Asymptomatic screening for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) as an infection prevention measure in healthcare facilities: Challenges and considerations

EffiCOVID-net: A highly efficient convolutional neural network for COVID-19 diagnosis using chest X-ray imaging

The global COVID-19 pandemic has drastically affected daily life, emphasizing the urgent need for early and accurate detection to provide adequate medical treatment, especially with limited antiviral options. Chest X-ray imaging has proven crucial for distinguishing COVID-19 from other respiratory conditions, providing an essential diagnostic tool. Deep learning (DL)-based models have proven highly effective in image diagnostics in recent years. Many of these models are computationally intensive and prone to overfitting, especially when trained on limited datasets. Additionally, conventional models often fail to capture multi-scale features, reducing diagnostic accuracy. This paper proposed a highly efficient convolutional neural network (CNN) called EffiCOVID-Net, incorporating diverse feature learning units. The proposed model consists of a bunch of EffiCOVID blocks that incorporate several layers of convolution containing (3×3) filters and recurrent connections to extract complex features while preserving spatial integrity. The performance of EffiCOVID-Net is rigorously evaluated using standard performance metrics on two publicly available COVID-19 chest X-ray datasets. Experimental results demonstrate that EffiCOVID-Net outperforms existing models, achieving 98.68% accuracy on the COVID-19 radiography dataset (D1), 98.55% on the curated chest X-ray dataset (D2), and 98.87% on the mixed dataset (DMix) in multi-class classification (COVID-19 vs. Normal vs. Pneumonia). For binary classification (COVID-19 vs. Normal), the model attains 99.06%, 99.78%, and 99.07% accuracy, respectively. Integrating Grad-CAM-based visualizations further enhances interpretability by highlighting critical regions influencing model predictions. EffiCOVID-Net's lightweight architecture ensures low computational overhead, making it suitable for deployment in resource-constrained clinical settings. A comparative analysis with existing methods highlights its superior accuracy, efficiency, and robustness performance. However, while the model enhances diagnostic workflows, it is best utilized as an assistive tool rather than a standalone diagnostic method.

Potential biases in test-negative design studies of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness arising from the inclusion of asymptomatic individuals

The test-negative design (TND) is a popular method for evaluating vaccine effectiveness (VE). A "classical" TND study includes symptomatic individuals tested for the disease targeted by the vaccine to estimate VE against symptomatic infection. However, recent applications of the TND have attempted to estimate VE against infection by including all tested individuals, regardless of their symptoms. In this article, we use directed acyclic graphs and simulations to investigate potential biases in TND studies of COVID-19 VE arising from the use of this "alternative" approach, particularly when applied during periods of widespread testing. We show that the inclusion of asymptomatic individuals can potentially lead to collider stratification bias, uncontrolled confounding by health and healthcare-seeking behaviors (HSBs), and differential outcome misclassification. While our focus is on the COVID-19 setting, the issues discussed here may also be relevant in the context of other infectious diseases. This may be particularly true in scenarios where there is either a high baseline prevalence of infection, a strong correlation between HSBs and vaccination, different testing practices for vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, or settings where both the vaccine under study attenuates symptoms of infection and diagnostic accuracy is modified by the presence of symptoms.

Estimates of SARS-CoV-2 Infections and Population Immunity After the COVID-19 Pandemic in Austria: Analysis of National Wastewater Data

BACKGROUND

Postpandemic surveillance data on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infections may help inform future public health policies regarding severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing, vaccinations, or other COVID-19 measures. We estimate the total SARS-CoV-2 infections in Austria after the end of the pandemic from wastewater data and utilize these estimates to calculate the average national levels of SARS-CoV-2 infection protection and COVID-19 death protection.

METHODS

We estimated the total SARS-CoV-2 infections in Austria after the end of the pandemic (5 May 2023, per World Health Organization) up to May 2024 from wastewater data using a previously published model. These estimates were used in an agent-based model (ABM) to estimate average national levels of SARS-CoV-2 infection protection and COVID-19 death protection, based on waning immunity estimates of infections and vaccination in previous literature.

RESULTS

We estimate approximately 3.2 million infections between 6 May 2023 and 23 May 2024, with a total of 17.8 million infections following 12 May 2020. The ABM estimates that the national average death protection was approximately 82% higher in May 2024 than before the pandemic. This represents a relative decrease of 8% since May 2023. It also shows that 95% of people in Austria were infected with SARS-CoV-2 at least once by May 2024. National infection protection remained relatively low after the onset of Omicron.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings should be considered for public health decisions on SARS-CoV-2 testing practices and vaccine booster administrations.

A questionnaire survey of infection control measures during the coronavirus infectious disease 2019 pandemic era

OBJECTIVE

To clarify the infection control measures required in the event of a new infectious disease outbreak, we conducted a questionnaire survey on the infection control measures implemented against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODS

An invitation to participate in this survey was sent to the heads of 2689 facilities affiliated with the members of the Japanese Society for Infection Prevention and Control in February 2023, requesting responses to the online survey using Google Forms by March 2023.

RESULTS

Six hundred and forty-five facilities, including 20 clinics and 625 hospitals, participated in the survey. This survey revealed that various infection control measures were implemented, including universal masking in the non-COVID-19 ward (96.5 %), screening tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on scheduled admission (89.0 %), SARS-CoV-2 tests (98.7 %), and isolation in private rooms (76.5 %) for inpatients with fever. However, nosocomial infections and clusters of COVID-19 occurred in 94.4 % and 90.9 % of cases during the investigation period, respectively. One of the reasons for these results is that healthcare personnel (HCP) and patients were common index cases of nosocomial infections, and the most common cause of clusters was the work of symptomatic HCPs. These results suggest that HCPs should understand that they can be index cases or spreaders. On the other hand, the most common support from external facilities was healthcare centers, followed by physicians or nurses from other hospitals.

CONCLUSION

In response to the emergence of infections, it is important to consider implementing infection control measures for HCPs and patients.

Comparing the effectiveness of universal admission testing and risk-based testing at emergency admission for preventing nosocomial COVID-19: a multicenter retrospective cohort study in Japan

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of universal admission testing (UAT) and risk-based testing (RBT) in preventing nosocomial coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) after the implementation of strict infection control measures.

DESIGN

Retrospective multicenter cohort study.

SETTING

Five community hospitals in Japan.

PATIENTS

14,028 adult patients admitted emergently from June 1, 2022, to January 31, 2023.

METHODS

We calculated crude incidence density rates of community-acquired COVID-19 (positive test ≤4 days postadmission), hospital-acquired COVID-19 (positive test ≥8 days postadmission), total postadmission COVID-19 (all cases of positive test postadmission), and primary cases (sporadic and index cases). A generalized estimating equation model was used to adjust for local incidence (new COVID-19 patients per 100,000 population), single-bed room proportion, and admission proportion of patients older than 65 years.

RESULTS

The weekly local incidence in the study areas was less than 1,800 per 100,000 population (1.8%). Two hospitals implemented RBT and 3 implemented UAT. The median admission testing rate was higher in the UAT group than in the RBT group (95% vs 55%; difference 45.2%, 95% CI, 40.3%-48.8%). Crude and adjusted analyses revealed no significant associations between incidence density rates (IRR; >1 indicates higher incidence with UAT) and admission strategies for any of the outcomes: community-acquired cases (adjusted IRR = 1.23; 95% CI, 0.46-3.31), hospital-acquired cases (1.46; 0.80-2.66), total postadmission COVID-19 (1.22; 0.79-1.87), and primary cases (0.81; 0.59-1.12).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with risk-based testing, universal admission testing may have limited additional benefits in preventing nosocomial COVID-19 transmission during a period of low-moderate local incidence.

Nosocomial Outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 in a Hospital Ward during the Omicron Variant-Dominant Wave with a Review of the Relevant Literature

Clusters of nosocomial coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been reported globally during the recent pandemic. Unfortunately, these clusters negatively affect inpatient morbidity, mortality, and hospital functioning. Using epidemiological data and whole-genome sequencing (WGS) of SARS-CoV-2, this study investigated the outbreak of COVID-19 at a university hospital. Eight inpatients and 13 healthcare workers tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during a 1-month period. WGS of the virus in 11 patients revealed that the two variants of concern belonging to the Omicron sublineages, BA.2.3 and BA1.1.2, caused an outbreak when the proportion of the Omicron lineage in the community changed. When variants of concern undergo mutation, a response to the outbreak should be made with multiple variants in mind, even in the absence of epidemiological data showing close contact or other potential vectors of infection. Awareness of infection prevention and control should be raised to safeguard patient safety.

SARS-CoV-2 Transmission during High-Altitude Field Studies

Grimm, Mirjam, Lucie Ziegler, Annina Seglias, Maamed Mademilov, Kamila Magdieva, Gulzada Mirzalieva, Aijan Taalaibekova, Simone Suter, Simon R. Schneider, Fiona Zoller, Vera Bissig, Lukas Reinhard, Meret Bauer, Julian Müller, Tanja L. Ulrich, Arcangelo F. Carta, Patrick R. Bader, Konstantinos Bitos, Aurelia E. Reiser, Benoit Champigneulle, Damira Ashyralieva, Philipp M. Scheiwiller, Silvia Ulrich, Talant M. Sooronbaev, Michael Furian, and Konrad E. Bloch. SARS-CoV-2 Transmission during High-Altitude Field Studies. High Alt Med Biol. 25:197-204, 2024. Background: Throughout the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, virus transmission during clinical research was of concern. Therefore, during high-altitude field studies performed in 2021, we took specific COVID-19 precautions and investigated the occurrence of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: From May to September 2021, we performed studies in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and in healthy school-age children in Kyrgyzstan in high-altitude facilities at 3,100 m and 3,250 m and at 760 m. The various implemented COVID-19 safety measures included systematic SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen testing (RAT). Main outcomes were SARS-CoV-2-RAT-positive rate among participants and staff at initial presentation (prevalence) and SARS-CoV-2-RAT-positive conversion during and within 10 days after studies (incidence). Results: Among 338 participants and staff, SARS-CoV-2-RAT-positive prevalence was 15 (4.4%). During mean ± SD duration of individual study participation of 3.1 ± 1.0 day and within 10 days, RAT-positive conversion occurred in 1/237(0.4%) participants. Among staff working in studies for 31.5 ± 29.3 days, SARS-CoV-2-RAT-positive conversion was 11/101(10.9%). In all 338 individuals involved in the studies over the course of 15.6 weeks, the median SARS-CoV-2-RAT-positive incidence was 0.00%/week (quartiles 0.00; 0.64). Over the same period, the median background incidence among the total Kyrgyz population of 6,636 million was 0.06%/week (0.03; 0.11), p = 0.013 (Wilcoxon rank sum test). Conclusions: Taking precautions by implementing specific safety measures, SARS-CoV-2 transmission during clinical studies was very rare, and the SARS-CoV-2 incidence among participants and staff was lower than that in the general population during the same period. The results are reassuring and may help in decision-making on the conduct of clinical research in similar settings.

Horizontal versus vertical strategies for infection prevention: current practices and controversies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) represent a major burden on healthcare facilities. Effective infection prevention strategies are essential to prevent the spread of HAIs. These can be broadly classified as vertical and horizontal interventions. Through this review, we aim to assess the merits of these strategies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Vertical strategies include active surveillance testing and isolation for patients infected or colonized with a particular organism. These strategies are beneficial to curb the spread of emerging pathogens and during outbreaks. However, the routine use of contact precautions for organisms such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus remains controversial. Horizontal interventions are larger-scale and reduce HAIs by targeting a common mode of transmission shared by multiple organisms. Among these, hand hygiene, chlorhexidine gluconate bathing of select patients and environmental decontamination are the most high-yield and must be incorporated into infection prevention programs. As antimicrobial stewardship is also an effective horizontal strategy, antimicrobial stewardship programs must operate in synergy with infection prevention programs for maximal impact.

SUMMARY

Overall, horizontal interventions are considered more cost-effective and have a broader impact. Infection control programs may opt for a combination of vertical and horizontal strategies based on local epidemiology and available resources.

Contact tracing in the hospital setting during the omicron wave of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: persons and periods of concern for nosocomial infection prevention and control

This study evaluating the efficacy of coronavirus disease 2019 contact tracing in the hospital setting during the omicron variant era found a high incidence of nosocomial severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission in outbreaks, especially among individuals having close contact with infected persons. Identifying close contacts and outbreaks is essential to prevent nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 transmission.

A severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nosocomial cluster with inter-facility spread: Lessons learned

BACKGROUND

Despite infection control guidance, sporadic nosocomial coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreaks occur. We describe a complex severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) cluster with interfacility spread during the SARS-CoV-2 δ (delta) pandemic surge in the Midwest.

SETTING

This study was conducted in (1) a hematology-oncology ward in a regional academic medical center and (2) a geographically distant acute rehabilitation hospital.

METHODS

We conducted contact tracing for each COVID-19 case to identify healthcare exposures within 14 days prior to diagnosis. Liberal testing was performed for asymptomatic carriage for patients and staff. Whole-genome sequencing was conducted for all available clinical isolates from patients and healthcare workers (HCWs) to identify transmission clusters.

RESULTS

In the immunosuppressed ward, 19 cases (4 patients, 15 HCWs) shared a genetically related SARS-CoV-2 isolate. Of these 4 patients, 3 died in the hospital or within 1 week of discharge. The suspected index case was a patient with new dyspnea, diagnosed during preprocedure screening. In the rehabilitation hospital, 20 cases (5 patients and 15 HCWs) positive for COVID-19, of whom 2 patients and 3 HCWs had an isolate genetically related to the above cluster. The suspected index case was a patient from the immune suppressed ward whose positive status was not detected at admission to the rehabilitation facility. Our response to this cluster included the following interventions in both settings: restricting visitors, restricting learners, restricting overflow admissions, enforcing strict compliance with escalated PPE, access to on-site free and frequent testing for staff, and testing all patients prior to hospital discharge and transfer to other facilities.

CONCLUSIONS

Stringent infection control measures can prevent nosocomial COVID-19 transmission in healthcare facilities with high-risk patients during pandemic surges. These interventions were successful in ending these outbreaks.

Incidence and outcomes of hospital-associated respiratory virus infections by viral species

BACKGROUND

Although the incidence of hospital-associated respiratory virus infection (HARVI) is well recognized, the risk factors for infection and impact on patient outcomes are not well characterized.

METHODS

We identified a cohort of all inpatient admissions ≥24 hours duration at a single academic medical center from 2017 to 2020. HARVI were defined as respiratory virus detected in a test ordered after the 95th percentile of the virus-specific incubation period. Risk factors for HARVI were assessed using Cox proportional hazards models of the competing outcomes of HARVI and discharge. The associations between time-varying HARVI status and the rates of ICU admission, discharge, and in-hospital death were estimated using Cox-proportional hazards models in a competing risk framework.

RESULTS

HARVI incidences were 8.8 and 3.0 per 10,000 admission days for pediatric and adult patients, respectively. For adults, congestive heart failure, renal disease, and cancer increased HARVI risk independent of their associations with length of stay. HARVI risk was also elevated for patients admitted in September-June relative to July admissions. For pediatric patients, cardiovascular and respiratory conditions, cancer, medical device dependence, and admission in December increased HARVI risk. Lengths of stay were longer for adults with HARVI compared to those without, and hospital-associated influenza A was associated with increased risk of death. Rates of ICU admission were increased in the 5 days after HARVI identification for adult and pediatric patients. HARVI was not associated with length of stay or death among pediatric patients.

CONCLUSIONS

HARVI is associated chronic health conditions and increases morbidity and mortality.

Population and hospital-level COVID-19 measures are associated with increased risk of hospital-onset COVID-19

A review of hospital-onset COVID-19 cases revealed 8 definite, 106 probable, and 46 possible cases. Correlations between hospital-onset cases and both HCW and inpatient cases were noted in 2021. Rises in community measures were associated with rises in hospital-onset cases. Measures of community COVID-19 activity might predict hospital-onset cases.

Diagnostic stewardship and the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: Lessons learned for prevention of emerging infectious diseases in acute-care settings

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has demonstrated the importance of stewardship of viral diagnostic tests to aid infection prevention efforts in healthcare facilities. We highlight diagnostic stewardship lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic and discuss how diagnostic stewardship principles can inform management and mitigation of future emerging pathogens in acute-care settings. Diagnostic stewardship during the COVID-19 pandemic evolved as information regarding transmission (eg, routes, timing, and efficiency of transmission) became available. Diagnostic testing approaches varied depending on the availability of tests and when supplies and resources became available. Diagnostic stewardship lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic include the importance of prioritizing robust infection prevention mitigation controls above universal admission testing and considering preprocedure testing, contact tracing, and surveillance in the healthcare facility in certain scenarios. In the future, optimal diagnostic stewardship approaches should be tailored to specific pathogen virulence, transmissibility, and transmission routes, as well as disease severity, availability of effective treatments and vaccines, and timing of infectiousness relative to symptoms. This document is part of a series of papers developed by the Society of Healthcare Epidemiology of America on diagnostic stewardship in infection prevention and antibiotic stewardship.1.

Asymptomatic Testing of Hospital Admissions for SARS-CoV-2: Is it OK to Stop?

Universal severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing of all persons admitted to acute care hospitals has become common practice. We describe why 1 hospital discontinued this practice after weighing potential benefits against known harms. Considerations around the benefits shifted as we saw a decline in SARS-CoV-2 community transmission and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity of illness, increased availability of vaccines and treatments, and better understood the many other transmission pathways in the healthcare environment. Considerations around harms included the additional strain on laboratory and infection prevention resources, and several unintended adverse consequences of admission screening for patients, including unnecessary isolation, antiviral treatments, and delays in care delivery. Poor test performance for detection of infectiousness also played a significant role in determining to stop universal screening. No increase in hospital-onset COVID-19 has been documented since discontinuation of admission testing. We continue to apply other established layers of prevention while monitoring for any change in incidence of within-facility transmission of SARS-CoV-2.

In Support of Universal Admission Testing for SARS-CoV-2 During Significant Community Transmission

Many hospitals have stopped or are considering stopping universal admission testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We discuss reasons why admission testing should still be part of a layered system to prevent hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infections during times of significant community transmission. These include the morbidity of SARS-CoV-2 in vulnerable patients, the predominant contribution of presymptomatic and asymptomatic people to transmission, the high rate of transmission between patients in shared rooms, and data suggesting surveillance testing is associated with fewer nosocomial infections. Preferences of diverse patient populations, particularly the hardest-hit communities, should be surveyed and used to inform prevention measures. Hospitals' ethical responsibility to protect patients from serious infections should predominate over concerns about costs, labor, and inconvenience. We call for more rigorous data on the incidence and morbidity of nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infections and more research to help determine when to start, stop, and restart universal admission testing and other prevention measures.

Maurice A, Yokoe DS, Cohen SH, Torriani FJ, Grein JD, Robinson PA, Mabalot S, Park J, Pedrani P, Platt R, Huang SS. Assessing past versus present severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection: A survey of criteria for discontinuing precautions in asymptomatic patients testing positive on admission

Infection prevention program leaders report frequent use of criteria to distinguish recently recovered coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases from actively infectious cases when incidentally positive asymptomatic patients were identified on routine severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing. Guidance on appropriate interpretation of high-sensitivity molecular tests can prevent harm from unnecessary precautions that delay admission and impede medical care.

Low infectivity among asymptomatic patients with a positive severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) admission test at a tertiary care center, 2020-2022

We used a strand-specific RT-qPCR to evaluate viral replication as a surrogate for infectiousness among 242 asymptomatic inpatients with a positive severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) admission test. Only 21 patients (9%) had detectable SARS-CoV-2 minus-strand RNA. Because most patients were found to be noninfectious, our findings support the suspension of asymptomatic admission testing.

Cost-Effectiveness of Universal Asymptomatic Preoperative SARS-CoV-2 Polymerase Chain Reaction Screening: A Cost-Utility Analysis

BACKGROUND

An early report has shown the clinical benefit of the asymptomatic preoperative severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) screening test, and some clinical guidelines recommended this test. However, the cost-effectiveness of asymptomatic screening was not evaluated. We aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of universal preoperative screening of asymptomatic patients for SARS-CoV-2 using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing.

METHODS

We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of asymptomatic screening using a decision tree model from a payer perspective, assuming that the test-positive rate was 0.07% and the screening cost was 8500 Japanese yen (JPY) (approximately 7601 US dollars [USD]). The input parameter was derived from the available evidence reported in the literature. A willingness-to-pay threshold was set at 5 000 000 JPY/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY).

RESULTS

The incremental cost of 1 death averted was 74 469 236 JPY (approximately 566 048 USD) and 291 123 368 JPY/QALY (approximately 2 212 856 USD/QALY), which was above the 5 000 000 JPY/QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio fell below 5 000 000 JPY/QALY only when the test-positive rate exceeded 0.739%. However, when the probability of developing a postoperative pulmonary complication among SARS-CoV-2-positive patients was below 0.22, asymptomatic screening was never cost-effective, regardless of how high the test-positive rate became.

CONCLUSIONS

Asymptomatic preoperative universal SARS-CoV-2 PCR screening is not cost-effective in the base case analysis. The cost-effectiveness mainly depends on the test-positive rate, the frequency of postoperative pulmonary complications, and the screening costs; however, no matter how high the test-positive rate, the cost-effectiveness is poor if the probability of developing postoperative pulmonary complications among patients positive for SARS-CoV-2 is sufficiently reduced.

Evaluation of an antigen-test-based strategy to reduce duration of transmission-based precautions for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in hospitalized patients

An academic hospital implemented a severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antigen-test-based strategy to facilitate discontinuation of precautions for patients admitted with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. Of 171 patients that underwent antigen testing, 68% had an initial negative test performed a median of 5 days after admission. Antigen testing reduced isolation time by 144 hours.

Prevalence of Pneumonia Among Patients Who Died with COVID-19 Infection in Ancestral Versus Omicron Variant Eras

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

The Omicron variant of COVID-19 is less severe than the ancestral strain, leading to the potential for deaths in patients infected with the virus but who die of other causes. This study evaluated the difference in rates of pneumonia among patients who died with SARS-CoV-2 infection in the ancestral vs Omicron eras.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We identified patients who died within 30days of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, from March 2020 through December 2022; variants were assigned based on the prevalent variant in the US at that time. We also obtained a control group from patients who died within 30days of a negative SARS-CoV-2 test in January 2022. The first CT after the test was reviewed in a blinded fashion and assigned a category from the RSNA Consensus Reporting Guidelines. The primary outcome was the difference in rates of positive (typical or indeterminate) COVID-19 findings in the ancestral vs Omicron eras.

RESULTS

A total of 598 patients died during the ancestral era and 400 during the Omicron era, and 347 decedents comprised the control group. The rate of positive COVID-19 findings was 67/81 (83%) in the ancestral era and 43/81 (53%) in the Omicron era (P < .001), an absolute difference of 30% (95% CI 16%-43%). The rate of positive findings in the control group was 23/76 (30%).

CONCLUSION

During the Omicron era, 30% fewer SARS-CoV-2-associated deaths were associated with COVID-19 pneumonia and were caused either by nonpulmonary effects of the infection or were unrelated to the infection.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) universal admission screening in patients and companions in Taiwan from May 2021 to June 2022: A nationwide multicenter study

OBJECTIVE

Universal admission screening and follow-up symptom-based testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) may play critical roles in controlling nosocomial transmission. We describe the performance of test strategies for inpatients and their companions during various disease incidences in Taiwan.

DESIGN

Retrospective population-based cohort study.

SETTING

The study was conducted across 476 hospitals in Taiwan.

METHODS

The data for both testing strategies by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction for SARS-CoV-2 in newly admitted patients and their companions during May 2021-June 2022 were extracted and analyzed.

RESULTS

The positivity rate of universal admission screening was 0.76% (14,640 of 1,928,676) for patients and 0.37% (5,372 of 1,438,944) for companions. The weekly community incidences of period 1 (May 2021-June 2021), period 2 (July 2021-March 2022), and period 3 (April 2022-June 2022) were 6.57, 0.27, and 1,261, respectively, per 100,000 population. The positivity rates of universal admission screening for patients and companions (4.39% and 2.18%) in period 3 were higher than those in periods 1 (0.29% and 0.04%) and 2 (0.03% and 0.003%) (all P < .01). Among the 22,201 confirmed cases, 9.86% were identified by symptom-based testing. The costs and potential savings of universal admission screening for patients and companions achieved a breakeven point when the test strategy was implemented in a period with weekly community incidences of 27 and 358 per 100,000 population, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Universal admission screening and follow-up symptom-based testing is important for reducing nosocomial transmission. Implementing universal admission screening at an appropriate time would balance the benefits with costs and potential unintended harms.

Maurice A, Yokoe D, Kwon J, Grein J, Cohen S, Uslan D, Vasudev M, Mauricio A, Mabalot S, Coady MH, Sljivo S, Smith K, Carver B, Poland R, Perlin J, Platt R, Huang SS, for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Epicenters Program. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection prevention practices that exceed Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance: Balancing extra caution against impediments to care

In a survey of infection prevention programs, leaders reported frequent clinical and infection prevention practice modifications to avoid coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) exposure that exceeded national guidance. Future pandemic responses should emphasize balanced approaches to precautions, prioritize educational campaigns to manage safety concerns, and generate an evidence-base that can guide appropriate infection prevention practices.

Discontinuation of admission screening for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the impact on in-hospital clusters of COVID-19: Experience at a tertiary-care center

We evaluated the impact of discontinuing universal preadmission screening for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on the occurrence of nosocomial clusters of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during the SARS-CoV-2 o (omicron) variant period. No increasing trend in nosocomial clusters was observed during community-based surges before and after discontinuation. This finding supports the safety of the practice change.

Non-Pharmacological Strategies and Interventions for Effective COVID-19 Control: A Narrative Review

The COVID-19 pandemic had a devastating impact on the world, causing widespread illness and death. Focusing on prevention strategies to limit the spread of the disease remains essential. Despite the advent of vaccines, maintaining a vigilant approach to prevention remains paramount. We reviewed effective strategies to prevent COVID-19 transmission, including various prevention measures and interventions and both established practices and unresolved issues that have been addressed in meta-analyses, literature reviews, or in the health care context. Standard precautions are the cornerstone of infection control, with hand hygiene and mask use as key components. The use of surgical masks is recommended to prevent droplet transmission, while eye protection is recommended in combination with masks. In terms of room occupancy, ventilation is critical in reducing the risk of transmission in poorly ventilated environments. Chemical disinfection of indoor air with Triethylene glycol-based products can provide safe additional protection. Since viral RNA detection on surfaces does not necessarily indicate infectivity, the risk of transmission by surface contact remains low if surfaces are properly maintained and hand hygiene is practiced regularly. Thus, prevention of SARS-CoV-2 transmission requires a multifaceted approach, including reducing particle emissions from infected persons by wearing masks, eliminating aerosols by ventilation and air treatment, ensuring physical separation, and protecting exposed persons with masks and eye protection.

Nasopharyngeal Swabs in Pediatric Patients With Thrombocytopenia and Anticoagulant Use

BACKGROUND

Nasopharyngeal (NP) swabbing is a technique that is commonly used to test pediatric patients for viral infections with increased use during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Complications from NP swabbing are rare and seem to occur more frequently in patients at risk of bleeding. Little is known about institutional or individual practices and experiences with NP swab testing in pediatric patients with risk factors for bleeding.

METHODS

We conducted a survey study of pediatric hematology/oncology (PHO) attending physicians to assess practices and experiences with NP swab testing in pediatric patients with thrombocytopenia and/or on anticoagulation.

RESULTS

There were 130 total respondents (5.6%, n = 130/2327) from 6 countries. Relatively few respondents (n = 17/130, 13.1%) reported that their institution had a policy specifying a lower-level platelet cutoff for patients undergoing NP swabbing. The median platelet cutoff below which NP swabs are not performed according to existing policies is 30,000×10(9)/L (interquartile range: 20,000 to 40,000). The median cutoff based on the opinion of the respondents was 10,000 (interquartile range: 10,000 to 20,000). There were 24 episodes of epistaxis among PHO patients that were NP swabbed; many adverse events (56.5%, n = 13/23) were described as persistent, severe, and/or required intervention. Three reported cases of epistaxis with anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy occurred in patients with concomitant thrombocytopenia. Only 1 respondent (n = 1/130, 0.7%) reported an institutional policy for limiting NP swabs in patients on anticoagulant therapy. NP (66.9%) and nares (33.1%) were the most common sources of coronavirus disease 2019 testing that were reported.

CONCLUSION

A small percentage of institutions in this survey have a policy restricting NP swabs in PHO patients. The discrepancy between lower platelet cutoffs proposed by experts and institutional policy suggests that existing policies may be too conservative. Expert guidelines are needed on this topic. Other bleeding risk factors (eg, aspirin use and von Willebrand disease) should be considered in policies and guidelines.

COVID-19: An Update on Epidemiology, Prevention and Treatment, September-2023

After a downward trend for more than 12 months, the incidence of COVID-19 has increased in the last months. Although COVID-19 is not as frequent as in the first years of the pandemic, case numbers are still very high, and it causes a significant number of deaths. COVID-19 is not seen with a predictable frequency, at least two times more deadly than the flu, continues as an epidemic, and has not reached the endemic level yet. Currently, the Omicron strains EG.5 and XBB.1.16 are dominant worldwide. Although BA.2.86 and FLip variants, including FL.1.5.1 are not widespread at the moment, both were shown to be highly immune-evasive and require close monitoring. Prevention of COVID-19 relies on vaccinations, surveillance, proper ventilation of enclosed spaces, isolation of patients, and mask usage. Currently, monovalent COVID-19 vaccines, including XBB.1.5 Omicron SARS-CoV-2, are recommended for both primary and booster vaccinations against COVID-19. Monovalent vaccines, including only original SARS-CoV-2 strain, and bivalent vaccines, including original virus plus BA4/5 variant, are no longer recommended against COVID-19. Booster vaccination with XBB.1.5 containing vaccine should be prioritized for patients at high risk for severe COVID-19. Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccination does not seem to be effective in preventing COVID-19. At the current phase of the pandemic, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, remdesivir, molnupiravir, sotrovimab (for patients from XBB.1.5 variant dominant settings), and convalescent plasma can be considered for the treatment of high-risk early-stage outpatients with COVID-19, while hospitalized patients with more severe disease can be treated with dexamethasone, anti cytokines including tocilizumab, sarilumab, baricitinib, and tofacitinib and antithrombotic agents including enoxaparin. Remdesivir oral analogues and ensitrelvir fumarate are promising agents for treating acute COVID-19, which are in phase trials now; however, ivermectin, fluvoxamine, and metformin were shown to be ineffective.

Discontinuation of Universal Admission Testing for SARS-CoV-2 and Hospital-Onset COVID-19 Infections in England and Scotland

This quality improvement study examines the association between the discontinuation of universal admission testing for SARS-CoV-2 infections and hospital-onset SARS-CoV-2 infections in England and Scotland.

Improving COVID-19 Disease Severity Surveillance Measures: Statewide Implementation Experience

Measurement of the burden of COVID-19 on U.S. hospitals has been an important element of the public health response to the pandemic. However, because of variation in testing density and policies, the metric is not standardized across facilities. Two types of burdens exist, one related to the infection control measures that patients who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 require and one from the care of severely ill patients receiving treatment of COVID-19. With rising population immunity from vaccination and infection, as well as the availability of therapeutics, severity of illness has declined. Prior research showed that dexamethasone administration was highly correlated with other disease severity metrics and sensitive to the changing epidemiology associated with the emergence of immune-evasive variants.

On 10 January 2022, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health began requiring hospitals to expand surveillance to include reports of both the total number of "COVID-19 hospitalizations" daily and the number of inpatients who received dexamethasone at any point during their hospital stay. All 68 acute care hospitals in Massachusetts submitted COVID-19 hospitalization and dexamethasone data daily to the Massachusetts Department of Public Health over a 1-year period. A total of 44 196 COVID-19 hospitalizations were recorded during 10 January 2022 to 9 January 2023, of which 34% were associated with dexamethasone administration. The proportion of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who had received dexamethasone was 49.6% during the first month of surveillance and decreased to a monthly average of approximately 33% by April 2022, where it has remained since (range, 28.7% to 33%).

Adding a single data element to mandated reporting to estimate the frequency of severe COVID-19 in hospitalized patients was feasible and provided actionable information for health authorities and policy makers. Updates to surveillance methods are necessary to match data collection with public health response needs.

Investigation of Blood Plasma Viral Nucleocapsid Antigen as a Marker of Active Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Omicron Variant Infection

Background

Nasopharyngeal qualitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is the gold standard for diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, but it is not practical or sufficient in every clinical scenario due to its inability to distinguish active from resolved infection. Alternative or adjunct testing may be needed to guide isolation precautions and treatment in patients admitted to the hospital.

Methods

We performed a single-center, retrospective analysis of residual clinical specimens and medical record data to examine blood plasma nucleocapsid antigen as a candidate biomarker of active SARS-CoV-2. Adult patients admitted to the hospital or presenting to the emergency department with SARS-CoV-2 ribonucleic acid (RNA) detected by RT-PCR from a nasopharyngeal swab specimen were included. Both nasopharyngeal swab and a paired whole blood sample were required to be available for analysis.

Results

Fifty-four patients were included. Eight patients had positive nasopharyngeal swab virus cultures, 7 of whom (87.5%) had concurrent antigenemia. Nineteen (79.2%) of 24 patients with detectable subgenomic RNA and 20 (80.0%) of 25 patients with N2 RT-PCR cycle threshold ≤ 33 had antigenemia.

Conclusions

Most individuals with active SARS-CoV-2 infection are likely to have concurrent antigenemia, but there may be some individuals with active infection in whom antigenemia is not detectable. The potential for high sensitivity and convenience of a blood test prompts interest in further investigation as a screening tool to reduce reliance on nasopharyngeal swab sampling and as an adjunct diagnostic test to aid in clinical decision making during the period after acute coronavirus disease 2019.

Vaccination for seasonal flu, pneumococcal infection, and SARS-CoV-2 in patients with solid tumors: recommendations of the Associazione Italiana di Oncologia Medica (AIOM)

Patients with cancer have a well-known and higher risk of vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs). VPDs may cause severe complications in this setting due to the immune system impairment, malnutrition and oncological treatments. Despite this evidence, vaccination rates are inadequate. The Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) has been involved in vaccination awareness since 2014. Based on a careful review of the available data about the immunogenicity, effectiveness and safety of flu, pneumococcal and anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, we report the recommendations of the Associazione Italiana di Oncologia Medica about these vaccinations in adult patients with solid tumors. AIOM recommends comprehensive education on the issue of VPDs. We believe that a multidisciplinary care model may improve the vaccination coverage in immunocompromised patients. Continued surveillance, implementation of preventive practices and future well-designed immunological prospective studies are essential for a better management of our patients with cancer.