Clinical characteristics and humoral immune response in healthcare workers with COVID-19 in a teaching hospital in Belgium

COVID-19 among health care workers and their impact on the health care system in a teaching hospital in Pakistan: A cross sectional observational study

Background and Aims

Health care workers (HCWs) are thought to be high-risk population for acquiring coronavirus disease (COVID-19). The COVID-19 emergence has had a profound effect on healthcare system. We sought to investigate the COVID-19 among HCWs and their effects on the healthcare system.

Methods

A cross sectional observational study was conducted at Timergara teaching hospital. The study included HCWs with positive real time polymerase chain reaction (Q-PCR) for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). The study duration was from April to September, 2020. The demographic profile of each recruited subject was collected through structured interview. The patient's admissions to hospital were collected for the 5 months before (October 2019-February 2020) and 5 months after lockdown (March-July 2020).

Results

A total of 72 out of 689 (10%) HCWs were tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, of whom 83% were front-liners. The majority were male (72%), with comorbidities (14%) and no mortality. The structured interview of all participants showed that the healthcare setting was the major possible source of infection (97%). The patient admissions into the hospital were reduced by 42% during lockdown than prelockdown period. The patients admission was significantly decreased in the medical ward during lockdown (60% decrease; p < 0.01) with slightly similar trends in other departments.

Conclusion

In conclusion, we found increased risk of COVID-19 for front-line HCWs. Lack of mortality was the favorable outcome. Lack of replacing the infected HCWs possibly explained the marked decrease in hospital admissions, and potential inadequate healthcare delivery during the lockdown. Understanding SARS-CoV-2 among HCWs and their impact on health-care system will be crucial for countries under COVID-19 crises or in case of future pandemic to deliver proper health services.

Geo-environmental parametric 3D models of SARS-CoV-2 virus circulation in hospital ventilation systems

The novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, has the potential to cause natural ventilation systems in hospital environments to be rendered inadequate, not only for workers but also for people who transit through these environments even for a limited duration. Studies in of the fields of geosciences and engineering, when combined with appropriate technologies, allow for the possibility of reducing the impacts of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in the environment, including those of hospitals which are critical centers for healthcare. In this work, we build parametric 3D models to assess the possible circulation of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in the natural ventilation system of a hospital built to care infected patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Building Information Modeling (BIM) was performed, generating 3D models of hospital environments utilizing Revit software for Autodesk CFD 2021. The evaluation considered dimensional analyses of 0°, 45°, 90° and 180°. The analysis of natural ventilation patterns on both internal and external surfaces and the distribution of windows in relation to the displacement dynamics of the SARS-CoV-2 virus through the air were considered. The results showed that in the external area of the hospital, the wind speed reached velocities up to 2.1 m/s when entering the building through open windows. In contact with the furniture, this value decreased to 0.78 m/s. In some internal isolation wards that house patients with COVID-19, areas that should be equipped with negative room pressure, air velocity was null. Our study provides insights into the possibility of SARS-CoV-2 contamination in internal hospital environments as well as external areas surrounding hospitals, both of which encounter high pedestrian traffic in cities worldwide.

Review of Clinical Performance of Serology Based Commercial Diagnostic Assays for Detection of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Antibodies

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus, which caused the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic as declared by the World Health Organization, has created havoc worldwide. The highly transmissible infection can be contained only by accurate diagnosis, quarantining, and exercising social distancing. Therefore, quick and massive deployment of SARS-CoV-2 testing plays a crucial role in the identification and isolation of infected patients. Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction is the gold standard for COVID-19 detection; however, it needs expertise, facilities, and time. Hence, for the ease of population-wide screening, serology-based diagnostic assays were introduced. These can help determine the prevalence of infection, understand the epidemiology of the disease, and assist in suitable public health interventions while being user-friendly and less time consuming. Although serological testing kits in markets soared, their sensitivity and specificity were questioned in reports from different parts of the world. In this article, we have reviewed 40 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and CE-approved clinically evaluated serological kits (8 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA] kits, 10 chemiluminescent immunoassay [CLIA] kits, and 22 lateral flow immunoassay [LFIA] kits) for their sensitivity and specificity and discussed the apparent reasons behind their performance. We observed appreciable sensitivity in the kits detecting total antibodies compared to the kits targeting single isotype antibodies. Tests that determined antibodies against nucleocapsid protein were found to be more sensitive and those detecting antibodies against spike protein were found to have greater specificity. This study was conducted to help the decision-making while acquiring antibody kits and concurrently to be mindful of their shortcomings.

Predictors for Severity of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Healthcare Workers

Background

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are still at higher risk of acquiring severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections than the general population. Identifying risk factors associated with severe SARS-CoV-2 infections is of paramount importance to protect HCWs and the non-infected patients attending different healthcare facilities.

Purpose

To recognize the predictors for severity of SARS-CoV2 infection among HCWs working in either COVID-19 or non-COVID-19 healthcare settings. Also, to assess compliance of HCW to standard precautions of infection control and explore the possible risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted among HCWs with suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, from different Egyptian governorates. They were asked to fill in a web-based self-reporting questionnaire. The questionnaire assessed the demographic and socio-economic characteristics of participants, compliance of HCWs to standard precautions of infection control and COVID-19 presentation.

Results

Our study enrolled 204 HCWs (52.3% physicians). Infection of SARS-CoV-2 was confirmed in 61.3% by RT- PCR; 35.8% were admitted to hospital, and of these, 3.9% were admitted to the intensive care unit. While 30.4% had mild disease, 48.5% had moderate disease, 17.2% had severe disease and 3.9% had critical disease. Regression analysis for variables predicting COVID-19 severity among study healthcare workers showed that associated chronic diseases and management at home were the main independent variables predicting severity of their SARS-COV-2 infection, while the variables age, sex, residence, occupation or drug history of immunosuppressives had no role in severity prediction.

Conclusion

Associated chronic diseases and management at home were the main independent variables predicting severity of SARS-COV-2 infection among HCWs. So, HCWs with chronic diseases should not work in COVID-19 designated hospitals, and there should be a screening strategy for their infection with SARS-COV-2. HCWs must not be negligent in adhering to strict precautions of infection control. HCWs infected with SARS-COV-2 must be managed in hospital not at home.

Sero-prevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among healthcare workers: A multicenter study from Egypt

Background

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at a high risk for disease exposure. Given the limited availability of nucleic acid testing by PCR in low resource settings, serological assays can provide useful data on the proportion of HCWs who have recently or previously been infected. Therefore, in this study, we conducted an immunologic study to determine the seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in two university hospitals in Egypt.

Methods

in this cross sectional study, HCWs who were working in SARS-CoV-2 Isolation Hospitals were interviewed. Estimating specific antibodies (IgM and IgG) against SARS-CoV-2 was carried out using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay targeting the Spike antigen of SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Results

Out of 111, 82 (74%) HCWs accepted to participate with a mean age of 31.5 ± 8.5 years. Anti-SARS-COV2 antibodies were detected in 38/82 (46.3%) of cases with a mean age of 31 years and female HCWs constituted 57.6% of cases. The highest rate of seropositivity was from the nurses (60.5%), and physicians (31.6%) with only (7.9%) technicians. Only 28/82 (34.1%) HCWs reported previous history of COVID19. We reported a statistically significant difference in the timing of exposure (p = 0.010) and the frequency of contact with COVID-19 cases (p = 0.040) between previously infected and on-infected HCWs. Longer time of recovery was reported from IgG positive HCWs (p = 0.036).

Conclusion

The high frequency of seropositive HCWs in investigated hospitals is alarming, especially among asymptomatic personnel. Confirmation of diseased HCWs (among seropositive ones) are warranted.

Higher rate of SARS-CoV-2 IgG seropositivity in hospital-based healthcare workers compared to elderly care staff in a Swedish low-prevalence region: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Previous seroprevalence studies have demonstrated higher anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG seroprevalence in healthcare workers (HCWs) than in the background population during the first phase of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. These studies, however, focussed mainly on hospital employees.

AIM

To perform a cross-sectional study comparing the seroprevalence of hospital-based HCWs with those employed in elderly care (home care and nursing homes).

METHODS

Employees (n = 4955) in the county of Värmland, Sweden, were recruited between weeks 27 and 42 and tested for IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Serological results were combined with self-reported questionnaire data.

FINDINGS

IgG seroprevalence was 5.7% in the total group of HCWs, and was higher among those employed in hospital-based healthcare than among those working in elderly care (8.4% vs. 3.7%, p < .001). Being employed as an assistant nurse, working in a COVID-19 unit, and being exposed via co-workers or private acquaintances were all associated with IgG seropositivity.

CONCLUSION

The difference in seroprevalence between HCWs in the two settings suggests that not only the profession but also factors in the workplace environment may be of importance. As all studied exposures were associated with IgG seropositivity, and asymptomatic infection was detected in 7.5% of participants, preventing outbreaks among HCWs is challenging. Adequate use of personal protective equipment when working with patients regardless of COVID-19 status, source control in situations with co-workers in which distancing is not possible, and routines enabling symptomatic staff to isolate pending PCR results are required to prevent healthcare-associated outbreaks of COVID-19.

COVID-19 in Relation to Hyperglycemia and Diabetes Mellitus

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), triggered by the severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), may lead to extrapulmonary manifestations like diabetes mellitus (DM) and hyperglycemia, both predicting a poor prognosis and an increased risk of death. SARS-CoV-2 infects the pancreas through angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), where it is highly expressed compared to other organs, leading to pancreatic damage with subsequent impairment of insulin secretion and development of hyperglycemia even in non-DM patients. Thus, this review aims to provide an overview of the potential link between COVID-19 and hyperglycemia as a risk factor for DM development in relation to DM pharmacotherapy. For that, a systematic search was done in the database of MEDLINE through Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), China Biology Medicine (CBM), and Wanfang Data. Data obtained underline that SARS-CoV-2 infection in DM patients is more severe and associated with poor clinical outcomes due to preexistence of comorbidities and inflammation disorders. SARS-CoV-2 infection impairs glucose homeostasis and metabolism in DM and non-DM patients due to cytokine storm (CS) development, downregulation of ACE2, and direct injury of pancreatic β-cells. Therefore, the potent anti-inflammatory effect of diabetic pharmacotherapies such as metformin, pioglitazone, sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2Is), and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitors may mitigate COVID-19 severity. In addition, some antidiabetic agents and also insulin may reduce SARS-CoV-2 infectivity and severity through the modulation of the ACE2 receptor expression. The findings presented here illustrate that insulin therapy might seem as more appropriate than other anti-DM pharmacotherapies in the management of COVID-19 patients with DM due to low risk of uncontrolled hyperglycemia and diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). From these findings, we could not give the final conclusion about the efficacy of diabetic pharmacotherapy in COVID-19; thus, clinical trial and prospective studies are warranted to confirm this finding and concern.

Impact of both socioeconomic level and occupation on antibody prevalence to SARS-CoV-2 in an Egyptian cohort: The first episode

We studied the impact of socioeconomic level on the anti-SARS-CoV-2-antibodies prevalence in an Egyptian cohort. The low socioeconomic standard group (LSS) included 51 humans, 30 females (F) and 21 males (M). The high socioeconomic standard group (HSS) included 55 subjects, 24 F and 31 M. Of the 30 LSSF, 6 were immunoglobulin M (IgM), 21 immunoglobulin G (IgG), and 6 double positive. Of the 21 LSSM, 5 were IgM, 12 IgG, and 5 double positive. Of the 24 HSSF, 6 were IgM, 11 IgG, and 5 double positive. Of the 31 HSSM, 6 were IgM, 14 IgG, and 4 double positive. Of the 51 LSS humans, 26 were symptomatic (S) and 25 asymptomatic (AS). Of the 26 S, 20 were IgG and 8 IgM/IgG double positive. Of the 25 AS, 13 were IgG and 3 IgM/IgG double positive. Of the 55 HSS humans, 38 were S and 17 AS. Of the 38S, 24 were IgG and 11 IgM positive of whom, 9 were double positive. Of the 17 AS, one was IgG and one IgM positive. The IgM prevalence was higher among the HSS humans. The IgG prevalence was significantly higher among the LSS humans. In the two different socioeconomic standards, the prevalence of either IgM or IgG was higher among F. An inverse correlation was observed between age and the anti-SARS-CoV-2-antibodies prevalence except for LSSF-IgG and LSSM-IgM. In conclusion, socioeconomic standard, gender, and age impact humoral responses to SARS-CoV-2 with a clear heterogeneity in individualized responses to the infection in terms of symptoms.

Healthcare workers hospitalized due to COVID-19 have no higher risk of death than general population. Data from the Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry

AIM

To determine whether healthcare workers (HCW) hospitalized in Spain due to COVID-19 have a worse prognosis than non-healthcare workers (NHCW).

METHODS

Observational cohort study based on the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry, a nationwide registry that collects sociodemographic, clinical, laboratory, and treatment data on patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in Spain. Patients aged 20-65 years were selected. A multivariate logistic regression model was performed to identify factors associated with mortality.

RESULTS

As of 22 May 2020, 4393 patients were included, of whom 419 (9.5%) were HCW. Median (interquartile range) age of HCW was 52 (15) years and 62.4% were women. Prevalence of comorbidities and severe radiological findings upon admission were less frequent in HCW. There were no difference in need of respiratory support and admission to intensive care unit, but occurrence of sepsis and in-hospital mortality was lower in HCW (1.7% vs. 3.9%; p = 0.024 and 0.7% vs. 4.8%; p<0.001 respectively). Age, male sex and comorbidity, were independently associated with higher in-hospital mortality and healthcare working with lower mortality (OR 0.211, 95%CI 0.067-0.667, p = 0.008). 30-days survival was higher in HCW (0.968 vs. 0.851 p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Hospitalized COVID-19 HCW had fewer comorbidities and a better prognosis than NHCW. Our results suggest that professional exposure to COVID-19 in HCW does not carry more clinical severity nor mortality.