Seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG among healthcare workers of a large university hospital in Milan, Lombardy, Italy: a cross-sectional study

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG among healthcare workers in Lagos, Nigeria

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are disproportionately infected with SARS-CoV-2 when compared to members of the general public; estimating the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibody and SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among HCWs is therefore crucial. This study was carried out in four health facilities in Lagos Nigeria to determine the prevalence of IgG antibodies (seroprevalence) and SARS-CoV-2 active infection rate via a positive rtPCR result, the cross-sectional study was conducted between December 2020 and July 2021. Nasopharyngeal and blood samples were collected from HCWs and screened for SARS-CoV-2 infection using the rtPCR technique and antibody using the Abbott anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG CMIA assay, respectively. Demographic and occupational exposures data were obtained and analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics, variables significant via inferential statistics were subjected to a multivariate analysis. A total of 413 participants were enrolled, with a mean age in years of 38.4±11.0. The seroprevalence was 30.9% (115/372) while 63/395 (15.9%) were actively infected with the virus. HCWs whose job role had direct contact with patients had a higher percentage of SARS-CoV-2 infection when compared with those not in direct contact, also being a health care worker was significantly associated with getting a positive COVID-19 PCR result. In conclusion the SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence seen in this study was higher than national serosurvey estimates indicating HCWs are at higher risk of COVID-19 infection when compared to the general public. Vaccination and effective implementation of infection control measures are important to protect HCWs.

Bidirectionality between Cardiometabolic Diseases and COVID-19: Role of Humoral Immunity

Cardiometabolic diseases and abnormalities have recently emerged as independent risk factors of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity, including hospitalizations, invasive mechanical ventilation, and mortality. Determining whether and how this observation translates to more effective long-term pandemic mitigation strategies remains a challenge due to key research gaps. Specific pathways by which cardiometabolic pathophysiology affects humoral immunity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), and vice versa, remain unclear. This review summarizes current evidence of the bidirectional influences between cardiometabolic diseases (diabetes, adiposity, hypertension, CVDs) and SARS-CoV-2 antibodies induced from infection and vaccination based on human studies. Ninety-two studies among >408,000 participants in 37 countries on 5 continents (Europe, Asia, Africa, and North and South America) were included in this review. Obesity was associated with higher neutralizing antibody titers following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Most studies conducted prior to vaccinations found positive or null associations between binding antibodies (levels, seropositivity) and diabetes; after vaccinations, antibody responses did not differ by diabetes. Hypertension and CVDs were not associated with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Findings underscore the importance of elucidating the extent that tailored recommendations for COVID-19 prevention, vaccination effectiveness, screening, and diagnoses among people with obesity could reduce disease burden caused by SARS-CoV-2.

Factors associated with receipt of COVID-19 vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity among healthcare workers in Albania (February 2021-June 2022): secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study

Background

Healthcare workers (HCWs) have been disproportionally affected by COVID-19. We investigated factors associated with two- and three-dose COVID-19 vaccine uptake and SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity among 1504 HCWs enrolled (19 February-7 May 2021) in a prospective COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness cohort in Albania through a secondary analysis.

Methods

We collected sociodemographic, occupational, health, prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, and COVID-19 vaccination data from all HCWs at enrollment. Vaccination status was assessed weekly through June 2022. A serum sample was collected from all participants at enrollment and tested for anti-spike SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. We analyzed HCWs characteristics and outcomes using multivariable logistic regression.

Findings

By 11 June 2022, 1337 (88.9%) HCWs had received two COVID-19 vaccine doses, of whom 255 (19.1%) received a booster. Factors significantly associated with receiving three doses (adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 95% CIs) were being ≥35 years (35-44 years: 1.76 (1.05-2.97); 45-54 years: 3.11 (1.92-5.05); ≥55 years: 3.38 (2.04-5.59)) and vaccinated against influenza (1.78; 1.20-2.64). Booster dose receipt was lower among females (0.58; 0.41-0.81), previously infected (0.67; 0.48-0.93), nurses and midwives (0.31; 0.22-0.45), and support staff (0.19; 0.11-0.32). Overall 1076 (72%) were SARS-CoV-2 seropositive at enrollment. Nurses and midwifes (1.45; 1.05-2.02), support staff (1.57; 1.03-2.41), and HCWs performing aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) (1.40; 1.01-1.94) had higher odds of being seropositive, while smokers had reduced odds (0.55; 0.40-0.75).

Interpretation

In a large cohort of Albanian HCWs, COVID-19 vaccine booster dose uptake was very low, particularly among younger, female, and non-physician HCWs, despite evidence demonstrating the added benefit of boosters in preventing infection and severe disease. Reasons behind these disparities should be explored to develop targeted strategies in order to promote uptake in this critical population. SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was higher among non-physicians and HCWs performing APGs. A better understanding of the factors contributing to these differences is needed to inform interventions that could reduce infections in the future.

Funding

This study was funded by the Task Force for Global Health (US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) cooperative agreement # NU51IP000873) and the World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe.

Ethnic inequalities in COVID-19 infection, hospitalisation, intensive care admission, and death: a global systematic review and meta-analysis of over 200 million study participants

Background

COVID-19 has exacerbated existing ethnic inequalities in health. Little is known about whether inequalities in severe disease and deaths, observed globally among minoritised ethnic groups, relates to greater infection risk, poorer prognosis, or both. We analysed global data on COVID-19 clinical outcomes examining inequalities between people from minoritised ethnic groups compared to the ethnic majority group.

Methods

Databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, EMCARE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library) were searched from 1st December 2019 to 3rd October 2022, for studies reporting original clinical data for COVID-19 outcomes disaggregated by ethnicity: infection, hospitalisation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and mortality. We assessed inequalities in incidence and prognosis using random-effects meta-analyses, with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) use to assess certainty of findings. Meta-regressions explored the impact of region and time-frame (vaccine roll-out) on heterogeneity. PROSPERO: CRD42021284981.

Findings

77 studies comprising over 200,000,000 participants were included. Compared with White majority populations, we observed an increased risk of testing positive for infection for people from Black (adjusted Risk Ratio [aRR]:1.78, 95% CI:1.59-1.99, I2 = 99.1), South Asian (aRR:3.00, 95% CI:1.59-5.66, I2 = 99.1), Mixed (aRR:1.64, 95% CI:1.02-1.67, I2 = 93.2) and Other ethnic groups (aRR:1.36, 95% CI:1.01-1.82, I2 = 85.6). Black, Hispanic, and South Asian people were more likely to be seropositive. Among population-based studies, Black and Hispanic ethnic groups and Indigenous peoples had an increased risk of hospitalisation; Black, Hispanic, South Asian, East Asian and Mixed ethnic groups and Indigenous peoples had an increased risk of ICU admission. Mortality risk was increased for Hispanic, Mixed, and Indigenous groups. Smaller differences were seen for prognosis following infection. Following hospitalisation, South Asian, East Asian, Black and Mixed ethnic groups had an increased risk of ICU admission, and mortality risk was greater in Mixed ethnic groups. Certainty of evidence ranged from very low to moderate.

Interpretation

Our study suggests that systematic ethnic inequalities in COVID-19 health outcomes exist, with large differences in exposure risk and some differences in prognosis following hospitalisation. Response and recovery interventions must focus on tackling drivers of ethnic inequalities which increase exposure risk and vulnerabilities to severe disease, including structural racism and racial discrimination.

Funding

ESRC:ES/W000849/1.

Taste loss as a distinct symptom of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Chemosensory scientists have been skeptical that reports of COVID-19 taste loss are genuine, in part because before COVID-19 taste loss was rare and often confused with smell loss. Therefore, to establish the predicted prevalence rate of taste loss in COVID-19 patients, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 376 papers published in 2020-2021, with 235 meeting all inclusion criteria. Drawing on previous studies and guided by early meta-analyses, we explored how methodological differences (direct vs. self-report measures) may affect these estimates. We hypothesized that direct measures of taste are at least as sensitive as those obtained by self-report and that the preponderance of evidence confirms taste loss is a symptom of COVID-19. The meta-analysis showed that, among 138,015 COVID-19-positive patients, 36.62% reported taste dysfunction (95% confidence interval: 33.02%-40.39%), and the prevalence estimates were slightly but not significantly higher from studies using direct (n = 15) versus self-report (n = 220) methodologies (Q = 1.73, df = 1, P = 0.1889). Generally, males reported lower rates of taste loss than did females, and taste loss was highest among middle-aged adults. Thus, taste loss is likely a bona fide symptom of COVID-19, meriting further research into the most appropriate direct methods to measure it and its underlying mechanisms.

Determinants of seropositivity for SARS-CoV-2 in hospital staff in the second wave of the pandemic in Slovenia

OBJECTIVES

The pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) affected a disproportionately high percentage of healthcare workers (HCWs). The aim of the study was to assess the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG antibodies in nurses and clinicians working in 2 Slovenian regional hospitals, and to identify the factors associated with seropositivity.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study was designed as a crosssectional study. Clinicians and nurses were invited to participate in November-December 2020. The respondents (813, 65.8%) completed a questionnaire and consented to provide 10 ml of blood for determining the presence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies.

RESULTS

The authors observed a seroprevalence rate of 20.4%. The results of the univariate analysis proved that the age of a nurse or clinician was the factor most strongly associated with seropositivity - in fact, the youngest nurses and clinicians were 8.33 times more likely to be seropositive than those in the oldest age group (p = 0.041). Being in contact with a family/household member who was SARS-CoV-2-positive was also a very important factor. In the work-related factors group, being in the contact with a SARS-CoV-2-positive colleague (OR = 2.35, p = 0.026) or being in contact with a COVID-19 patient (OR = 1.96, p = 0.004) correlated with seropositivity. In the primary work location/department group, the only significant association appeared among those working in surgical, ENT or ophthalmology departments. The results of the multivariate analysis further supported the thesis that the age of nurses and clinicians was the factor most strongly associated with seropositivity. The youngest nurses and clinicians were 12.5 times more likely to be seropositive than those in the oldest age group (p = 0.024). Being in contact with a SARS-CoV-2-positive family/household member remained the second most important factor.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant number of clinicians and nurses working in secondary healthcare were infected in the first 9 months of the pandemic. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2022;35(5):571-84.

SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence around the world: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Covid-19 has been one of the major concerns around the world in the last 2 years. One of the challenges of this disease has been to determine its prevalence. Conflicting results of the serology test in Covid explored the need for an updated meta-analysis on this issue. Thus, this systematic review aimed to estimate the prevalence of global SARS-CoV-2 serology in different populations and geographical areas.

METHODS

To identify studies evaluating the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2, a comprehensive literature search was performed from international databases, including Medline (PubMed), Web of Sciences, Scopus, EMBASE, and CINHAL.

RESULTS

In this meta-analysis, the results showed that SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence is between 3 and 15% worldwide. In Eastern Mediterranean, the pooled estimate of seroprevalence SARS-CoV-2 was 15% (CI 95% 5-29%), and in Africa, the pooled estimate was 6% (CI 95% 1-13%). In America, the pooled estimate was 8% (CI 95% 6-11%), and in Europe, the pooled estimate was 5% (CI 95% 4-6%). Also the last region, Western Pacific, the pooled estimate was 3% (CI 95% 2-4%). Besides, we analyzed three of these areas separately. This analysis estimated the prevalence in subgroups such as study population, diagnostic methods, sampling methods, time, perspective, and type of the study.

CONCLUSION

The present meta-analysis showed that the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 has been between 3 and 15% worldwide. Even considering the low estimate of this rate and the increasing vaccination in the world, many people are still susceptible to SARS-CoV-2.

Effectiveness of a digital data gathering system to manage the first pandemic wave among healthcare workers in a main European coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) tertiary-care hospital

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the information collected from workers infected with severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or close contacts using a digital data gathering system (DDGS) developed at the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic to better manage the spread of infection at our hospital.

DESIGN

Observational retrospective study.

SETTING

Tertiary University Hospital "Spedali Civili" Hospital, Brescia, Italy.

PARTICIPANTS

Workers (most of whom are healthcare workers) employed at the hospital.

METHODS

The information collected by the DDGS was transferred to the IBM SPSS statistical software package and then statistically analyzed.

RESULTS

Overall, ∼16% of the hospital workforce was infected by SARS-CoV-2 in the first pandemic wave. Nurses were the professional category with the highest infection rate (∼15%). The asymptomatic rate of infection was between 31% and 62%. Positive molecular swabs were significantly more frequent in workers undergoing the test after sending a signaling form to our DDGS. Among workers sending the signaling forms, the information about symptoms was more predictive in terms of risk, compared to the close-contact information. The concordance between molecular swabs and subsequent serological testing was significantly higher in workers signaling their at-risk condition through the DDGS.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, our data demonstrate the advantages of a digital system to gather information from workers, which is useful for managing emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic. This holds particularly true for large organizations such as hospitals.

Role of serology tests in COVID-19 non-hospitalized patients: A cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV2) has imposed catastrophic impressions on the world. After all the focused researches conducted in the COVID-19 area, many features remain obscure. We have surveyed 1,363 outpatients with suspected COVID-19 in Tehran, Iran. The analysis emphasized on characteristics of patients with positive PCR or serology of SARS-CoV-2.

METHODS

The nasopharyngeal swabs were tested for SARS-CoV2 PCR. Serum specimens were tested for SARS-CoV2 IgG and IgM. Clinical presentations of the patients, history of chronic diseases or drug use, contact with a possible COVID-19 patient and previous infection with SARS-COV2 were investigated.

RESULTS

Of the total 1,363 investigated patients, 22% had positive SARS-CoV-2 PCRs, 82% had positive IgG, 38% had positive IgM, and 31% had both positive IgM and IgG values. Positive serologic tests were significantly associated with a positive PCR test obtained previously in the course of the current disease (P value<0.001). IgG and IgM antibody values were significantly associated with underlying disease, cough, fever, chills, fatigue, and myalgia (all P values <0.001). Dyspnea was significantly associated with IgG levels (P value = 0.01), yet it was not associated with IgM serology (P value = 0.2). Positive serology tests were not associated with symptoms of coryza. GI symptoms were not associated with positive IgG test (P value = 0.1), yet it did show an association with positive IgM test (P value = 0.02). Cough, fever, chills, myalgia fatigue, dyspnea, and GI symptoms were all significantly associated with positive PCR (all P values <0.001), and symptoms of coryza did not show a significant relationship (P value = 0.8).

CONCLUSION

Assessing antibody titers in outpatients is invaluable due to the epidemiological importance of investigations in mild or even asymptomatic cases. Since the number of such studies in non-hospitalized patients is not high, the current study can be used as a comparison model.

Health of International Migrant Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Scoping Review

Background

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and control measures adopted have had a disproportionate impact on workers, with migrants being a group specifically affected but poorly studied. This scoping review aims to describe the evidence published on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the physical and mental health of migrant workers.

Methods

Papers written in English covering physical and mental health among international migrant workers during the COVID-19 pandemic, retrieved from six electronic databases searched on July 31, 2021, were included. A total of 1,096 references were extracted, of which 26 studies were finally included.

Results

Most of the migrant populations studied were born in Asia (16 of 26) and Latin America (8 of 26) and were essential workers (15 of 26). Few studies described the length of stay in the host country (9 of 26), the legal status of the migrant population (6 of 26), or established comparison groups (7 of 26). Ten studies described COVID-19 outbreaks with high infection rates. Fourteen studies evaluated mental health (anxiety, depression, worries, fears, stress, and post-traumatic stress disorder). Three of the 26 studies presented collateral positive effects of the COVID-19 pandemic because of improved hygiene.

Conclusion

There is a limited number of original publications related to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the physical and mental health of migrant workers around the world. These publications mainly focus on migrants born in Asia and Latin America. The physical, long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has, so far, not been evaluated. The positive collateral effects of improving healthcare conditions for migrant workers should also be further investigated.

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Screening in Healthcare Workers and Its Correlation with Clinical Presentation in Tertiary Care Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal, from November 2020 to January 2021

Background

Antibody titer and the life span of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 have been found to be associated with the clinical presentation in individuals. The extent of exposure of healthcare workers and the general public to SARS-CoV-2 needs to be assessed to monitor the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, this study is an attempt in assessing the anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody in health care workers.

Methods

This laboratory-based cross-sectional study was performed in Manmohan Memorial Medical College and Teaching Hospital, Kathmandu from November 2020 to January 2021. A total of 185 HCWs were enrolled in this study. Their serum samples were screened for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, and a structured questionnaire was administered to collect further information. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody screening was performed using lateral flow immunoassay. The data were analyzed using SPSS version 20.

Results

Among 185 HCWs that participated in the study, 41 (22.2%) tested positive for the anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody. Of these 41 HCWs, 37 tested positive for IgG only and 4 of them tested positive for both IgM and IgG antibodies. The presence of the previous history of SARS-CoV-2 infection (p < 0.001), the presence of flu-like symptoms within the last 6 months (p < 0.001), and the presence of positive contact history (p=0.002) were statistically significant with the presence of the antibody among HCWs.

Conclusion

Healthcare workers carry a high burden of SARS-CoV-2 infection and are at risk of acquiring infection from their workplace. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody screening among healthcare workers is highly recommended in multiple healthcare settings as it can help in monitoring transmission dynamics and evaluation of infection control policies.

Clinical characteristics of healthcare workers with SARS-CoV-2 infection after vaccination with BNT162b2 vaccine

Background

The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), had a significant impact worldwide. Vaccines against COVID-19 appear as a tool able to curb out mortality and reduce the circulation of the virus. Little is known so far about the clinical characteristics of individuals who developed SARS-CoV-2 infection after having received the vaccination, as well as the temporal relationship between vaccine administration and symptoms onset.

Methods

Retrospective cohort study among the 3219 healthcare workers (HCWs) of the Fondazione IRCCS Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico of Milano who received a full immunization with the BNT162b2 vaccine and who developed SARS-CoV-2 infection (documented through positive RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal swab) in March–April 2021.

Results

Overall, we have identified 15 HCWs with SARS-CoV-2 infection after vaccination, 7 (46.7%) of them were male and the mean age was 38.4 years (SD 14). In 4 of them, the presence of SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleocapsid (anti-N) antibodies was assessed before vaccination and resulted positive in 1 case. In all HCWs the presence of SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike (anti-S1) antibodies was assessed, on average 42.2 days after the completion of vaccination, with a mean value of 2055 U/mL (SD 1927.3). SARS-CoV-2 infection was ascertained on average 56.2 days after vaccination. The mean cycle threshold (Ct) of SARS-CoV-2 PCR was 26.4, the lineage was characterized in 9 HCWs. None of the HCWs reported a primary or secondary immunodeficiency. Regarding symptoms, they were reported only by 7 (46.7%) HCWs and appeared on average 55 days after the second dose of vaccination. Of those who reported symptoms, one (14.3%) had fever, 7 (100%) rhinitis/conjunctivitis, 4 (57.1%) taste and smell alterations, none had respiratory symptoms, 4 headache/arthralgia (57.1%) and 1 gastrointestinal symptom (14.3%). All symptoms disappeared in a few days and no other unclassified symptoms were reported.

Conclusions

Infections occurring after vaccination with the BNT162b2 vaccine are mostly asymptomatic and are not associated with the serum titre of anti-S1 antibodies. We did not find a predominance of specific viral variants, with several lineages represented.

Taste loss as a distinct symptom of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Chemosensory scientists have been skeptical that reports of COVID-19 taste loss are genuine, in part because before COVID-19 taste loss was rare and often confused with smell loss. Therefore, to establish the predicted prevalence rate of taste loss in COVID-19 patients, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 376 papers published in 2020-2021, with 241 meeting all inclusion criteria. Drawing on previous studies and guided by early meta-analyses, we explored how methodological differences (direct vs. self-report measures) may affect these estimates. We hypothesized that direct measures of taste are at least as sensitive as those obtained by self-report and that the preponderance of evidence confirms taste loss is a symptom of COVID-19. The meta-analysis showed that, among 138,897 COVID-19-positive patients, 39.2% reported taste dysfunction (95% confidence interval: 35.34%-43.12%), and the prevalence estimates were slightly but not significantly higher from studies using direct (n = 18) versus self-report (n = 223) methodologies (Q = 0.57, df = 1, P = 0.45). Generally, males reported lower rates of taste loss than did females, and taste loss was highest among middle-aged adults. Thus, taste loss is likely a bona fide symptom of COVID-19, meriting further research into the most appropriate direct methods to measure it and its underlying mechanisms.

Exploring the Clinical Utility of Gustatory Dysfunction (GD) as a Triage Symptom Prior to Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) in the Diagnosis of COVID-19: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of COVID-19 is made using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) but its sensitivity varies from 20 to 100%. The presence of gustatory dysfunction (GD) in a patient with upper respiratory tract symptoms might increase the clinical suspicion of COVID-19.

AIMS

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR-) and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of using GD as a triage symptom prior to RT-PCR.

METHODS

PubMed and Embase were searched up to 20 June 2021. Studies published in English were included if they compared the frequency of GD in COVID-19 adult patients (proven by RT-PCR) to COVID-19 negative controls in case control or cross-sectional studies. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies.

RESULTS

21,272 COVID-19 patients and 52,298 COVID-19 negative patients were included across 44 studies from 21 countries. All studies were of moderate to high risk of bias. Patients with GD were more likely to test positive for COVID-19: DOR 6.39 (4.86-8.40), LR+ 3.84 (3.04-4.84), LR- 0.67 (0.64-0.70), pooled sensitivity 0.37 (0.29-0.47) and pooled specificity 0.92 (0.89-0.94). While history/questionnaire-based assessments were predictive of RT-PCR positivity (DOR 6.62 (4.95-8.85)), gustatory testing was not (DOR 3.53 (0.98-12.7)). There was significant heterogeneity among the 44 studies (I2 = 92%, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

GD is useful as a symptom to determine if a patient should undergo further testing, especially in resource-poor regions where COVID-19 testing is scarce. Patients with GD may be advised to quarantine while repeated testing is performed if the initial RT-PCR is negative.

FUNDING

None.

SARS-CoV-2 IgG seropositivity in a cohort of 449 non-hospitalized individuals during Spanish COVID-19 lockdown

The Coronavirus Disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 led the Spanish government to impose a national lockdown in an attempt to control the spread of the infection. Mobility restrictions and the requirement of a medical prescription for serological testing for COVID-19 were included among the control measures. Under this scenario, between April 15th and June 15th, 2020, we performed an observational study including 449 individuals allowed to be tested according to the governmental restrictions, i.e. fulfilling the following prescription requirements: manifestation of COVID-19-compatible symptoms, contact with a confirmed COVID-19 patient, or employment as an essential worker, including health care workers, firefighters and public safety personnel such as police. Importantly, a relevant feature of the studied cohort was that none of the participants had been hospitalized. We analyzed SARS-CoV-2 IgG seropositivity in this specific cohort, uncovering intrinsic features of great demographic interest. The overall rate of IgG seropositivity was 33.69% (95% CI: 29.27-38.21). This frequency was comparable among the different participant occupations. A RT-PCR positive test, contact with a household member previously tested positive and the presence of COVID-19-compatible symptoms were positively associated with IgG + results. Among these symptoms, ageusia/anosmia was positively and independently associated with SARS-CoV-2 IgG seropositivity, while odynophagia was inversely associated. However, fever, ageusia/anosmia and asthenia were the most frequent symptoms described by IgG + subjects. Therefore, our data illustrate how specific cohorts display particular characteristics that should be taken into account when studying population-wide SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence and key defining symptoms of COVID-19.

Taste loss as a distinct symptom of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Chemosensory scientists have been skeptical that reports of COVID-19 taste loss are genuine, in part because before COVID-19, taste loss was rare and often confused with smell loss. Therefore, to establish the predicted prevalence rate of taste loss in COVID-19 patients, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 376 papers published in 2020-2021, with 241 meeting all inclusion criteria. Additionally, we explored how methodological differences (direct vs. self-report measures) may affect these estimates. We hypothesized that direct prevalence measures of taste loss would be the most valid because they avoid the taste/smell confusion of self-report. The meta-analysis showed that, among 138,897 COVID-19-positive patients, 39.2% reported taste dysfunction (95% CI: 35.34-43.12%), and the prevalence estimates were slightly but not significantly higher from studies using direct (n = 18) versus self-report (n = 223) methodologies (Q = 0.57, df = 1, p = 0.45). Generally, males reported lower rates of taste loss than did females and taste loss was highest in middle-aged groups. Thus, taste loss is a bona fide symptom COVID-19, meriting further research into the most appropriate direct methods to measure it and its underlying mechanisms.

Lessons learnt from the first large outbreak of COVID-19 in health-care settings in Tasmania, Australia

Problem

One month after the initial case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Tasmania, an island state of Australia, two health-care workers (HCWs) from a single regional hospital were notified to public health authorities following positive tests for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid. These were the first recognized cases in an outbreak that overwhelmed the hospital’s ability to function.

Context

The outbreak originated from two index cases. Both had returned to Tasmania following travel on a cruise ship and required hospital admission for management of COVID-19. A total of 138 cases were subsequently linked to this outbreak: 81 HCWs (most being nurses) and 23 patients across three hospitals, one resident of an aged-care facility and 33 close contacts.

Action

The outbreak was controlled through the identification and isolation of cases, identification and quarantining of close contacts and their household members, closure of the affected facilities and community-level restrictions to reduce social mixing in the affected region.

Lessons learnt

Factors that were likely to have contributed to ongoing transmission in this setting included workplace practices that prevented adequate physical distancing, attending work while symptomatic, challenges in rapidly identifying contacts, mobility of staff and patients between facilities, and challenges in the implementation of infection control practices.

Discussion

Many commonly accepted hospital practices before the COVID-19 pandemic amplified the outbreak. The lessons learnt from this investigation changed work practices for HCWs and led to wider public health interventions in the management of potential primary and secondary contacts.

Nasopharyngeal Testing among Healthcare Workers (HCWs) of a Large University Hospital in Milan, Italy during Two Epidemic Waves of COVID-19

BACKGROUND

since October 2020, a second SARS-CoV-2 epidemic wave has hit Italy. We investigate the frequency of positive nasopharyngeal swabs among HCWs during the two waves and the association with occupation and demographic characteristics.

METHODS

this is a retrospective, observational study conducted in a large university hospital in Milan, Northern Italy. We defined two epidemic waves: 1st (February 2020-July 2020) and 2nd (August 2020-January 2021). Occupational and demographic characteristics of HCWs who underwent nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 were collected.

RESULTS

in the 1st wave, 242 positive subjects (7.2%) were found among 3378 HCWs, whereas in the 2nd wave, the positive subjects were 545 out of 4465 (12.2%). In both epidemic waves positive NPSs were more frequent among HCWs with health-related tasks and lower among students (p < 0.001). However, in the 2nd wave, workers engaged in non-health-related tasks had a peak of 20.7% positivity. Among 160 positive HCWs in the 1st wave who were tested again in the 2nd wave, the rate of reinfection based on SARS-CoV2 RNA cycle quantification value was 0.6%.

CONCLUSIONS

during the 2nd epidemic wave, we confirmed a significant impact of COVID-19 among HCWs. The rise of infection rate among HCWs seems to reflect the increasing spread of SARS-CoV-2 among the overall population.

SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike antibody titres after vaccination with BNT162b2 in naïve and previously infected individuals

Great expectations are placed in vaccines against COVID-19 to control the pandemic. We reviewed the antibody titres in a cohort of healthcare workers (HCWs) vaccinated with BNT162b2 to assess the influence of a previous infection on them. We stratified the results according to the individual history of nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) and symptoms. Among 3475 HCWs the highest titres were recorded among those infected more than 6 months before vaccination, independently of symptoms, followed by those infected less than 6 months before vaccination, especially in those with symptoms, and by uninfected HCWs. Vaccination with BNT162b2 can boost immunity acquired through infection, particularly in those infected more than 6 months before vaccination.

Prevalence, Persistence, and Factors Associated with SARS-CoV-2 IgG Seropositivity in a Large Cohort of Healthcare Workers in a Tertiary Care University Hospital in Northern Italy

This observational study evaluated SARS-CoV-2 IgG seroprevalence and related clinical, demographic, and occupational factors among workers at the largest tertiary care University-Hospital of Northwestern Italy and the University of Turin after the first pandemic wave of March–April 2020. Overall, about 10,000 individuals were tested; seropositive subjects were retested after 5 months to evaluate antibodies waning. Among 8769 hospital workers, seroprevalence was 7.6%, without significant differences related to job profile; among 1185 University workers, 3.3%. Self-reporting of COVID-19 suspected symptoms was significantly associated with positivity (Odds Ratio (OR) 2.07, 95%CI: 1.76–2.44), although 27% of seropositive subjects reported no previous symptom. At multivariable analysis, contacts at work resulted in an increased risk of 69%, or 24% for working in a COVID ward; contacts in the household evidenced the highest risk, up to more than five-fold (OR 5.31, 95%CI: 4.12–6.85). Compared to never smokers, being active smokers was inversely associated with seroprevalence (OR 0.60, 95%CI: 0.48–0.76). After 5 months, 85% of previously positive subjects still tested positive. The frequency of SARS-COV-2 infection among Health Care Workers was comparable with that observed in surveys performed in Northern Italy and Europe after the first pandemic wave. This study confirms that infection frequently occurred as asymptomatic and underlines the importance of household exposure, seroprevalence (OR 0.60, 95%CI: 0.48–0.76).