Transmission of community- and hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 in hospital settings in the UK: A cohort study

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. 00:00-00, 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.

Transferring inpatients between wards drives large nosocomial COVID-19 outbreaks, Wales, 2020-22: a matched case-control study using routine and enhanced surveillance data

BACKGROUND

The role of the hospital environment in the spread of COVID-19 is unclear.

AIM

To measure associations between ward characteristics and outbreak size to inform mitigations.

METHODS

Wards with large (case wards) and small (control wards) outbreaks in three acute hospitals were compared. Cases were healthcare-associated COVID-19 inpatients (positive polymerase chain reaction test ≥8 days post admission). Case wards were adult medical/surgical wards with ≥10 cases within rolling 14-day periods, between April 1st, 2020 and April 30th, 2022. Control wards were equivalents with 2-9 cases. Demographic and laboratory data were extracted from routine surveillance systems. Continuous data were aggregated fortnightly and analysed as binary variables according to median values. Each case ward was compared with two control wards matched on outbreak start date (±14 days) to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) using univariable and conditional multivariable logistic regression.

FINDINGS

From 170 outbreaks (median: 5 cases; interquartile range: 2-9), 35 case wards were identified. Community admissions were lower in case wards vs control wards (5 vs 10 median admissions; P<0.01, respectively), whereas transfers between wards within the same hospital were higher (58 vs 29 median transfers; P<0.01, respectively). Wards with more transfers in the preceding fortnight were significantly more likely to experience a large outbreak (≥35 vs <35 transfers; adjusted OR: 9.08; 95% CI: 2.5-33).

CONCLUSION

We recommend safely minimizing patient movements, such as by asking clinicians to record the rationale for transfer, to reduce the likelihood of disease transmission.

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.

Evaluating pooled testing for asymptomatic screening of healthcare workers in hospitals

BACKGROUND

There is evidence that during the COVID pandemic, a number of patient and HCW infections were nosocomial. Various measures were put in place to try to reduce these infections including developing asymptomatic PCR (polymerase chain reaction) testing schemes for healthcare workers. Regularly testing all healthcare workers requires many tests while reducing this number by only testing some healthcare workers can result in undetected cases. An efficient way to test as many individuals as possible with a limited testing capacity is to consider pooling multiple samples to be analysed with a single test (known as pooled testing).

METHODS

Two different pooled testing schemes for the asymptomatic testing are evaluated using an individual-based model representing the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in a 'typical' English hospital. We adapt the modelling to reflect two scenarios: a) a retrospective look at earlier SARS-CoV-2 variants under lockdown or social restrictions, and b) transitioning back to 'normal life' without lockdown and with the omicron variant. The two pooled testing schemes analysed differ in the population that is eligible for testing. In the 'ward' testing scheme only healthcare workers who work on a single ward are eligible and in the 'full' testing scheme all healthcare workers are eligible including those that move across wards. Both pooled schemes are compared against the baseline scheme which tests only symptomatic healthcare workers.

RESULTS

Including a pooled asymptomatic testing scheme is found to have a modest (albeit statistically significant) effect, reducing the total number of nosocomial healthcare worker infections by about 2[Formula: see text] in both the lockdown and non-lockdown setting. However, this reduction must be balanced with the increase in cost and healthcare worker isolations. Both ward and full testing reduce HCW infections similarly but the cost for ward testing is much less. We also consider the use of lateral flow devices (LFDs) for follow-up testing. Considering LFDs reduces cost and time but LFDs have a different error profile to PCR tests.

CONCLUSIONS

Whether a PCR-only or PCR and LFD ward testing scheme is chosen depends on the metrics of most interest to policy makers, the virus prevalence and whether there is a lockdown.

Predisposing Factors of Nosocomial Infections in Hospitalized Patients in the United Kingdom: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Nosocomial infections are infections incubating or not present at the time of admission to a hospital and manifest 48 hours after hospital admission. The specific factors contributing to the risk of infection during hospitalization remain unclear, particularly for the hospitalized population of the United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic literature review was to explore the risk factors of nosocomial infections in hospitalized adult patients in the United Kingdom.

METHODS

A comprehensive keyword search was conducted through the PubMed, Medline, and EBSCO CINAHL Plus databases. The keywords included "risk factors" or "contributing factors" or "predisposing factors" or "cause" or "vulnerability factors" and "nosocomial infections" or "hospital-acquired infections" and "hospitalized patients" or "inpatients" or "patients" or "hospitalized." Additional articles were obtained through reference harvesting of selected articles. The search was limited to the United Kingdom with papers written in English, without limiting for age and gender to minimize bias. The above process retrieved 377 articles, which were further screened using inclusion and exclusion criteria following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. The retained 9 studies were subjected to critical appraisal using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (cohort and case-control studies) and Appraisal Tool for Cross-Sectional Studies (cross-sectional studies) checklists. Finally, 6 eligible publications were identified and used to collect the study findings. A thematic analysis technique was used to analyze data extracted on risk factors of nosocomial infections in hospitalized patients in the United Kingdom.

RESULTS

The risk factors for nosocomial infections that emerged from the reviewed studies included older age, intrahospital transfers, cross-infection, longer hospital stay, readmissions, prior colonization with opportunistic organisms, comorbidities, and prior intake of antibiotics and urinary catheters. Nosocomial infections were associated with more extended hospital stays, presenting with increased morbidity and mortality. Measures for controlling nosocomial infections included the use of single-patient rooms, well-equipped wards, prior screening of staff and patients, adequate sick leave for staff, improved swallowing techniques and nutritional intake for patients, improved oral hygiene, avoiding unnecessary indwelling plastics, use of suprapubic catheters, aseptic techniques during patient care, and prophylactic use.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a need for further studies to aid in implementing nosocomial infection prevention and control.

Viral load of SARS-CoV-2 in surgical smoke in minimally invasive and open surgery: a single-center prospective clinical trial

At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, it was assumed that SARS-CoV-2 could be transmitted through surgical smoke generated by electrocauterization. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) was targeted due to potentially higher concentrations of the SARS-CoV-2 particles in the pneumoperitoneum. Some surgical societies even recommended open surgery instead of MIS to prevent the potential spread of SARS-CoV-2 from the pneumoperitoneum. This study aimed to detect SARS-CoV-2 in surgical smoke during open and MIS. Patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection who underwent open surgery or MIS at Heidelberg University Hospital were included in the study. A control group of patients without SARS-CoV-2 infection undergoing MIS or open surgery was included for comparison. The trial was approved by the Ethics Committee of Heidelberg University Medical School (S-098/2021). The following samples were collected: nasopharyngeal and intraabdominal swabs, blood, urine, surgical smoke, and air samples from the operating room. An SKC BioSampler was used to sample the surgical smoke from the pneumoperitoneum during MIS and the approximate surgical field during open surgery in 15 ml of sterilized phosphate-buffered saline. An RT-PCR test was performed on all collected samples to detect SARS-CoV-2 viral particles. Twelve patients with proven SARS-CoV-2 infection underwent open abdominal surgery. Two SARS-CoV-2-positive patients underwent an MIS procedure. The control group included 24 patients: 12 underwent open surgery and 12 MIS. One intraabdominal swab in a patient with SARS-CoV-2 infection was positive for SARS-CoV-2. However, during both open surgery and MIS, none of the surgical smoke samples showed any detectable viral particles of SARS-CoV-2. The air samples collected at the end of the surgical procedure showed no viral particles of SARS-CoV-2. Major complications (CD ≥ IIIa) were more often observed in SARS-CoV-2 positive patients (10 vs. 4, p = 0.001). This study showed no detectable viral particles of SARS-CoV-2 in surgical smoke sampled during MIS and open surgery. Thus, the discussed risk of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 via surgical smoke could not be confirmed in the present study.

The burden and dynamics of hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 in England

Hospital-based transmission had a dominant role in Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) epidemics1,2, but large-scale studies of its role in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic are lacking. Such transmission risks spreading the virus to the most vulnerable individuals and can have wider-scale impacts through hospital-community interactions. Using data from acute hospitals in England, we quantify within-hospital transmission, evaluate likely pathways of spread and factors associated with heightened transmission risk, and explore the wider dynamical consequences. We estimate that between June 2020 and March 2021 between 95,000 and 167,000 inpatients acquired SARS-CoV-2 in hospitals (1% to 2% of all hospital admissions in this period). Analysis of time series data provided evidence that patients who themselves acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection in hospital were the main sources of transmission to other patients. Increased transmission to inpatients was associated with hospitals having fewer single rooms and lower heated volume per bed. Moreover, we show that reducing hospital transmission could substantially enhance the efficiency of punctuated lockdown measures in suppressing community transmission. These findings reveal the previously unrecognized scale of hospital transmission, have direct implications for targeting of hospital control measures and highlight the need to design hospitals better equipped to limit the transmission of future high-consequence pathogens.

Nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 Infections and Mortality During Unique COVID-19 Epidemic Waves

Importance

Quantifying the burden of nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infections and associated mortality is necessary to assess the need for infection prevention and control measures.

Objective

To investigate the occurrence of nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infections and associated 30-day mortality among patients admitted to hospitals in Region Stockholm, Sweden.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective, matched cohort study divided the period from March 1, 2020, until September 15, 2022, into a prevaccination period, early vaccination and pre-Omicron (period 1), and late vaccination and Omicron (period 2). From among 303 898 patients 18 years or older living in Region Stockholm, 538 951 hospital admissions across all hospitals were included. Hospitalized admissions with nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infections were matched to as many as 5 hospitalized admissions without nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 by age, sex, length of stay, admission time, and hospital unit.

Exposure

Nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infection defined as the first positive polymerase chain reaction test result at least 8 days after hospital admission or within 2 days after discharge.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcome of 30-day mortality was analyzed using time-to-event analyses with a Cox proportional hazards regression model adjusted for age, sex, educational level, and comorbidities.

Results

Among 2193 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infections or reinfections (1107 women [50.5%]; median age, 80 [IQR, 71-87] years), 2203 nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infections were identified. The incidence rate of nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infections was 1.57 (95% CI, 1.51-1.64) per 1000 patient-days. In the matched cohort, 1487 hospital admissions with nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infections were matched to 5044 hospital admissions without nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infections. Thirty-day mortality was higher in the prevaccination period (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 2.97 [95% CI, 2.50-3.53]) compared with period 1 (AHR, 2.08 [95% CI, 1.50-2.88]) or period 2 (AHR, 1.22 [95% CI, 0.92-1.60]). Among patients with nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infections, 30-day AHR comparing those with 2 or more doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and those with less than 2 doses was 0.64 (95% CI, 0.46-0.88).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this matched cohort study, nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infections were associated with higher 30-day mortality during the early phases of the pandemic and lower mortality during the Omicron variant wave and after the introduction of vaccinations. Mitigation of excess mortality risk from nosocomial transmission should be a strong focus when population immunity is low through implementation of adequate infection prevention and control measures.

Risk factors associated with severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission, outbreak duration, and mortality in acute-care settings

BACKGROUND

Transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in acute-care settings affects patients, healthcare workers, and the healthcare system. We conducted an analysis of risk factors associated with outbreak severity to inform prevention strategies.

METHODS

This cross-sectional analysis of COVID-19 outbreaks was conducted at Fraser Health acute-care sites between March 2020 and March 2021. Outbreak severity measures included COVID-19 attack rate, outbreak duration, and 30-day case mortality. Generalized linear models with generalized estimating equations were used for all outcome measures. A P value of 0.05 indicated statistical significance. Analyses were performed using SAS version 3.8 software, R version 4.1.0 software, and Stata version 16.0 software.

RESULTS

Between March 2020 and March 2021, 54 COVID-19 outbreaks were declared in Fraser Health acute-care sites. Overall, a 10% increase in the hand hygiene rate during the outbreak resulted in an 18% decrease in the attack rate (P < .01), 1 fewer death (P = .03), and shorter outbreaks (P < .01). A 10-year increase in unit age was associated with 2.2 additional days of outbreak (P < 0.01) and increases in the attack rate (P < .05) and the number of deaths (P < .01).

DISCUSSION

We observed an inverse relationship between increased hand hygiene compliance during outbreaks and all 3 severity measures. Increased unit age was also associated with increases in each of the severity measures.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the importance of hand hygiene practices during an outbreak and the difficulties faced by older facilities, many of which have infrastructural challenges. The latter reinforces the need to incorporate infection control standards into healthcare planning and construction.

Combining epidemiological data and whole genome sequencing to understand SARS-CoV-2 transmission dynamics in a large tertiary care hospital during the first COVID-19 wave in The Netherlands focusing on healthcare workers

BACKGROUND

Healthcare facilities have been challenged by the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission between healthcare workers (HCW) and patients. During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, infections among HCW were observed, questioning infection prevention and control (IPC) measures implemented at that time.

AIM

This study aimed to identify nosocomial transmission routes of SARS-CoV-2 between HCW and patients in a tertiary care hospital.

METHODS

All SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive HCW and patients identified between 1 March and 19 May 2020, were included in the analysis. Epidemiological data were collected from patient files and HCW contact tracing interviews. Whole genome sequences of SARS-CoV-2 were generated using Nanopore sequencing (WGS). Epidemiological clusters were identified, whereafter WGS and epidemiological data were combined for re-evaluation of epidemiological clusters and identification of potential transmission clusters. HCW infections were further classified into categories based on the likelihood that the infection was acquired via nosocomial transmission. Secondary cases were defined as COVID-19 cases in our hospital, part of a transmission cluster, of which the index case was either a patient or HCW from our hospital.

FINDINGS

The study population consisted of 293 HCW and 245 patients. Epidemiological data revealed 36 potential epidemiological clusters, with an estimated 222 (75.7%) HCW as secondary cases. WGS results were available for 195 HCW (88.2%) and 20 patients (12.8%) who belonged to an epidemiological cluster. Re-evaluation of the epidemiological clusters, with the available WGS data identified 31 transmission clusters with 65 (29.4%) HCW as secondary cases. Transmission clusters were all part of 18 (50.0%) previously determined epidemiological clusters, demonstrating that several larger outbreaks actually consisted, of several smaller transmission clusters. A total of 21 (7.2%) HCW infections were classified as from confirmed nosocomial, of which 18 were acquired from another HCW and 3 from a patient.

CONCLUSION

The majority of SARS-CoV-2 infections among HCW could be attributed to community-acquired infection. Infections among HCW that could be classified as due to nosocomial transmission, were mainly caused by HCW-to-HCW transmission rather than patient-to-HCW transmission. It is important to recognize the uncertainties of cluster analyses based solely on epidemiological data.

A systematic outbreak investigation of SARS-CoV-2 transmission clusters in a tertiary academic care center

BACKGROUND

We sought to decipher transmission pathways in healthcare-associated infections with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) within our hospital by epidemiological work-up and complementary whole genome sequencing (WGS). We report the findings of the four largest epidemiologic clusters of SARS-CoV-2 transmission occurring during the second wave of the pandemic from 11/2020 to 12/2020.

METHODS

At the University Hospital Basel, Switzerland, systematic outbreak investigation is initiated at detection of any nosocomial case of SARS-CoV-2 infection, as confirmed by polymerase chain reaction, occurring more than five days after admission. Clusters of nosocomial infections, defined as the detection of at least two positive patients and/or healthcare workers (HCWs) within one week with an epidemiological link, were further investigated by WGS on respective strains.

RESULTS

The four epidemiologic clusters included 40 patients and 60 HCWs. Sequencing data was available for 70% of all involved cases (28 patients and 42 HCWs), confirmed epidemiologically suspected in house transmission in 33 cases (47.1% of sequenced cases) and excluded transmission in the remaining 37 cases (52.9%). Among cases with identical strains, epidemiologic work-up suggested transmission mainly through a ward-based exposure (24/33, 72.7%), more commonly affecting HCWs (16/24, 66.7%) than patients (8/24, 33.3%), followed by transmission between patients (6/33, 18.2%), and among HCWs and patients (3/33, 9.1%, respectively two HCWs and one patient).

CONCLUSIONS

Phylogenetic analyses revealed important insights into transmission pathways supporting less than 50% of epidemiologically suspected SARS-CoV-2 transmissions. The remainder of cases most likely reflect community-acquired infection randomly detected by outbreak investigation. Notably, most transmissions occurred between HCWs, possibly indicating lower perception of the risk of infection during contacts among HCWs.

COVID-19 patient and personal safety - lessons learnt for pandemic preparedness and the way to the next normal

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly challenged societies and healthcare systems in particular. To prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2, infection prevention and control (IPC) strategies had to be developed on the local, national and international level. The aim of this study is to provide details of the COVID-19 experience at the Vienna General Hospital (VGH) in the context of the national and international COVID-19 response for learning and improvement.

METHODS

This is a retrospective report, outlining the evolution of IPC measures and challenges encountered at the health facility (VGH), the national (Austria) and global level between February 2020 and October 2022.

RESULTS

The IPC strategy at the VGH has been continuously adapted to changes in the epidemiological setting, new legal directives and Austrian by-laws. The current strategy, nationally and internationally, focuses on endemicity rather than maximum transmission risk reduction. For the VGH, this has recently resulted in an increase in COVID-19 clusters. To protect our particularly vulnerable patients, many COVID-19 precautions have been maintained. Barriers to adequate IPC implementation at the VGH and other hospitals include a lack of sufficient isolation options and non-adherence with universal face mask regulations. Globally, misinformation on COVID-19 hampered an effective response.

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective analysis of the COVID-19 response at the VGH and international reports underline the need for pandemic preparedness, readiness and response by improving future hospital design and infrastructure, conducting regular trainings for protective attire and increasing health literacy as now recently published in a concise document by WHO.

Comparison of risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers during Omicron and Delta dominance periods in Japan

BACKGROUND

The risk factors for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) among healthcare workers (HCWs) might have changed since the emergence of the highly immune evasive Omicron variant.

AIM

To compare the risk factors for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among HCWs during the Delta- and Omicron-predominant periods.

METHODS

Using data from repeated serosurveys among the staff of a medical research centre in Tokyo, two cohorts were established: Delta period cohort (N = 858) and Omicron period cohort (N = 652). The potential risk factors were assessed using a questionnaire. Acute/current or past SARS-CoV-2 infection was identified by polymerase chain reaction or anti-nucleocapsid antibody tests, respectively. Poisson regression was used to calculate the risk ratio (RR) of infection risk.

FINDINGS

The risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection during the early Omicron-predominant period was 3.4-fold higher than during the Delta-predominant period. Neither working in a COVID-19-related department nor having a higher degree of occupational exposure to SARS-CoV-2 was associated with an increased infection risk during both periods. During the Omicron-predominant period, infection risk was higher among those who spent ≥30 min in closed spaces, crowded spaces, and close-contact settings without wearing mask (≥3 times versus never: RR: 6.62; 95% confidence interval: 3.01-14.58), whereas no such association was found during the Delta period.

CONCLUSION

Occupational exposure to COVID-19-related work was not associated with the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the Delta or Omicron period, whereas high-risk behaviours were associated with an increased infection risk during the Omicron period.

Analysis of SARS-CoV-2 genomic surveillance data during the Delta and Omicron waves at a Saudi tertiary referral hospital

BACKGROUND

Studying the genomic evolution of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) may help determine outbreak clusters and virus transmission advantages to aid public health efforts during the pandemic. Thus, we tracked the evolution of SARS-CoV-2 by variant epidemiology, breakthrough infection, and patient characteristics as the virus spread during the Delta and Omicron waves. We also conducted phylogenetic analyses to assess modes of transmission.

METHODS

Nasopharyngeal samples were collected from a cohort of 900 patients with positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test results confirming COVID-19 disease. Samples underwent real-time PCR detection using TaqPath assays. Sequencing was performed with Ion GeneStudio using the Ion AmpliSeq™ SARS-CoV-2 panel. Variant calling was performed with Torrent Suite™ on the Torrent Server. For phylogenetic analyses, the MAFFT tool was used for alignment and the maximum likelihood method with the IQ-TREE tool to build the phylogenetic tree. Data were analyzed using SAS statistical software. Analysis of variance or t tests were used to assess continuous variables, and χ² tests were used to assess categorical variables. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were preformed to estimate odds ratios (ORs).

RESULTS

The predominant variants in our cohort of 900 patients were non-variants of concern (11.1 %), followed by Alpha (4.1 %), Beta (5.6 %), Delta (21.2 %), and Omicron (58 %). The Delta wave had more male than female cases (112 vs. 78), whereas the Omicron wave had more female than male cases (311 vs. 208). The oldest patients (mean age, 43.4 years) were infected with non-variants of concern; the youngest (mean age, 33.7 years), with Omicron. Younger patients were mostly unvaccinated, whereas elderly patients were mostly vaccinated, a statistically significant difference. The highest risk for breakthrough infection by age was for patients aged 30-39 years (OR = 12.4, CI 95 %: 6.6-23.2), followed by patients aged 40-49 years (OR = 11.2, CI 95 %: 6.1-23.1) and then 20-29 years (OR = 8.2, CI 95 %: 4.4-15.4). Phylogenetic analyses suggested the interaction of multiple cases related to outbreaks for breakthrough infections, healthcare workers, and intensive care unit admission.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study highlighted several major public health ramifications, including the distribution of variants over a wide range of demographic and clinical variables and by vaccination status.

A Counterintuitive Neutrophil-Mediated Pattern in COVID-19 Patients Revealed through Transcriptomics Analysis

The COVID-19 pandemic has persisted for almost three years. However, the mechanisms linked to the SARS-CoV-2 effect on tissues and disease severity have not been fully elucidated. Since the onset of the pandemic, a plethora of high-throughput data related to the host transcriptional response to SARS-CoV-2 infections has been generated. To this end, the aim of this study was to assess the effect of SARS-CoV-2 infections on circulating and organ tissue immune responses. We profited from the publicly accessible gene expression data of the blood and soft tissues by employing an integrated computational methodology, including bioinformatics, machine learning, and natural language processing in the relevant transcriptomics data. COVID-19 pathophysiology and severity have mainly been associated with macrophage-elicited responses and a characteristic "cytokine storm". Our counterintuitive findings suggested that the COVID-19 pathogenesis could also be mediated through neutrophil abundance and an exacerbated suppression of the immune system, leading eventually to uncontrolled viral dissemination and host cytotoxicity. The findings of this study elucidated new physiological functions of neutrophils, as well as tentative pathways to be explored in asymptomatic-, ethnicity- and locality-, or staging-associated studies.

The unseen pandemic: treatment delays and loss to follow-up due to fear of COVID

Background

Fear of contracting SARS-CoV-2 has transformed public interaction with healthcare professionals and hospitals alike. In turn, this has resulted in a collateral impact on patients’ health across medical and surgical paradigms. Understanding the causative factors of this fear, and tackling it head on, is vital to return to pre-pandemic levels of healthcare.

Main body

In this editorial, we explore the evidence base behind the fear of healthcare professionals and facilities that has developed during the course of the SARS-CoV-2pandemic. We also reflect on the ways in which these fears have affected the general public. In so doing, we review a recent article from Montalto et al. that has explored fear of SARS-CoV-2 among patients undergoing surgery in Italy.

Conclusion

While fear of SARS-CoV-2 is uncommon among surgical patients, there are still those who delay or avoiding seeking medical care due to fear of transmission. Physicians must lead the fight against this fear in a hope to regain the trust of the public.

A domain-knowledge modeling of hospital-acquired infection risk in Healthcare personnel from retrospective observational data: A case study for COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

Hospital-acquired infections of communicable viral diseases (CVDs) have been posing a tremendous challenge to healthcare workers globally. Healthcare personnel (HCP) is facing a consistent risk of viral infections, and subsequently higher rates of morbidity and mortality.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We proposed a domain-knowledge-driven infection risk model to quantify the individual HCP and the population-level risks. For individual-level risk estimation, a time-variant infection risk model is proposed to capture the transmission dynamics of CVDs. At the population-level, the infection risk is estimated using a Bayesian network model constructed from three feature sets, including individual-level factors, engineering control factors, and administrative control factors. For model validation, we investigated the case study of the Coronavirus disease, in which the individual-level and population-level infection risk models were applied. The data were collected from various sources such as COVID-19 transmission databases, health surveys/questionaries from medical centers, U.S. Department of Labor databases, and cross-sectional studies.

RESULTS

Regarding the individual-level risk model, the variance-based sensitivity analysis indicated that the uncertainty in the estimated risk was attributed to two variables: the number of close contacts and the viral transmission probability. Next, the disease transmission probability was computed using a multivariate logistic regression applied for a cross-sectional HCP data in the UK, with the 10-fold cross-validation accuracy of 78.23%. Combined with the previous result, we further validated the individual infection risk model by considering six occupations in the U.S. Department of Labor O*Net database. The occupation-specific risk evaluation suggested that the registered nurses, medical assistants, and respiratory therapists were the highest-risk occupations. For the population-level risk model validation, the infection risk in Texas and California was estimated, in which the infection risk in Texas was lower than that in California. This can be explained by California's higher patient load for each HCP per day and lower personal protective equipment (PPE) sufficiency level.

CONCLUSION

The accurate estimation of infection risk at both individual level and population levels using our domain-knowledge-driven infection risk model will significantly enhance the PPE allocation, safety plans for HCP, and hospital staffing strategies.

Factors contributing to a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak on a mixed medical-surgical unit in a Canadian acute-care hospital

OBJECTIVE

To identify preventable factors that contribute to the cross transmission of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) to patients in healthcare facilities.

DESIGN

A case-control study was conducted among inpatients on a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak unit.

SETTING

This study was conducted in a medical-surgical unit of a tertiary-care hospital in Nova Scotia in May 2021.

PATIENTS

Patients hospitalized on the unit for at least 12 hours and healthcare workers (HCW) working on the unit within 2 weeks of outbreak declaration were included.

METHODS

Risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection were analyzed using simple and multiple logistic regression. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) was performed to identify SARS-CoV-2 strain relatedness. Network analysis was used to describe patient accommodation.

RESULTS

SARS-CoV-2 infections were identified in 21 patients (29.6%) and 11 HCWs (6.6%). WGS data revealed 4 distinct clades of related sequences. Several factors likely contributed to the outbreak, including failure to identify SARS-CoV-2, a largely incomplete or unvaccinated population, and patient wandering behaviors. The most significant risk factor for SARS-CoV-2 infection was room sharing with an infectious patient, which was the only factor that remained statistically significant following multivariate analysis (odds ratio [OR], 9.2l; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.04-41.67; P = .004).

CONCLUSIONS

This outbreak likely resulted from admission of 2 patients with COVID-19, with subsequent transmissions to 17 patients and 11 staff. WGS and bioinformatics analyses were critical to identifying previously unrecognized nosocomial transmissions of SARS-CoV-2. This study supports strategies to reduce nosocomial transmissions of SARS-CoV-2, such as single-patient rooms, promotion of COVID-19 vaccination, and infection prevention and control measures including management of wandering behaviors.

Healthcare workers' SARS-CoV-2 infection rates during the second wave of the pandemic: follow-up study

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess if, during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers had increased severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection rates, following close contact with patients, co-workers and persons outside work with COVID-19.

METHODS

A follow-up study of 5985 healthcare workers from Denmark was conducted between November 2020 and April 2021 and provided day-to-day information on COVID-19 contacts. SARS-CoV-2 infection was defined by the first positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test ever. Data was analyzed in multivariable Poisson regression models.

RESULTS

The SARS-CoV-2 infection rates following close contact 3-7 days earlier with patients, co-workers and persons outside work with COVID-19 were 153.7, 240.8, and 728.1 per 100 000 person-days, respectively. This corresponded with age, sex, month, number of PCR tests and mutually adjusted incidence rate ratios of 3.17 [40 cases, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.15-4.66], 2.54 (10 cases, 95% CI 1.30-4.96) and 17.79 (35 cases, 95% CI 12.05-26.28). The risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection was thus lower, but the absolute numbers affected was higher following COVID-19 contact at work than COVID-19 contact off work.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite strong focus on preventive measures during the second wave of the pandemic, healthcare workers were still at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection when in close contact with patients or co-workers with COVID-19. There is a need for increased focus on infection control measures in order to secure healthcare workers' health and reduce transmission into the community during ongoing and future waves of SARS-CoV-2 and other infections.

Infection control strategies for patients and accompanying persons during the COVID-19 pandemic in German hospitals: a cross-sectional study in March-April 2021

BACKGROUND

Patients are at risk of nosocomial COVID-19 infection. The role of accompanying persons/visitors as potential infection donors is not yet well researched, but the risk will be influenced by prevention measures recommended by infection control practitioners.

AIM

To collect information about COVID-19 infection control strategies for patients and accompanying persons from infection control practitioners in German hospitals.

METHODS

A cross-sectional questionnaire was developed, ethically approved, pre-tested and formatted as an online tool. Infection control practitioners in 987 randomly selected German hospitals were invited to participate in March and April 2021. For statistical analysis, the hospitals were categorized as small (0-499 beds) or large (≥500 beds).

FINDINGS

One hundred surveys were completed (response rate: 10%). A higher proportion of large (71%) than small (49%) hospitals let patients decide freely whether to wear medical or FFP2 masks. Most hospitals reported spatial separation for COVID-19 patients and non-COVID-19 cases (38%) or additionally for suspected COVID-19 cases (53%). A separation of healthcare teams for these areas existed in 54% of the hospitals. Accompaniment bans were more prevalent in large (52%) than in small hospitals (29%), but large hospitals granted more exemptions.

CONCLUSION

The decision as to whether to separate areas and teams seemed to depend on the hospital's structural conditions, therefore impairing the implementation of recommendations. Accompaniment regulations differ between hospital sizes and may depend on patient numbers, case type/severity and patients' requirements. In the dynamic situation of a pandemic, it can be difficult to stay up to date with findings and recommendations on infection control.

SARS-CoV-2 infection rate in Antananarivo frontline health care workers, Madagascar

BACKGROUND

Health care workers (HCWs) represent a vulnerable population during epidemic periods. Our cohort study aimed to estimate the risk of infection and associated factors among HCWs during the first wave of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in Madagascar.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study was carried out in three hospitals that oversaw the first cases of COVID-19. Monthly ELISA-based serological tests were conducted, and nasopharyngeal swabs were collected in the case of symptoms linked to COVID-19 for RT-PCR analysis. Survival analyses were used to determine factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

RESULTS

The study lasted 7 months from May 2020. We included 122 HCWs, 61.5% of whom were women. The median age was 31.9 years (IQR: 26.4-42.3). In total, 42 (34.4%) had SARS-CoV-2 infections, of which 20 were asymptomatic (47.6%). The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was 9.3% (95% CI [6.5-13.2]) person-months. Sixty-five HCWs presented symptoms, of which 19 were positive by RT-PCR. When adjusted for exposure to deceased cases, infection was more frequent in HCWs younger than 30 years of age (RR = 4.9, 95% CI [1.4-17.2]).

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate a high incidence of infection with SARS-CoV-2 among HCWs, with a high proportion of asymptomatic cases. Young HCWs are more likely to be at risk than others. Greater awareness among young people is necessary to reduce the threat of infection among HCWs.

COVID-19 Booster Uptake among First Responders and Their Household Members May Be Lower than Anticipated

(1) Background: COVID-19 vaccination status varies widely among law enforcement and emergency medical services professionals. Though at high risk of exposure, these first responders have demonstrated significant vaccine hesitancy, with only 70% reportedly vaccinated. We sought to understand whether similar vaccine hesitancy exists for first responders and their household contacts around COVID-19 boosters. (2) Methods: In a prospective longitudinal cohort of first responders and their household contacts, survey data was collected, including demographics, medical history, COVID-19 exposure risks, and vaccination and/or booster status. The statistical analysis focused on primary vaccination and booster rates of both the first responders and their household contacts. (3) Results: Across 119 study participants, 73% reported having received some combination of vaccine and/or booster, and 26% were unvaccinated. Vaccinated individuals were older, reported less prior exposure to COVID-19 and had more comorbidities. Only 23% reported having received a COVID-19 booster. Pairing of the data for household contacts demonstrated a 60% agreement to receive primary vaccination but only a 20% agreement for boosters within households. (4) Conclusions: This study provides insight into the vaccination and booster rates of first responders and household contacts. Focused efforts to enhance vaccinations is essential for the protection and maintenance of this critical workforce.

Compliance with Medication amongst Persons with Diabetes Mellitus during the COVID-19 Pandemic, Kerala, India: A Cross Sectional Study

Compliance with medication in persons with diabetes mellitus (DM) has been a challenge during the COVID-19 pandemic, leading to poor glycemic control and higher risk of complications. In the state of Kerala, India, 20−25% of adults have DM. Our cross-sectional study aimed to assess medication compliance and factors associated with poor compliance in DM persons attending selected primary care government facilities in Kerala during the COVID-19 pandemic. Persons registered with DM for >6 months were consecutively interviewed between August and September 2021. Poor compliance was defined as answering “No” to one or more of three questions related to access and intake of medication two weeks prior to and the day before the interview. Factors independently associated with poor compliance were assessed using adjusted prevalence ratios (aPr) and 95% confidence intervals. Of the 560 DM persons included, 209 (37%) exhibited poor compliance. Factors associated with poor compliance were age 19−45 years (aPr 1.4, 1.1−1.9); inability to be blood glucose tested during the COVID-19 pandemic (aPr 3.6, 2.9−4.3); not having COVID-19 (aPr 1.4, 1.0−1.9); and being double vaccinated against COVID-19 (aPr 1.4, 1.1−2.0). Focused attention must be paid to these groups to improve medication compliance and prevent DM complications and severe COVID-19-related disease.

Evaluation of Screening Program and Phylogenetic Analysis of SARS-CoV-2 Infections among Hospital Healthcare Workers in Liège, Belgium

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are known to be at higher risk of developing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections although whether these risks are equal across all occupational roles is uncertain. Identifying these risk factors and understand SARS-CoV-2 transmission pathways in healthcare settings are of high importance to achieve optimal protection measures. We aimed to investigate the implementation of a voluntary screening program for SARS-CoV-2 infections among hospital HCWs and to elucidate potential transmission pathways though phylogenetic analysis before the vaccination era. HCWs of the University Hospital of Liège, Belgium, were invited to participate in voluntary reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assays performed every week from April to December 2020. Phylogenetic analysis of SARS-CoV-2 genomes were performed for a subgroup of 45 HCWs. 5095 samples were collected from 703 HCWs. 212 test results were positive, 15 were indeterminate, and 4868 returned negative. 156 HCWs (22.2%) tested positive at least once during the study period. All SARS-CoV-2 test results returned negative for 547 HCWs (77.8%). Nurses (p < 0.05), paramedics (p < 0.05), and laboratory staff handling respiratory samples (p < 0.01) were at higher risk for being infected compared to the control non-patient facing group. Our phylogenetic analysis revealed that most positive samples corresponded to independent introduction events into the hospital. Our findings add to the growing evidence of differential risks of being infected among HCWs and support the need to implement appropriate protection measures based on each individual’s risk profile to guarantee the protection of both HCWs and patients. Furthermore, our phylogenetic investigations highlight that most positive samples correspond to distinct introduction events into the hospital.

Risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection in a multiethnic cohort of United Kingdom healthcare workers (UK-REACH): A cross-sectional analysis

BACKGROUND

Healthcare workers (HCWs), particularly those from ethnic minority groups, have been shown to be at disproportionately higher risk of infection with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) compared to the general population. However, there is insufficient evidence on how demographic and occupational factors influence infection risk among ethnic minority HCWs.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We conducted a cross-sectional analysis using data from the baseline questionnaire of the United Kingdom Research study into Ethnicity and Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Outcomes in Healthcare workers (UK-REACH) cohort study, administered between December 2020 and March 2021. We used logistic regression to examine associations of demographic, household, and occupational risk factors with SARS-CoV-2 infection (defined by polymerase chain reaction (PCR), serology, or suspected COVID-19) in a diverse group of HCWs. The primary exposure of interest was self-reported ethnicity. Among 10,772 HCWs who worked during the first UK national lockdown in March 2020, the median age was 45 (interquartile range [IQR] 35 to 54), 75.1% were female and 29.6% were from ethnic minority groups. A total of 2,496 (23.2%) reported previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. The fully adjusted model contained the following dependent variables: demographic factors (age, sex, ethnicity, migration status, deprivation, religiosity), household factors (living with key workers, shared spaces in accommodation, number of people in household), health factors (presence/absence of diabetes or immunosuppression, smoking history, shielding status, SARS-CoV-2 vaccination status), the extent of social mixing outside of the household, and occupational factors (job role, the area in which a participant worked, use of public transport to work, exposure to confirmed suspected COVID-19 patients, personal protective equipment [PPE] access, aerosol generating procedure exposure, night shift pattern, and the UK region of workplace). After adjustment, demographic and household factors associated with increased odds of infection included younger age, living with other key workers, and higher religiosity. Important occupational risk factors associated with increased odds of infection included attending to a higher number of COVID-19 positive patients (aOR 2.59, 95% CI 2.11 to 3.18 for ≥21 patients per week versus none), working in a nursing or midwifery role (1.30, 1.11 to 1.53, compared to doctors), reporting a lack of access to PPE (1.29, 1.17 to 1.43), and working in an ambulance (2.00, 1.56 to 2.58) or hospital inpatient setting (1.55, 1.38 to 1.75). Those who worked in intensive care units were less likely to have been infected (0.76, 0.64 to 0.92) than those who did not. Black HCWs were more likely to have been infected than their White colleagues, an effect which attenuated after adjustment for other known risk factors. This study is limited by self-selection bias and the cross sectional nature of the study means we cannot infer the direction of causality.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified key sociodemographic and occupational risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection among UK HCWs, and have determined factors that might contribute to a disproportionate odds of infection in HCWs from Black ethnic groups. These findings demonstrate the importance of social and occupational factors in driving ethnic disparities in COVID-19 outcomes, and should inform policies, including targeted vaccination strategies and risk assessments aimed at protecting HCWs in future waves of the COVID-19 pandemic.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was prospectively registered at ISRCTN (reference number: ISRCTN11811602).

Transmission of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) between hospital workers and members of their household: Nationwide, registry-based, cohort study from Norway

Background:

Understanding and limiting infection in healthcare workers (HCWs) and subsequent transmission to their families is always important and has been underscored during the COVID-19 pandemic. Except in specific and local settings, little is known about the extent of such transmissions at the national level.

Objective:

To describe SARS-CoV-2 infection in HCWs and to estimate the risk of HCWs transmitting COVID-19 to their household members, including calculating the secondary attack rate to household members and estimating the risk for hospital workers to contract COVID-19 at home.

Methods:

Using individual-level data on all HCWs employed in Norwegian hospitals and their household members, we identified (1) the number of HCWs who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between August 2020 and September 2021 and the proportion of those who were index cases in their own household and (2) the number of HCWs who were secondary cases in their own households.

Results:

During this period, ∼3,005 (2,6%) hospital workers acquired COVID-19. Almost half of all hospital workers with confirmed COVID-19 were likely index cases in their own households. When the index case in a family was an HCW, the secondary attack rate was 24.8%. At least 17.8% of all confirmed COVID-19 cases among hospital workers were acquired in the household.

Conclusions:

Our results suggest not only that many HCWs are infected with SARS-CoV-2 in their households but also that infected HCWs constitute a serious infection risk to members of the HCW’s household.

COVID-19 Severity among Healthcare Workers: Overweight Male Physicians at Risk

We performed a prospective longitudinal cohort study in two healthcare settings. In total, 909 HCWs out of 3982 (23.35%) were diagnosed with COVID-19 before the vaccination era. Eighty-five per cent of COVID-19 positive HCWs (n = 774) were asymptomatic or mild, and 15% were moderate or severe. The mean age of the infected HCWs in the moderate or severe group was higher than the mild or asymptomatic group (35.4 vs. 31.3 years, p < 0.001). Thirty-two per cent of HCWs were male and the rate of male gender was more frequent in the moderate/severe group (p = 0.009). The rate of those who have cardiovascular diseases (p = 0.003) and diabetes mellitus (p = 0.044) were significantly higher among the HCWs with moderate or severe COVID-19. In multivariate analysis, male gender (OR:1.65, CI:1.11−2.46, p = 0.013), BMI > 30 (OR: 1.9, CI: 1.09−3.51, p = 0.024), and being physician (OR: 2.56, CI:1.45−4.52, p = 0.001) were found to be associated with moderate or severe COVID-19.

Characterising within-hospitalSARS-CoV-2 transmission events using epidemiological and viral genomic data across two pandemic waves

Hospital outbreaks of COVID19 result in considerable mortality and disruption to healthcare services and yet little is known about transmission within this setting. We characterise within hospital transmission by combining viral genomic and epidemiological data using Bayesian modelling amongst 2181 patients and healthcare workers from a large UK NHS Trust. Transmission events were compared between Wave 1 (1st March to 25th J'uly 2020) and Wave 2 (30th November 2020 to 24th January 2021). We show that staff-to-staff transmissions reduced from 31.6% to 12.9% of all infections. Patient-to-patient transmissions increased from 27.1% to 52.1%. 40%-50% of hospital-onset patient cases resulted in onward transmission compared to 4% of community-acquired cases. Control measures introduced during the pandemic likely reduced transmissions between healthcare workers but were insufficient to prevent increasing numbers of patient-to-patient transmissions. As hospital-acquired cases drive most onward transmission, earlier identification of nosocomial cases will be required to break hospital transmission chains.

Infection prevention and control insights from a decade of pathogen whole-genome sequencing

Pathogen whole-genome sequencing has become an important tool for understanding the transmission and epidemiology of infectious diseases. It has improved our understanding of sources of infection and transmission routes for important healthcare-associated pathogens, including Clostridioides difficile and Staphylococcus aureus. Transmission from known infected or colonized patients in hospitals may explain fewer cases than previously thought and multiple introductions of these pathogens from the community may play a greater a role. The findings have had important implications for infection prevention and control. Sequencing has identified heterogeneity within pathogen species, with some subtypes transmitting and persisting in hospitals better than others. It has identified sources of infection in healthcare-associated outbreaks of food-borne pathogens, Candida auris and Mycobacterium chimera, as well as individuals or groups involved in transmission and historical sources of infection. SARS-CoV-2 sequencing has been central to tracking variants during the COVID-19 pandemic and has helped understand transmission to and from patients and healthcare workers despite prevention efforts. Metagenomic sequencing is an emerging technology for culture-independent diagnosis of infection and antimicrobial resistance. In future, sequencing is likely to become more accessible and widely available. Real-time use in hospitals may allow infection prevention and control teams to identify transmission and to target interventions. It may also provide surveillance and infection control benchmarking. Attention to ethical and wellbeing issues arising from sequencing identifying individuals involved in transmission is important. Pathogen whole-genome sequencing has provided an incredible new lens to understand the epidemiology of healthcare-associated infection and to better control and prevent these infections.

Reconstruction of transmission chains of SARS-CoV-2 amidst multiple outbreaks in a geriatric acute-care hospital: a combined retrospective epidemiological and genomic study

Background

There is ongoing uncertainty regarding transmission chains and the respective roles of healthcare workers (HCWs) and elderly patients in nosocomial outbreaks of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in geriatric settings.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study including patients with nosocomial coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in four outbreak-affected wards, and all SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positive HCWs from a Swiss university-affiliated geriatric acute-care hospital that admitted both Covid-19 and non-Covid-19 patients during the first pandemic wave in Spring 2020. We combined epidemiological and genetic sequencing data using a Bayesian modelling framework, and reconstructed transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 involving patients and HCWs, to determine who infected whom. We evaluated general transmission patterns according to case type (HCWs working in dedicated Covid-19 cohorting wards: HCW_covid; HCWs working in non-Covid-19 wards where outbreaks occurred: HCW_outbreak; patients with nosocomial Covid-19: patient_noso) by deriving the proportion of infections attributed to each case type across all posterior trees and comparing them to random expectations.

Results

During the study period (1 March to 7 May 2020), we included 180 SARS-CoV-2 positive cases: 127 HCWs (91 HCW_covid, 36 HCW_outbreak) and 53 patients. The attack rates ranged from 10% to 19% for patients, and 21% for HCWs. We estimated that 16 importation events occurred with high confidence (4 patients, 12 HCWs) that jointly led to up to 41 secondary cases; in six additional cases (5 HCWs, 1 patient), importation was possible with a posterior probability between 10% and 50%. Most patient-to-patient transmission events involved patients having shared a ward (95.2%, 95% credible interval [CrI] 84.2%-100%), in contrast to those having shared a room (19.7%, 95% CrI 6.7%-33.3%). Transmission events tended to cluster by case type: patient_noso were almost twice as likely to be infected by other patient_noso than expected (observed:expected ratio 2.16, 95% CrI 1.17-4.20, p=0.006); similarly, HCW_outbreak were more than twice as likely to be infected by other HCW_outbreak than expected (2.72, 95% CrI 0.87-9.00, p=0.06). The proportion of infectors being HCW_covid was as expected as random. We found a trend towards a greater proportion of high transmitters (≥2 secondary cases) among HCW_outbreak than patient_noso in the late phases (28.6% vs. 11.8%) of the outbreak, although this was not statistically significant.

Conclusions

Most importation events were linked to HCW. Unexpectedly, transmission between HCW_covid was more limited than transmission between patients and HCW_outbreak. This finding highlights gaps in infection control and suggests the possible areas of improvements to limit the extent of nosocomial transmission.

Funding

This study was supported by a grant from the Swiss National Science Foundation under the NRP78 funding scheme (Grant no. 4078P0_198363).

Microbiological screening tests for SARS-CoV-2 in the first hour since the hospital admission: A reliable tool for enhancing the safety of pediatric care

INTRODUCTION/PURPOSE

Since a significant proportion of SARS-CoV-2 infections occur within healthcare facilities, a multidisciplinary approach is required for careful and timely assessment of the risk of infection in asymptomatic patients or those whose COVID-19 diagnosis has not yet been made. The aim of this study was to investigate whether an adaptative model based on microbiological testing can represent a valid risk management strategy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We collected data from the risk management unit database of a 1,550-bed tertiary hospital (Fondazione Policlinico Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy) concerning pediatric admissions to the Emergency Department (ED) from 1 March 2020 to 31 December 2021. The study period was subdivided in period A and period B according to the technique used for the microbiological screening, respectively reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and antigen-detection test.

RESULTS

In Period A, 426 children (mean age: 6 years) underwent microbiological screening at the ED. The total number of molecular tests performed was 463. 459/463 tested negative at the molecular test. In Period B, 887 children (mean age: 6 years) underwent microbiological screening in the ED. The total number of molecular tests performed was 1,154. 1,117/1,154 tested negative at the molecular test. Neither in Period A nor in Period B hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infections were reported.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Despite high volumes, no cases of hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection have been reported. SARS-CoV-2 antigen-based tests can be used as a first-line option as they provide rapid results compared to RT-PCR, reducing the risk of infection in ED waiting rooms.

One-year prevalence and the association between SARS-CoV-2 cycle threshold, comorbidity and outcomes in population of Babol, North of Iran (2020-2021)

BACKGROUND

The present study aimed to investigate the one-year prevalence of SARS-CoV-2, common comorbidities and demographic information among negative- and positive rRT-PCR in health care workers (HCW), hospitalized and outpatients. Also, the association between SARS-CoV-2 cycle threshold (Ct) and the outcomes of patients were analyzed in Babol, northern Iran.

METHODS

This large retrospective cross-sectional study was performed between March 2020 and March 2021. The records of 19232 hospitalized, outpatients and HCW suspected to COVID-19 were collected from teaching hospitals in the North of Iran.

RESULTS

Out of the 19232 suspected to COVID-19 patients, 7251 (37.7%) had a positive rRT-PCR result; 652 (9%), 4599 (63.4%) and 2000 (27.6%) of those were categorized as HCW, hospitalized and outpatients, respectively. Moreover, between the hospitalized and the outpatient group, 10.2 and 0.8% cases died, whereas no death cases were reported in the HCW. Furthermore, it seems that death rate was significantly different between the three groups of Ct value, the highest mortality in those with Ct between 21 and 30 (group B=7.6%) and the lowest in the group with the highest Ct (between 31 and 40 = 5.5%) (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

In summary, 37.7% of cases were positive for SARS-CoV-2; of which, 63.4, 27.6 and 9% were hospitalized, outpatients and HCW, respectively. With regard to the mortality rate in hospitalized patients and the significant association with Ct under 20 and 30, it seems that the early detection and the initial quantification of SARS-CoV-2 in the first week of the conflict and therapeutic considerations to reduce the relative load can reduce the mortality rate.