility of a new SARS-CoV-2 strain on these metrics. We found that, even if the new variant has the same death rate, its high transmissibility can increase the number of infected people, those hospitalized, and deaths. The simulation results show that health institutions need to focus on increasing non-pharmaceutical interventions and the pace of vaccine inoculation since a new variant with higher transmissibility, such as, for example, VOC-202012/01 of lineage B.1.1.7, may cause more devastating outcomes in the population.

Prevalence of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Infection and Outcomes Among Symptomatic Healthcare Workers in Seattle, Washington

Background

Healthcare workers (HCWs) who serve on the front lines of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have been at increased risk for infection due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in some settings. Healthcare-acquired infection has been reported in similar epidemics, but there are limited data on the prevalence of COVID-19 among HCWs and their associated clinical outcomes in the United States.

Methods

We established 2 high-throughput employee testing centers in Seattle, Washington, with drive-through and walk-through options for symptomatic employees in the University of Washington Medicine system and its affiliated organizations. Using data from these testing centers, we report the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among symptomatic employees and describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes among employees with COVID-19.

Results

Between 12 March 2020 and 23 April 2020, 3477 symptomatic employees were tested for COVID-19 at 2 employee testing centers; 185 (5.3%) employees tested positive for COVID-19. The prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 was similar when comparing frontline HCWs (5.2%) with nonfrontline staff (5.5%). Among 174 positive employees reached for follow-up at least 14 days after diagnosis, 6 reported COVID-related hospitalization; all recovered.

Conclusions

During the study period, we observed that the prevalence of positive SARS-CoV-2 tests among symptomatic HCWs was comparable to that of symptomatic nonfrontline staff. Reliable and rapid access to testing for employees is essential to preserve the health, safety, and availability of the healthcare workforce during this pandemic and to facilitate the rapid return of SARS-CoV-2–negative employees to work.

European Resuscitation Council Guidelines 2021: Executive summary

Informed by a series of systematic reviews, scoping reviews and evidence updates from the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, the 2021 European Resuscitation Council Guidelines present the most up to date evidence-based guidelines for the practice of resuscitation across Europe. The guidelines cover the epidemiology of cardiac arrest; the role that systems play in saving lives, adult basic life support, adult advanced life support, resuscitation in special circumstances, post resuscitation care, first aid, neonatal life support, paediatric life support, ethics and education.

Literature Review: Occupational Safety and Health Risk Factors of Healthcare Workers during COVID-19 Pandemic

Introduction: The pandemic of COVID-19 has major effects, particularly on hospitals and health workers. At the beginning of March, more than 3,300 health workers have beencontracted with COVID-19 as reported by China's National Health Commission. Twenty percent of healthcare workers in Italy have also also infected and some died. To minimize the risk of transmission to health workers, knowledge of the risk factors that influence the transmission is needed. Thus, this study aims to determine risk factors related to occupational safety and health for healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: The literature was searched on Pubmed, Google Scholar, WHO, and the Ministry of Health instruments were implemented. 8 relevant studies were reviewed. Results: According to the analysis results of several studies, the use of PPE that is less consistent and not suitable with the risk of exposure will increase the risk of infection. The risk of infection is also increased by poor hand hygiene. According to the Kaplan-Meier curve, the working duration of ≥ 15 hours will increase the risk of infection. The risk of infection also exists for health workers who carry out risky procedures that generate airborne particles such as resuscitation, as well as environmental factors such as negative pressure rooms and traffic control bundling. Conclusion: Risk factors related to occupational health and safety during this COVID-19 pandemic for healthcare staff are: compliance with the use of PPE, hand hygiene, working hours duration, risky procedures, and environmental factors.Keywords: healthcare workers, occupational safety, COVID-19, personal protective equipment

Inactivation of Human Coronavirus by FATHHOME's Dry Sanitizer Device: Rapid and Eco-Friendly Ozone-Based Disinfection of SARS-CoV-2

The pandemic of SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 was reported in December 2019 in Wuhan, China. Pertaining to its high transmissibility and wide host adaptability, this unique human coronavirus spread across the planet inflicting 115 million people and causing 2.5 million deaths (as of March 3rd, 2021). Limited or negligible pre-existing immunity to multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants has resulted in severe morbidity and mortality worldwide, as well as a record-breaking surge in the use of medical-surgical supplies and personal protective equipment. In response to the global need for effective sterilization techniques, this study evaluated the virucidal efficacy of FATHHOME's self-contained, ozone-based dry-sanitizing device, by dose and time response assessment. We tested inactivation of human coronavirus, HCoV-OC43, a close genetic model of SARS-CoV-2, on porous (N95 filtering facepiece respirator/FFR) and nonporous (glass) surfaces. We started our assays with 20 ppm-10 min ozone exposure, and effectively reduced 99.8% and 99.9% of virus from glass and N95 FFR surfaces, respectively. Importantly, the virus was completely inactivated, below the detection limit (over 6-log10 reduction) with 25 ppm-15 min ozone exposure on both tested surfaces. As expected, a higher ozone exposure (50 ppm-10 min) resulted in faster inactivation of HCoV-OC43 with 100% inactivation from both the surfaces, with no residual ozone present after completion of the 5-min post exposure recapture cycle and no measurable increase in ambient ozone levels. These results confirmed that FATHHOME's device is suitable for rapid decontamination of SARS-CoV-2- from worn items, frequently touched items, and PPE including N95 FFRs, face shields, and other personal items.

Determinants of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Italian healthcare workers: a multicenter study

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at increased risk of being infected with SARS-CoV-2, yet limited information is available on risk factors of infection. We pooled data on occupational surveillance of 10,654 HCW who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection in six Italian centers. Information was available on demographics, job title, department of employment, source of exposure, use of personal protective equipment (PPEs), and COVID-19-related symptoms. We fitted multivariable logistic regression models to calculate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals of infection. The prevalence of infection ranged from 3.0 to 22.0%, and was correlated with that of the respective areas. Women were at lower risk of infection compared to men. Fever, cough, dyspnea and malaise were the symptoms most strongly associated with infection, together with anosmia and ageusia. No differences in the risk of infection were detected according to job title, or working in a COVID-19 designated department. Reported contact with a patient inside or outside the workplace was a risk factor. Use of a mask was strongly protective against risk of infection as was use of gloves. The use of a mask by the source of exposure (patient or colleague) had an independent effect in reducing infection risk.

Review of the risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 transmission

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, which has lasted for nearly a year, has made people deeply aware of the strong transmissibility and pathogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 since its outbreak in December 2019. By December 2020, SARS-CoV-2 had infected over 65 million people globally, resulting in more than 1 million deaths. At present, the exact animal origin of SARS-CoV-2 remains unclear and antiviral vaccines are now undergoing clinical trials. Although the social order of human life is gradually returning to normal, new confirmed cases continue to appear worldwide, and the majority of cases are sporadic due to environmental factors and lax self-protective consciousness. This article provides the latest understanding of the epidemiology and risk factors of nosocomial and community transmission of SARS-CoV-2, as well as strategies to diminish the risk of transmission. We believe that our review will help the public correctly understand and cope with SARS-CoV-2.

Screening COVID-19 Patients Using Safe Practice Score System in Non-COVID Radiology Departments

Background:

A prospective study was designed to evaluate the role of safe practice score system (SPSS) for targeted screening of patients in the non-COVID radiology department with the objective to (a) determine the incidence of COVID-19 in patients visiting non-COVID facilities, (b) to determine the sensitivity and specificity with predictive value of SPSS system to identify high-risk COVID patients undergoing ultrasound and echocardiographic examinations, (c) determination of relative risk (RR) estimation for health-care staff and other visiting patients and attendants, and (d) overall impact of the use of SPSS in the prevention of spread of the disease in the society.

Methods:

The study comprised a cohort of 688 patients who initially presented as non-COVID patients for ultrasound and echocardiography tests to a non-COVID health-care facility. Patients were divided into low-, moderate-, and high-risk COVID-19 probability groups based on SPSS screening scores of 0–3, 4–6, and more than 6, respectively. All high-risk patients with SPSS of more than 6 were advised real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) or plain high-resolution computed tomography chest for the presence of COVID-19 before the diagnostic test could be done and all results were analyzed statistically.

Results:

Four hundred and forty-four low-risk patients had a median score of 3, and all underwent their radiological examinations. One hundred and forty patients were in the moderate-risk group and had a median score of 5. Thirty-six patients had a score of 6, out of which 12 patients were upgraded to score 6. One hundred and four patients were in the high-risk category group. Out of these, 20 patients were screened as RT-PCR negative and got their ultrasound examinations. The sensitivity and specificity of SPSS in categorizing patients into low and high risk were 100% and 95%, respectively, with false positive and negative of 4% and 0% with a positive and negative predictive value of 77% and 100%, respectively. The use of SPSS reduced the RR ratio for health-care workers and other staff from 7.9 to 2.6 (P = 0.001). The overall incidence of COVID-19 disease in patients visiting non-COVID hospitals was 12% during this time period. Screening and detection by the use of SPSS had a positive epidemiological impact and saved 33,000 people from getting infected when calculated by the susceptible-exposed-infectious-recovered (SEIR) pandemic model in this period of 90 days.

Conclusion:

SPSS categorized patients in low-, moderate-, and high-risk pretest COVID-19 probability categories accurately with good sensitivity and specificity and was useful in preventing the spread of disease with reduced RR to 2.6 for medical staff and other hospital patients and also helped to contain spread in the society.

SARS-CoV-2-Specific Neutralizing Antibody Responses in Norwegian Health Care Workers After the First Wave of COVID-19 Pandemic: A Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, many countries experienced infection in health care workers (HCW) due to overburdened health care systems. Whether infected HCW acquire protective immunity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is unclear.

METHODS

In a Norwegian prospective cohort study, we enrolled 607 HCW before and after the first COVID-19 wave. Exposure history, COVID-19-like symptoms, and serum samples were collected. SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies were characterized by spike-protein IgG/IgM/IgA enzyme-linked immunosorbent and live-virus neutralization assays.

RESULTS

Spike-specific IgG/IgM/IgA antibodies increased after the first wave in HCW with, but not in HCW without, COVID-19 patient exposure. Thirty-two HCW (5.3%) had spike-specific antibodies (11 seroconverted with ≥4-fold increase, 21 were seropositive at baseline). Neutralizing antibodies were found in 11 HCW that seroconverted, of whom 4 (36.4%) were asymptomatic. Ninety-seven HCW were tested by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) during follow-up; 8 were positive (7 seroconverted, 1 had undetectable antibodies).

CONCLUSIONS

We found increases in SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies in infected HCW, especially after COVID-19 patient exposure. Our data show a low number of SARS-CoV-2-seropositive HCW in a low-prevalence setting; however, the proportion of seropositivity was higher than RT-PCR positivity, highlighting the importance of antibody testing.

Risk Factors Associated with COVID-19 Infected Healthcare Workers in Muscat Governorate, Oman

Introduction:

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread rapidly worldwide, causing a global public health crisis. Healthcare workers (HCWs) are vulnerable due to their role in the management of COVID-19 infected patients. As of June 2020, a total of 847 HCWs in Oman had reportedly contracted COVID-19, with an incidence rate of 1.47%. This study therefore aimed to identify factors associated with COVID-19 infection among HCWs in Muscat Governorate, Oman, as well as to evaluate adherence to infection prevention and control (IPC) measures.

Methods:

This cross-sectional study involved cases of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection among HCWs working under the Directorate General of Health Services of Muscat Governorate, Ministry of Health, between February and June 2020. Data regarding the participants’ sociodemographic characteristics, risk factors, pre-existing medical conditions, and adherence to IPC measures were collected using a self-administered questionnaire distributed via a web-based mobile application.

Results:

A total of 126 HCWs with confirmed COVID-19 infection participated in the study. Of these, 72.2% were female, 53.2% worked in primary care facilities, and 61.1% were medical doctors or nurses. Only 18.1% were over 45 years of age and 30.2% had pre-existing medical conditions. While 29.4% had never received IPC training, the majority followed recommended hand hygiene practice (96.8%) and social distancing protocols (93.7%) and wore protective facemasks for routine patient care (96.9%).

Conclusion:

While the majority of HCWs followed crucial IPC measures, one-third had never received specific IPC training or faced restrictions on PPE use. HCWs, including those in housekeeping and administrative functions are recommended to undergo rigorous IPC training. In addition, high-risk HCWs could be assigned duties away from active COVID 19 cases. It is recommended to restructure health facilities for better adherence to IPC standards.

What are the sources of exposure in healthcare personnel with coronavirus disease 2019 infection?

In our facility, 25% of personnel with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) had a higher-risk exposure to an infected patient or co-worker and 14% reported a higher-risk exposure in the community. All higher-risk exposures to infected patients occurred on non-COVID-19 units, often when there was a delay in diagnosis because COVID-19 was not initially suspected. Higher-risk exposures to co-workers with COVID-19 often involved lapses in compliance with masking in nonpatient care areas such as nursing stations and staff work or break rooms.

The Perils of Covid-19 for Otorhinolaryngologists: An Overview

Covid-19 symptoms are commonly seen in Otorhinolaryngology clinics on a daily basis. This article provides a brief review of the current knowledge regarding SARS Cov-2 including disease transmission, clinical characteristics and occupational hazard. The article focuses on the adequate precautions needed for Otorhinolaryngologists. We, being involved in the frequent manipulation of the aero-digestive tract containing a high viral load carry the biggest threat of an occupational hazard. We should be aware of utmost importance of effective use of full or enhanced Personal Protective Equipment during diagnostic and therapeutic procedures.

COVID-19 and healthcare workers: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has focused attention on the challenges and risks faced by frontline healthcare workers (HCW). This study aimed to describe the clinical outcomes and risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection in HCW.

METHODS

Three databases were surveyed and 328 articles were identified. Of these, 225 articles did not meet inclusion criteria; therefore, 97 full-text article were reviewed. Finally, after further revision, 30 articles were included in the systematic review and 28 were used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies were identified involving 119,883 patients. The mean age of the patients was 38.37 years (95% CI 36.72-40.03) and males comprised 21.4% (95% CI 12.4-34.2) of the population of HCW. The percentage of HCW who tested positive for COVID-19 was 51.7% (95% CI 34.7-68.2). The total prevalence of comorbidities in seven studies was 18.4% (95% CI 15.5-21.7). The most prevalent symptoms were fever 27.5% (95% CI 17.6-40.3) and cough 26.1% (95% CI 18.1-36). The prevalence of hospitalisation was 15.1% (95% CI 5.6-35) in 13 studies and of death was 1.5% (95% CI 0.5-3.9) in 12 studies. Comparisons of HCW with and without infection showed an increased relative risk for COVID-19 related to personal protective equipment, workplace setting, profession, exposure, contacts, and testing.

CONCLUSION

A significant number of HCW were reported to be infected with COVID-19 during the first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, with a prevalence of hospitalisation of 15.1% and mortality of 1.5%. Further data are needed to track the continued risks in HCW as the pandemic evolves and health systems adapt.

A Semi-Quantitative Risk Assessment and Management Strategies on COVID-19 Infection to Outpatient Health Care Workers in the Post-Pandemic Period

BACKGROUND

In the pandemic of COVID-19, due to asymptomatic patients and high personnel fluidity in outpatient clinics, health care workers (HCWs) in outpatients were facing severe threat from infection. There is an urgent need for a risk assessment to recognize and prevent infection risks.

PURPOSE

To establish a semi-quantitative risk assessment model on COVID-19 infections for HCWs in outpatient departments, and apply it to practices. Further to provide infection risk management strategies to reduce infection threats in the post-pandemic of COVID-19.

METHODS

We used the method of Brainstorm, Literature study and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) for risk factors selection and model construction, we also created corresponding indicators for each risk factors, in order to collect data in assessment practice.

RESULTS

Eighteen risk factors were recognized and selected for model construction, by scatter plot, these risk factors had been classified into four parts, spanned the scopes of diagnosis and treatment, environment, personal protection and emergency handling, with specific management suggestions provided. In the practice, outpatient clinics were divided into three risk levels, 5 clinics in high risk level, 9 in medium risk level and 11 in low risk level.

CONCLUSION

A proper comprehensive risk assessment model for COVID-19 infections has been successfully established. With the model, the ability to COVID-19 prevention in outpatients can be easily evaluated. The strategies on disinfection, surveillance and personal protection were also valuable references in the post-pandemic of COVID-19.

Prevalence of COVID-19 infection in black people in primary health care, hospital units and intensive care units: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

COVID-19 pandemic has affected people all over the world. In this context, health disparities are already evident in becoming ill and dying from this condition, further accentuating historical racial inequalities.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This protocol will be developed based on the recommendations of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols. For this, searches will be carried out in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Lilacs and ScienceDirect databases searching for cross-sectional studies that assessed the prevalence of black people with COVID-19 at different levels of complexity. All cross-sectional studies that analysed the prevalence of COVID-19 in black people assisted in primary care, hospital wards and intensive care units will be included. The research will be carried out by two independent researchers who will identify the articles; they will exclude duplicate studies. Through blind evaluation, they will select the articles using the Rayyan QCRI application. The instrument proposed by Downs and Black will be used to assess the risk of bias. The meta-analyses will be performed according to the data conditions included.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

For this study's development, there is no need for an ethical appraisal considering that it is a systematic review that will use secondary studies. This study's findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and condensed summaries for main stakeholders and partners in the field. The database search is expected to begin on 1 February 2021. It is expected to complete the entire review process by 30 October 2021 TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020209079.

Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 infections in healthcare workers with high and low exposures to Covid-19 patients in a Norwegian University Hospital

INTRODUCTION

A year into the pandemic, the knowledge of SARS-CoV-2 infection risks among healthcare workers remains limited. In this cross-sectional study, we examined whether healthcare workers with high exposure to Covid-19 patients had a higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection than other healthcare workers in a Norwegian University Hospital. We also investigated the prevalence of asymptomatic healthcare workers in a ward with a SARS-CoV-2 outbreak.

METHODS

Healthcare workers from five wards at Akershus University Hospital were included between May 11 and June 11, 2020. Blood samples were analyzed for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and seroprevalences compared between participants with high and low exposure to Covid-19 patients. Demographic data and SARS-CoV-2 infection risk factors were recorded in a questionnaire. Naso-/oropharyngeal swabs from participants from the outbreak ward were analyzed by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction.

RESULTS

360/436 (82.6%) healthcare workers participated. 9/262 (3.4%) participants from wards with high exposure to Covid-19 patients were SARS-CoV-2 seropositive versus 3/98 (3.1%) from wards with low exposure (OR 1.13; 95%CI 0.3-4.26, p = .861). SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were found in 11/263 (4.2%) participants who had worked one or more shifts caring for Covid-19 patients versus in 1/85 (1.2%) without any known occupational Covid-19 exposure (OR 3.67; 95%CI 0.46-29.06, p = .187). SARS-CoV-2 was detected in naso-/oropharyngeal swabs from 2/78 (2.6%) participants.

CONCLUSION

We found no significantly increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in healthcare workers with high exposure to COVID-19 patients. Five healthcare workers had either serologic or molecular evidence of past or present unrecognized SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Personal protective equipment usage, recycling and disposal among spine surgeons: An Asia Pacific Spine Society survey

PURPOSE

In this study we investigated on the personal protective equipment (PPE) usage, recycling, and disposal among spine surgeons in the Asia Pacific region.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was carried out among spine surgeons in Asia Pacific. The questionnaires were focused on the usage, recycling and disposal of PPE.

RESULTS

Two hundred and twenty-two surgeons from 19 countries participated in the survey. When we sub-analysed the differences between countries, the provision of adequate PPE by hospitals ranged from 37.5% to 100%. The usage of PPE was generally high. The most used PPE were surgical face masks (88.7%), followed by surgical caps (88.3%), gowns (85.6%), sterile gloves (83.3%) and face shields (82.0%). The least used PPE were powered air-purifying respirators (PAPR) (23.0%) and shoes/boots (45.0%). The commonly used PPE for surgeries involving COVID-19 positive patients were N95 masks (74.8%), sterile gloves (73.0%), gowns (72.1%), surgical caps (71.6%), face shields (64.4%), goggles (64.0%), shoe covers (58.6%), plastic aprons (45.9%), shoes/boots (45.9%), surgical face masks (36.5%) and PAPRs (21.2%). Most PPE were not recycled. Biohazard bins were the preferred method of disposal for all types of PPE items compared to general waste.

CONCLUSIONS

The usage of PPE was generally high among most countries especially for surgeries involving COVID-19 positive patients except for Myanmar and Nepal. Overall, the most used PPE were surgical face masks. For surgeries involving COVID-19 positive patients, the most used PPE were N95 masks. Most PPE were not recycled. Biohazard bins were the preferred method of disposal for all types of PPE.

Acute psychological impact on COVID-19 patients in Hubei: a multicenter observational study

We conducted a multicentre cross-sectional survey of COVID-19 patients to evaluate the acute psychological impact on the patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during isolation treatment based on online questionnaires from 2 February to 5 March 2020. A total of 460 COVID-19 patients from 13 medical centers in Hubei province were investigated for their mental health status using online questionnaires (including Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, Patient Health Questionnaire-15, and Insomnia Severity Index scales). Among all 460 COVID-19 patients, 187 (40.65%) of them were healthcare workers (HCWs). 297 (64.57%) of them were females. The most common psychological problems were somatization symptoms (66.09%, n = 304), followed by depression (53.48%, n = 246), anxiety (46.30%, n = 213), problems of insomnia (42.01%, n = 171), and then self-mutilating or suicidal thoughts (23.26%, n = 107). Of all the patients, 15.65% (n = 72) had severe somatization symptoms, and 2.83% (n = 13) had severe (almost every day) self-mutilating or suicidal thoughts. The most common psychological problems for HCWs were somatization symptoms (67.84%, n = 125), followed by depression (51.87%, n = 97), anxiety (44.92%, n = 84), problems of insomnia (36.18%, n = 55), and then self-mutilating or suicidal thoughts (20.86%, n = 39). Patients with lower education levels were found to be associated with higher incidence of self-mutilating or suicidal thoughts (odds ratio [OR], 2.68, 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.66-4.33 [P < 0.001]). Patients with abnormal body temperature were found to be associated with higher incidence of self-mutilating or suicidal thoughts (OR, 3.97, 95% CI, 2.07-7.63 [P < 0.001]), somatic symptoms (OR, 2.06, 95% CI, 1.20-3.55 [P = 0.009]) and insomnia (OR, 1.66, 95% CI, 1.04-2.65 [P = 0.033]). Those with suspected infected family members displayed a higher prevalence of anxiety than those without infected family members (OR, 1.61, 95% CI, 1.1-2.37 [P = 0.015]). Patients at the age of 18-44 years old had fewer somatic symptoms than those aged over 45 years old (OR, 1.91, 95% CI, 1.3-2.81 [P = 0.001]). In conclusion, COVID-19 patients tended to have a high prevalence of adverse psychological events. Early identification and intervention should be conducted to avoid extreme events such as self-mutilating or suicidal impulsivity for COVID-19 patients, especially for those with low education levels and females who have undergone divorce or bereavement.

Reopening Dental Offices for Routine Care Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic: Report From Palestine

Objectives

This study reports on the readiness of Palestinian dentists to reopen their practices for routine care during the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

Methods

A cross-sectional study targeted dentists in the West Bank area of Palestine using an online survey during the first 2 weeks of May 2020. Questions mainly asked about dentists’ perception of the risks of COVID-19, readiness to reopen their clinics for routine care, and the level of confidence in dealing with patients suspected of having COVID-19.

Results

A total of 488 dentists completed the survey. Almost 60% believed that they were not ready to reopen their practices. Almost 13% had “no confidence” in dealing with patients with COVID-19, while 64% had “little to moderate” confidence. Confidence was correlated negatively with increased fear of becoming infected (ρ = -0.317, P < .0001) and positively with years of practice (ρ = 1.7, P < .0001). Dentists who received updated training on infection control or on COVID-19 reported higher levels of confidence (χ² = 53.8, P < .0001, χ² = 26.8, P < .0001, respectively). Although 88% preferred not to treat patients with COVID-19, 40% were willing to provide care to them. Almost 75% reported that they were already facing financial hardships and could not survive financially until the end of the current month.

Conclusions

Ethical and financial reasons were the main drivers for dentists in this sample to reopen their practices for routine care. Data from this study highlights the fragility of private dental practice in emergency situations. Ethical, health, and financial challenges that emerged during COVID-19 require dentists to adapt and be better prepared to face future crises.

Transmission of infection among health care personnel performing surgical tracheostomies on COVID-19 patients

Background

Staff and patient safety are of paramount importance while performing a surgical tracheostomy (ST) during the corona virus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. The aim was to assess the incidence of COVID-19 infection among the healthcare personnel (HCP) performing ST on COVID-19 patients.

Methods

One hundred and twenty-two HCP participating in 71 ST procedures performed at our institution between 26th March 2020 and 27th May 2020 were identified. A COVID-19 health questionnaire was distributed among staff with their consent. Data related to the presence of COVID-19 symptoms (new onset continuous cough, fever, loss of taste and/or loss of smell) among HCP involved in ST as well as patient related data were collected.

Results

Of the HCP who responded, eleven (15%,11/72) reported key COVID-19 symptoms and went into self-isolation. Ten members from this group underwent a COVID-19 swab test and three tested positive. Only one HCP attended hospital for symptomatic treatment, none required hospitalisation. Sixty percent (43/72) of the responders had a COVID-19 antibody test with a positive rate of 18.6% (8/43).

Among the patients undergoing a ST, 67% (37/55) required a direct intensive care unit (ICU) admission; the mean age was 58 years (29–78) with a male preponderance (65.5%). The median time from intubation to ST was 15 days (range 5–33,IQR = 9). The overall mortality was 11% (6/55).

Conclusions

ST can be carried out safely with strict adherence to both, personnel protective equipment and ST protocols which are vital to mitigate the potential transmission of COVID-19 to the HCP.

COVID-19 mimics endemic tropical diseases at an early stage: a report of two symptomatic COVID-19 patients treated in a polymerase chain reaction void zone in Cameroon

At the end of December 2019, they emerged a new coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), triggering a pandemic of an acute respiratory syndrome (COVID-19) in humans. We report the relevant features of the first two confirmed cases of COVID-19 recorded from the 29^th April 2020 in the Far North Region of Cameroon. We did a review of the files of these two patients who were admitted to the internal medicine ward of a medical Centre in Maroua Town, Far North Region. We present 2 cases of symptomatic COVID-19 patients, both males and health personnel, with an average age of 53 years, with no recent history of travel to a COVID-19 zone at risk and working in a then COVID-19 free region. They presented with extreme fatigue as their main symptom. Both were treated initially for severe malaria with quinine sulfate infusion with initial relief of symptoms. In the first confirmed case, at his re-hospitalization with an acute respiratory syndrome, a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test in search of SARS-CoV-2 was requested with his results available 7 days into admission. For the second case, he had his results 48 hours on admission while he was prepared to be discharged. Both control PCR tests for COVID-19 came back negative 14 days after hospitalization. Health personnel remains a group at risk for the COVID-19 infection. The clinical manifestation at an early stage may be atypical mimicking endemic tropical infections. Also, the therapeutic potential of quinine salts in the relief of symptoms of COVID-19 is questionable and remains a subject to explore in our context.

Knowledge and Practice Toward Prevention of SARS-CoV-2 Among Healthcare Workers at Delghi Primary Hospital During a Massive Test Campaign in Northwest Gondar, Ethiopia: Institution-Based Descriptive Cross-Sectional Survey

BACKGROUND

Since December 29, 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has been spreading and is associated with notoriously increased morbidity and mortality of populations worldwide, including Ethiopia. Medicine and the healthcare system have been challenged by both first and second-waves of SARS-CoV-2. During this entire crisis, the main purpose of this study was to determine the current evidence on the level of awareness and prevention practice of healthcare workers (HCWs) at the district primary hospital, Delghi Primary Hospital (DPH) regarding COVID-19 in the overall effort to control the spread of the virus.

METHODS

Institutional-based descriptive cross-sectional analysis was performed between late August and September 20, 2020. Participants of the study were HCWs with various occupations at DPH, North West Gondar, Ethiopia. In this study, among 112 health professions, we included a total of 104 HCWs. Written consent was obtained for willingness of the study participants from the DPH administrative office. Then, using a pre-tested, structured, and self-administered questionnaire, data were collected. The questionnaire included socio-demographics, sources of information, knowledge, and practice measures regarding COVID-19. The collected data were analyzed through IBM SPSS version 20. As a cut-off value, ≥8 out of 15 knowledge questions and ≥7 out of 14 practice questions were considered good knowledge and practice, respectively.

RESULTS

The result of this study showed the majority of the respondents were male (71/104, (68.3%)), with a median age of 28 (minimum age 20 and maximum age 50) years. Thus, 94.2% (n=98/104) was the overall rate of correctly answered questions out of 15 knowledge questions. However, 40.6% of them had poor prevention practices. 73.1% of participants used regular hand-washing with soap and 64.4% used hand sanitizer and handshake avoidance equally for prevention purposes. Whereas, social distancing rule and mask-wearing were reported as impracticable by 55.8% and 44.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

94.2% of HCWs had a good level of knowledge about COVID-19; in contrast, lack of preventive practice was observed. This implies that there is a gap between knowledge and implementation of preventive measures toward the disease.

The SARS-CoV-2-Inactivating Activity of Hydroxytyrosol-Rich Aqueous Olive Pulp Extract (HIDROX®) and Its Use as a Virucidal Cream for Topical Application

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread globally. Although measures to control SARS-CoV-2, namely, vaccination, medication, and chemical disinfectants are being investigated, there is an increase in the demand for auxiliary antiviral approaches using natural compounds. Here we have focused on hydroxytyrosol (HT)-rich aqueous olive pulp extract (HIDROX^®) and evaluated its SARS-CoV-2-inactivating activity in vitro. We showed that the HIDROX solution exhibits time- and concentration-dependent SARS-CoV-2-inactivating activities, and that HIDROX has more potent virucidal activity than pure HT. The evaluation of the mechanism of action suggested that both HIDROX and HT induced structural changes in SARS-CoV-2, which changed the molecular weight of the spike proteins. Even though the spike protein is highly glycosylated, this change was induced regardless of the glycosylation status. In addition, HIDROX or HT treatment disrupted the viral genome. Moreover, the HIDROX-containing cream applied on film showed time- and concentration-dependent SARS-CoV-2-inactivating activities. Thus, the HIDROX-containing cream can be applied topically as an antiviral hand cream. Our findings suggest that HIDROX contributes to improving SARS-CoV-2 control measures.

Social Behaviors Associated With a Positive COVID-19 Test Result

Objective

To compare the social behaviors of individuals who were tested positive for COVID-19 relative to non-infected individuals.

 

Methods

We sent COVID positive cases and age/gender-matched controls a survey regarding their social behaviors via MyChart (online patient portal). We called cases if they did not complete the electronic survey within two days. Data were collected from May to June 2020. Survey responses for cases without close contact and controls were compared using Pearson chi-square or Fisher’s exact tests as appropriate.

 

Results

A total of 339 participants completed the survey (113 cases, 226 controls); 45 (40%) cases had known contact with COVID-19. Cases were more likely to have recently traveled (4% vs. 0%, p = 0.01) or to work outside the home (40% vs. 25%, p = 0.02). There was no difference in the rates of attending private or public gatherings, mask/glove use, hand-washing, cleaning surfaces, and cleaning mail/groceries between cases and controls.

 

Conclusions

Sixty percent of cases had no known contact with COVID-19, indicating ongoing community transmission and underlining the importance of contact tracing. The greater percentage of cases who work outside the home provides further evidence for social distancing and remote telework when possible.

Sociodemographic risk factors for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection among Massachusetts healthcare workers: A retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To better understand coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) transmission among healthcare workers (HCWs), we investigated occupational and nonoccupational risk factors associated with cumulative COVID-19 incidence among a Massachusetts HCW cohort.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The retrospective cohort study included adult HCWs in a single healthcare system from March 9 to June 3, 2020.

METHODS

The SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal RT-PCR results and demographics of the study participants were deidentified and extracted from an established occupational health, COVID-19 database at the healthcare system. HCWs from each particular job grouping had been categorized into frontline or nonfrontline workers. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and odds ratios (ORs) were used to compare subgroups after excluding HCWs involved in early infection clusters before universal masking began. A sensitivity analysis was performed comparing jobs with the greatest potential occupational risks with others.

RESULTS

Of 5,177 HCWs, 152 (2.94%) were diagnosed with COVID-19. Affected HCWs resided in areas with higher community attack rates (median, 1,755.2 vs 1,412.4 cases per 100,000; P < .001; multivariate-adjusted IRR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.03-3.44 comparing fifth to first quintile of community rates). After multivariate adjustment, African-American and Hispanic HCWs had higher incidence of COVID-19 than non-Hispanic white HCWs (IRR, 2.78; 95% CI, 1.78-4.33; and IRR, 2.41, 95% CI, 1.42-4.07, respectively). After adjusting for race and residential rates, frontline HCWs had a higher IRR (1.73, 95% CI, 1.16-2.54) than nonfrontline HCWs overall, but not within specific job categories nor when comparing the highest risk jobs to others.

CONCLUSIONS

After universal masking was instituted, the strongest risk factors associated with HCW COVID-19 infection were residential community infection rate and race.

[Assessment of the risk of infection from SARS-CoV-2 for healthcare workers-findings from practice]

Das SARS-CoV-2-Virus als Erreger der COVID-19-Erkrankung hat sich innerhalb kurzer Zeit weltweit in der Bevölkerung ausgebreitet. Bei der Abfassung des Beitrags stehen noch keine Schutzimpfung und keine spezifische Therapie gegen SARS-CoV‑2 zur Verfügung. Bei Veröffentlichung des Artikels werden mindestens zwei Impfstoffe zur Verfügung stehen. In der internationalen Laienpresse wird das Risiko für medizinisches Personal, an SARS-CoV‑2 zu erkranken, als hoch eingeschätzt; das Robert Koch-Institut stuft das Risiko für die Gesamtbevölkerung in Deutschland als „hoch“ ein. Das Ziel des vorliegenden Beitrags ist es, das Infektions- und Erkrankungsrisiko für medizinisches Personal basierend auf Praxiserfahrungen, nationalen Verordnungen und Richtlinien sowie Infektionszahlen zu diskutieren und neu einzuschätzen. Dabei wird sowohl ungeschütztes als auch mit persönlicher Schutzausrüstung (PSA) ausgestattetes medizinisches Personal betrachtet. Eine entsprechende Risikomatrix wird erstellt.

Das Infektionsrisiko für ungeschütztes medizinisches Personal entspricht dem in der Gesamtbevölkerung und ist mit „hoch“ einzustufen. Mit entsprechender persönlicher Schutzausrüstung ist das Infektionsrisiko für medizinisches Personal dagegen als „mittel“ einzuschätzen. Zur PSA gehören ein flüssigkeitsdichter Schutzkittel, Handschuhe, Maske – Schutzstufe FFP2 oder FFP3 – bei Tätigkeiten mit Tröpfchen oder Aerosolbildung, Kopfhaube und eine geeignete Schutzbrille. Ungenügende Handhygienemaßnahmen, falsche Handhabung der Schutzkleidung sowie lange Dienstzeiten erhöhen das Infektionsrisiko.

Epidemiologic Linkage of COVID-19 Outbreaks at Two University-affiliated Hospitals in the Seoul Metropolitan Area in March 2020

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreaks emerged at two university-affiliated hospitals in Seoul (hospital A) and Uijeongbu City (hospital S) in the metropolitan Seoul area in March 2020. The aim of this study was to investigate epidemiological links between the outbreaks using whole genome sequencing (WGS) of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).

METHODS

Fifteen patients were enrolled in the study, including four non-outbreak (A1-A4) and three outbreak cases (A5-A7) in hospital A and eight cases (S1-S8) in hospital S. Patients' hospital stays, COVID-19 symptoms, and transfer history were reviewed. RNA samples were submitted for WGS and genome-wide single nucleotide variants and phylogenetic relationships were analyzed.

RESULTS

The index patient (A5) in hospital A was transferred from hospital S on 26 March. Patients A6 and A7 were the family caregiver and sister, respectively, of the patient who shared a room with A5 for 4 days. Prior to transfer, A5 was at the next bed to S8 in the emergency room on 25 March. Patient S6, a professional caregiver, took care of the patient in the room next to S8's room for 5 days until 22 March and then S5 for another 3 days. WGS revealed that SARS-CoV-2 in A2, A3, and A4 belong to clades V/B.2, S/A, and G/B.1, respectively, whereas that of A5-A7 and S1-S5 are of the V/B.2.1 clade and closely clustered. In particular, SARS-CoV-2 in patients A5 and S5 showed perfect identity.

CONCLUSION

WGS is a useful tool to understand epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2. It is the first study to elucidate the role of patient transfer and caregivers as links of nosocomial outbreaks of COVID-19 in multiple hospitals.

Risk factors and protective measures for healthcare worker infection during highly infectious viral respiratory epidemics: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate risk factors for HCW infection in viral respiratory pandemics (SARS-CoV-2, MERS, SARS CoV-1, influenza A H1N1, influenza H5N1) and improve understanding of HCW risk management amidst the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched from conception until July 2020 for studies comparing infected HCWs (cases) and non-infected HCWs (controls) and risk factors for infection. Outcomes included HCW types, infection prevention practices, and medical procedures. Pooled effect estimates with pathogen-specific stratified meta-analysis and inverse variance meta-regression analysis were completed. GRADE framework was used to rate certainty of evidence. PROSPERO (CRD42020176232) 6 April 2020.

RESULTS

Fifty-four comparative studies were included (n=191,004 HCWs). Compared to non-frontline HCWs, frontline HCWs were at increased infection risk (OR 1.66 95%CI 1.24 to 2.22) and greater for HCWs involved in endotracheal intubations (risk difference [95%CI]: 35.2% [21.4 to 47.9]). Use of gloves, gown, surgical mask, N95 respirator, face protection, and infection training were each strongly protective against infection. Meta-regression showed reduced infection risk in frontline HCWs working in facilities with infection designated wards (OR -1.04, 95%CI -1.53 to -0.33, p=0.004) and performing aerosol-generating medical procedures in designated centres (OR -1.30 95%CI -2.52 to -0.08; p=0.037).

CONCLUSIONS

During highly infectious respiratory pandemics, widely available protective measures such as use of gloves, gowns, and face masks are strongly protective against infection and should be instituted, preferably in dedicated settings, to protect frontline HCW during waves of respiratory virus pandemics.

Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies in First Responders and Public Safety Personnel, New York City, New York, USA, May-July 2020

We conducted a serologic survey in public service agencies in New York City, New York, USA, during May–July 2020 to determine prevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among first responders. Of 22,647 participants, 22.5% tested positive for SARS-CoV-2–specific antibodies. Seroprevalence for police and firefighters was similar to overall seroprevalence; seroprevalence was highest in correctional staff (39.2%) and emergency medical technicians (38.3%) and lowest in laboratory technicians (10.1%) and medicolegal death investigators (10.8%). Adjusted analyses demonstrated association between seropositivity and exposure to SARS-CoV-2–positive household members (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.52 [95% CI 3.19–3.87]), non-Hispanic Black race or ethnicity (aOR 1.50 [95% CI 1.33–1.68]), and severe obesity (aOR 1.31 [95% CI 1.05–1.65]). Consistent glove use (aOR 1.19 [95% CI 1.06–1.33]) increased likelihood of seropositivity; use of other personal protective equipment had no association. Infection control measures, including vaccination, should be prioritized for frontline workers.

Characteristics and predicting factors of Corona Virus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) among healthcare providers in a developing country

A limited number of publications have identified risk factors for Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) among Healthcare Providers (HCPs). We aimed to assess the clinical and epidemiological characteristics and the predicting factors related to COVID-19 among HCPs in Egypt. A comparative cross-sectional study was conducted among HCPs via an online questionnaire. Out of 440 responses, a total of 385 complete responses were analyzed. The responders’ mean age was 37.5±9.4 years, 215 (55.8%) of the participants were males. They included 77 (20%) confirmed COVID-19 cases; most of them had mild (58.6%) or moderate symptoms (30%), and (9.1%) were asymptomatic. Almost all sustained infection while on duty (97.4%). The sources of infection were either infected patients (39%), colleagues (22.1%), household contacts (5.2%) or uncertain (33.8%). The sources were symptomatic in only 62.3% of cases. Asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic sources accounted for 37.7% of the cases. Exposure occurred during healthcare provision in 66.3% of the cases. The presence of co-morbidities (OR = 2.53, CI 1.47–4.38, P = 0.001), working more than 8 hours per day in isolation hospital (OR = 3.09, CI 1.02–9.35, P = 0.046), training on hand hygiene (OR = 2.31, CI 1.05–5.08, P = 0.038) and adherence to IPC measures (OR = 2.11, CI 1.16–3.81, P = 0.014) were the significant predictors of COVID-19. In conclusion, COVID-19 occurred in 20% of responders. Silent spread from asymptomatic or presymptomatic patients, and infected colleagues in hospital settings is an alarming sign. Proactive infection prevention and control measures are highly encouraged on both strategic and operational levels. Reconsideration of surveillance strategy and work-related regulations in healthcare settings are warranted.

COVID-19 and healthcare workers: a rapid systematic review into risks and preventive measures

OBJECTIVE

The COVID-19 pandemic is demanding for occupational medicine and for public health. As healthcare workers (HCWs) fight impacts of SARS-CoV-2 on front lines, we must create safe work environments through comprehensive risk assessments, evaluation and effective implementation of counter-measures. We ask: 'What does current literature report on health risks at workplaces regarding COVID-19?' and 'What do current studies report on the effectiveness of enacted preventative recommendations?'

METHODS

As a snapshot of early HCW research, on 26 April 2020, we conducted a rapid systematic literature search in three databases (PubMed, Web of Science and PsycInfo) for COVID-19-related health outcomes and preventive measures in healthcare-associated workplaces.

RESULTS

27 studies were identified as relevant for exploring the risk of infection, 11 studies evaluated preventive measures. The studies described that SARS-CoV-2 impacts significantly on HCW's health and well-being, not only through infections (n=6), but also from a mental health perspective (n=16). 4 studies reported indirect risks such as skin injuries, one study described headaches to result from the use of personal protective equipment. Few studies provided information on the effectiveness of prevention strategies. Overall, most studies on health risks as well as on the effectiveness of preventive measures were of a moderate-to-low quality; this was mainly due to limitations in study design, imprecise exposure and outcome assessments.

CONCLUSIONS

Due to widespread exposure of HCW to SARS-CoV-2, workplaces in healthcare must be as safe as possible. Information from HCW can provide valuable insights into how infections spread, into direct and indirect health effects and into how effectively counter-measures mitigate adverse health outcomes. However, available research disallows to judge which counter-measure(s) of a current 'mix' should be prioritised for HCW. To arrive at evidence-based cost-effective prevention strategies, more well-conceived studies on the effectiveness of counter-measures are needed.