Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 25
Filter
1.
J Racial Ethn Health Disparities ; 2022 May 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2318374

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission during mass gatherings and a risk of asymptomatic infection. We aimed to estimate the use of masks during Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests and whether these protests increased the risk of COVID-19. Two reviewers screened 496 protest images for mask use, with high inter-rater reliability. Protest intensity, use of tear gas, government control measures, and testing rates were estimated in 12 cities. A correlation analysis was conducted to assess the potential effect of mask use and other measures, adjusting for testing rates, on COVID-19 epidemiology 4 weeks (two incubation periods) post-protests. Mask use ranged from 69 to 96% across protests. There was no increase in the incidence of COVID-19 post-protest in 11 cities. After adjusting for testing rates, only Miami, which involved use of tear gas and had high protest intensity, showed a clear increase in COVID-19 after one incubation period post-protest. No significant correlation was found between incidence and protest factors. Our study showed that protests in most cities studied did not increase COVID-19 incidence in 2020, and a high level of mask use was seen. The absence of an epidemic surge within two incubation periods of a protest is indicative that the protests did not have a major influence on epidemic activity, except in Miami. With the globally circulating highly transmissible Alpha, Delta, and Omicron variants, layered interventions such as mandated mask use, physical distancing, testing, and vaccination should be applied for mass gatherings in the future.

2.
Vaccine ; 40(31): 4253-4261, 2022 07 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1829616

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Influenza outbreaks in aged care facilities are a major public health concern. In response to the severe 2017 influenza season in Australia, enhanced influenza vaccines were introduced from 2018 onwards for those over 65 and more emphasis was placed on improving vaccination rates among aged care staff. During the COVID-19 pandemic, these efforts were then further escalated to reduce the additional burden that influenza could pose to facilities. METHODS: An observational epidemiological study was conducted from 2018 to 2020 in nine Sydney (Australia) aged care facilities of the same provider. De-identified vaccination data and physical layout data were collected from participating facility managers from 2018 to 2020. Active surveillance of influenza-like illness was carried out from 2018 to 2020 influenza seasons. Correlation and Poisson regression analyses were carried out to explore the relationship between physical layout variables to occurrence of influenza cases. RESULTS: Influenza cases were low in 2018 and 2019, and there were no confirmed influenza cases identified in 2020. Vaccination rates increased among staff by 50.5% and residents by 16.8% over the three-year period of surveillance from 2018 to 2020. For each unit increase in total number of beds, common areas, single rooms, all types of rooms (including double occupancy rooms), the influenza cases increased by 1.02 (95% confidence interval:1.018-1.025), 1.04 (95% confidence interval: 1.019-1.073), 1.03 (95% confidence interval: 1.016-1 0.038) and 1.02 (95% confidence interval:1.005-1.026) times which were found to be statistically significant. For each unit increase in the proportion of shared rooms, influenza cases increased by 1.004 (95% confidence interval:1.0001-1.207) which was found to be statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: There is a relationship between influenza case counts and aspects of the physical layout such as facility size, and this should be considered in assessing risk of outbreaks in aged care facilities. Increased vaccination rates in staff and COVID-19 prevention and control measures may have eliminated influenza in the studied facilities in 2020.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Aged , Australia/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Vaccination
3.
Vaccine ; 40(45): 6558-6565, 2022 Oct 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2061960

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The aim of this project was to develop a road map to support countries in Eastern Mediterranean Region in developing and implementing evidence-based seasonal influenza vaccination policy, strengthen influenza vaccination delivery program and address vaccine misperceptions and hesitancy. METHODS: The road map was developed through consultative meetings with countries' focal points, review of relevant literature and policy documents and analysis of WHO/UNICEF Joint Reporting Form on immunization ((JRF 2015-2020) data. Countries were categorised into three groups, based on the existence of influenza vaccination policy and national regulatory authority, availability of influenza vaccine in the country and number of influenza vaccine doses distributed/ 1000 population. The final road map was shared with representatives of all countries in Eastern Mediterranean Region and other stakeholders during a meeting in September 2021. RESULT: The goal for next 5 years is to increase access to and use of utilization of seasonal influenza vaccine in Eastern Mediterranean Region to reduce influenza-associated morbidity and mortality among priority groups for vaccination. Countries in the Eastern Mediterranean Region are at different stages of implementation of the influenza vaccination program, so activities are planned under four strategic priority areas based on current situations in countries. The consultative body recommended that some countries should establish a new seasonal influenza vaccination programme and ensure the availability of vaccines, while other countries need to reduce vaccine hesitancy and enhance current seasonal influenza vaccination coverage, particularly in all high-risk groups. Countries are also encouraged to leverage COVID-19 adult vaccination programs to improve seasonal influenza vaccine uptake. CONCLUSION: This road map was developed through a consultative process to scale up the uptake and utilization of influenza vaccine in all countries of Eastern Mediterranean Region. The road map proposes activities that should be adopted in the local context to develop/ update national policies and programs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Adult , Humans , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Immunization Programs , Vaccination , Mediterranean Region/epidemiology
4.
BMJ Open ; 12(8): e061850, 2022 08 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2001851

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Over the years, countries reformed their pandemic plans but still healthcare systems were unprepared to handle the COVID-19 pandemic. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers (HCWs) raised issues around shortage of personal protective equipment (PPE), inadequate occupational infection prevention and control (IPC) training, lack of guidance regarding reuse/extended use of PPE and absence of HCWs. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this scoping review was to compare national and transnational pandemic plans and COVID-19 guidelines for the inclusion of recommendations regarding pandemic-specific occupational IPC training for HCWs, as well as strategies for managing the surge in PPE needs and staffing. INCLUSION CRITERIA: From each of the six WHO defined world regions, four countries with the highest burden of COVID-19 cases (as of mid-2020) were selected and attempted to locate the relevant pandemic plans and COVID-19 guidelines. METHODS: Searches were undertaken of 1: National Guidelines Clearinghouse, 2: websites of international public healthcare agencies such as WHO, the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) and, 3: in-country health departments/Ministry of Health/Department of Public Health, between June 2020 and July 2021. The data were summarised under six themes drawn from publicly available pandemic plans and COVID-19 (IPC) guidelines of WHO, ECDC and 23 countries. RESULTS: The WHO, ECDC and 14 countries reported pandemic-specific IPC training; however, only four discussed training HCWs on correct PPE use; six countries listed strategies to manage the surge in demand of HCWs, while only five discussed managing the shortage of PPE. None of the COVID-19 guidelines recommended training HCWs for correct reuse or extended use of PPE and only one country's guideline outlined mandatory HCWs attendance and delivery of training in a regional language. CONCLUSION: Pandemic plans should be revised to include guiding principles regarding the delivery of pandemic specific IPC training. There is also a need to provide guidance on when countries should consider reuse and extended use of PPE. This discourse should also be reflected in disease-specific pandemic guidelines, like COVID-19 (IPC) guidelines. The aim of this review is to assist international health agencies in generating evidence-based guideline updates.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Personnel , Humans , Infection Control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Personal Protective Equipment , SARS-CoV-2
6.
BMJ Open ; 12(6): e057860, 2022 06 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1902000

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Since mask uptake and the timing of mask use has the potential to influence the control of the COVID-19 pandemic, this study aimed to assess the changes in knowledge toward mask use in Sydney and Melbourne, Australia, during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: An observational study, using a cross-sectional survey, was distributed to adults in Sydney and Melbourne, Australia, during July-August 2020 (survey 1) and September 2020 (survey 2), during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Participants aged 18 years or older and living in either Sydney or Melbourne. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Demographics, risk measures, COVID-19 severity and perception, mask attitude and uptake were determined in this study. RESULTS: A total of 700 participants completed the survey. In both Sydney and Melbourne, a consistent decrease was reported in almost all risk-mitigation behaviours between March 2020 and July 2020 and again between March 2020 and September 2020. However, mask use and personal protective equipment use increased in both Sydney and Melbourne from March 2020 to September 2020. There was no significant difference in mask use during the pandemic between the two cities across both timepoints (1.24 (95% CI 0.99 to 1.22; p=0.072)). Perceived severity and perceived susceptibility of COVID-19 infection were significantly associated with mask uptake. Trust in information on COVID-19 from both national (1.77 (95% CI 1.29 to 2.44); p<0.000)) and state (1.62 (95% CI 1.19 to 2.22); p=0.003)) government was a predictor of mask use across both surveys. CONCLUSION: Sydney and Melbourne both had high levels of reported mask wearing during July 2020 and September 2020, consistent with the second wave and mask mandates in Victoria, and cluster outbreaks in Sydney at the time. High rates of mask compliance may be explained by high trust levels in information from national and state government, mask mandates, risk perceptions, current outbreaks and the perceived level of risk of COVID-19 infection at the time.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires , Victoria
7.
J Infect Dis ; 225(9): 1561-1568, 2022 05 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1890948

ABSTRACT

Cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been reported in more than 200 countries. Thousands of health workers have been infected, and outbreaks have occurred in hospitals, aged care facilities, and prisons. The World Health Organization (WHO) has issued guidelines for contact and droplet precautions for healthcare workers caring for suspected COVID-19 patients, whereas the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has initially recommended airborne precautions. The 1- to 2-meter (≈3-6 feet) rule of spatial separation is central to droplet precautions and assumes that large droplets do not travel further than 2 meters (≈6 feet). We aimed to review the evidence for horizontal distance traveled by droplets and the guidelines issued by the WHO, CDC, and European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control on respiratory protection for COVID-19. We found that the evidence base for current guidelines is sparse, and the available data do not support the 1- to 2-meter (≈3-6 feet) rule of spatial separation. Of 10 studies on horizontal droplet distance, 8 showed droplets travel more than 2 meters (≈6 feet), in some cases up to 8 meters (≈26 feet). Several studies of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) support aerosol transmission, and 1 study documented virus at a distance of 4 meters (≈13 feet) from the patient. Moreover, evidence suggests that infections cannot neatly be separated into the dichotomy of droplet versus airborne transmission routes. Available studies also show that SARS-CoV-2 can be detected in the air, and remain viable 3 hours after aerosolization. The weight of combined evidence supports airborne precautions for the occupational health and safety of health workers treating patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Aerosols , Aged , Health Personnel , Humans , Infection Control , SARS-CoV-2
8.
Vaccine ; 40(17): 2498-2505, 2022 04 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1683644

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is widespread hesitancy towards COVID-19 vaccines in the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia. OBJECTIVE: To identify predictors of willingness to vaccinate against COVID-19 in five cities with varying COVID-19 incidence in the US, UK, and Australia. DESIGN: Online, cross-sectional survey of adults from Dynata's research panel in July-September 2020. PARTICIPANTS, SETTING: Adults aged 18 and over in Sydney, Melbourne, London, New York City, or Phoenix. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine; reason for vaccine intention. STATISTICAL METHODS: To identify predictors of intention to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, we used Poisson regression with robust error estimation to produce prevalence ratios. RESULTS: The proportion willing to receive a COVID-19 vaccine was 70% in London, 71% NYC, 72% in Sydney, 76% in Phoenix, and 78% in Melbourne. Age was the only sociodemographic characteristic that predicted willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine in all five cities. In Sydney and Melbourne, participants with high confidence in their current government had greater willingness to receive the vaccine (PR = 1.24; 95% CI = 1.07-1.44 and PR = 1.38; 95% CI = 1.74-1.62), while participants with high confidence in their current government in NYC and Phoenix were less likely to be willing to receive the vaccine (PR = 0.78; 95% CI = 0.72-0.85 and PR = 0.85; 95% CI = 0.76-0.96). LIMITATIONS: Consumer panels can be subject to bias and may not be representative of the general population. CONCLUSIONS: Success for COVID-19 vaccination programs requires high levels of vaccine acceptance. Our data suggests more than 25% of adults may not be willing to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, but many of them were not explicitly anti-vaccination and thus may become more willing to vaccinate over time. Among the three countries surveyed, there appears to be cultural differences, political influences, and differing experiences with COVID-19 that may affect willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Adolescent , Adult , Australia , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Cities , Cross-Sectional Studies , Government , Humans , Intention , SARS-CoV-2 , Trust , United Kingdom , United States , Vaccination , Vaccination Hesitancy
9.
Am J Infect Control ; 50(7): 735-742, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1664607

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The 2009 Influenza A(H1N1) pandemic prompted one of the largest public health responses in history. The continuous emergence of new and deadly pathogens has highlighted the need to reflect upon past experiences to improve pandemic preparedness. The aim of this study was to examine the development and rollout of 2009 influenza A(H1N1) pandemic vaccine and knowledge challenges for the effective implementation of vaccination programs for COVID-19 and future influenza pandemics. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted searching EMBASE (inception to current date) and PUBMED (from January 2009 to current date) databases for relevant published studies about influenza A(H1N1) pandemic vaccines. A Google search was conducted to identify relevant documents from gray literature. Selected Studies were reviewed and summarized. RESULTS: A total of 22, comprising of 12 original studies and 10 relevant documents met the inclusion criteria. Fourteen papers reported an initial high demand that outweighed production capacity and caused vaccine shortages. Vaccine procurement and supply were skewed toward high-income countries. Low vaccination rates of about 5%-50% were reported in all studies mainly due to a low-risk perception of getting infected, safety concerns, and the fear of adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: Safety concerns about the approved H1N1 vaccines resulted in many unsuccessful vaccination campaigns worldwide. Understanding the factors that influence people's decision to accept or refuse vaccination, effective risk communication strategies, adequate resources for vaccine deployment initiatives and building local capacities through shared knowledge and technology transfer may help to improve COVID-19 vaccine uptake and accelerate pandemic control.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza A Virus, H1N1 Subtype , Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Vaccination , Vaccine Development
10.
Influenza Other Respir Viruses ; 16(3): 429-437, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1555974

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Aged-care facilities (ACF's) provide unique challenges when implementing infection control methods for respiratory outbreaks such as COVID-19. Research on this highly vulnerable setting is lacking and there was no national reporting data of COVID-19 cases in ACFs in Australia early in the pandemic. We aimed to estimate the burden of aged-care worker (ACW) infections and outbreaks of COVID-19 in Australian aged-care. METHODS: A line list of publicly available aged-care related COVID-19 reported cases from January 25 to June 10, 2020 was created and was enhanced by matching data extracted from media reports of aged-care related COVID-19 relevant outbreaks and reports. Rate ratios (RR) were used to predict risk of infection in ACW and aged-care residents, and were calculated independently, by comparing overall cases to ACW and aged-care residents' cases. RESULTS: A total of 14 ACFs with COVID-19 cases were recorded by June 2020 nationwide, with a high case fatality rate (CFR) of 50% (n = 34) and 100% (n = 3) seen in two ACFs. Analysis on the resident risk found that the COVID-19 risk is 1.27 times higher (unadjusted RR 1.27 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00 to1.61; P = 0.047) as compared with the risk of infection in the general population. In over 60% of cases identified in ACFs, the source of infection in the index case was unknown. A total of 28 deaths associated within ACFs were reported, accounting for 54.9% of total deaths in New South Wales and 26.9% of total deaths in Australia. CONCLUSIONS: This high-risk population requires additional prevention and control measures, such as routine testing of all staff and patients regardless of symptoms. Prompt isolation and quarantine as soon as a case is confirmed within a facility is essential.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Aged , Australia/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Quarantine
12.
Int J Infect Dis ; 106: 199-207, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1279597

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To determine patterns of mask wearing and other infection prevention behaviours, over two time periods of the COVID-19 pandemic, in cities where mask wearing was not a cultural norm. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of masks and other preventive behaviours in adults aged ≥18 years was conducted in five cities: Sydney and Melbourne, Australia; London, UK; and Phoenix and New York, USA. Data were analysed according to the epidemiology of COVID-19, mask mandates and a range of predictors of mask wearing. RESULTS: The most common measures used were avoiding public areas (80.4%), hand hygiene (76.4%), wearing masks (71.8%) and distancing (67.6%). Over 40% of people avoided medical facilities. These measures decreased from March-July 2020. Pandemic fatigue was associated with younger age, low perceived severity of COVID-19 and declining COVID-19 prevalence. Predictors of mask wearing were location (US, UK), mandates, age <50 years, education, having symptoms and knowing someone with COVID-19. Negative experiences with mask wearing and low perceived severity of COVID-19 reduced mask wearing. Most respondents (98%) believed that hand washing and distancing were necessary, and 80% reported no change or stricter adherence to these measures when wearing masks. CONCLUSION: Pandemic mitigation measures were widely reported across all cities, but decreased between March and July 2020. Pandemic fatigue was more common in younger people. Cities with mandates had higher rates of mask wearing. Promotion of mask use for older people may be useful. Masks did not result in a reduction of other hygiene measures.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/psychology , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Masks/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Australia/epidemiology , Cities/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Mandatory Programs , Masks/virology , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom/epidemiology , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
13.
ACS Biomater Sci Eng ; 7(6): 2791-2802, 2021 06 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1275857

ABSTRACT

Cloth masks can be an alternative to medical masks during pandemics. Recent studies have examined the performance of fabrics under various conditions; however, the performance against violent respiratory events such as human sneezes is yet to be explored. Accordingly, we present a comprehensive experimental study using sneezes by a healthy adult and a tailored image-based flow measurement diagnostic system evaluating all dimensions of protection of commonly available fabrics and their layered combinations: the respiratory droplet blocking efficiency, water resistance, and breathing resistance. Our results reveal that a well-designed cloth mask can outperform a three-layered surgical mask for such violent respiratory events. Specifically, increasing the number of layers significantly increases the droplet blocking efficiency, on average by ∼20 times per additional fabric layer. A minimum of three layers is necessary to resemble the droplet blocking performance of surgical masks, and a combination of cotton/linen (hydrophilic inner layer)-blends (middle layer)-polyester/nylon (hydrophobic outer layer) exhibited the best performance among overall indicators tested. In an optimum three-layered design, the average thread count should be greater than 200, and the porosity should be less than 2%. Furthermore, machine washing at 60 °C did not significantly impact the performance of cloth masks. These findings inform the design of high-performing homemade cloth masks.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Humans , Masks , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Textiles
14.
Clin Infect Dis ; 72(10): e639-e641, 2021 05 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1232186

ABSTRACT

Choral singing has become a major risk during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic due to high infection rates. Our visualization and velocimetry results reveal that the majority of droplets expelled during singing follow the ambient airflow pattern. These results point toward the possibility of COVID-19 spread by small airborne droplets during singing.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Singing , Aerosols , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
15.
PLoS One ; 16(5): e0251605, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1225816

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Rumors and conspiracy theories, can contribute to vaccine hesitancy. Monitoring online data related to COVID-19 vaccine candidates can track vaccine misinformation in real-time and assist in negating its impact. This study aimed to examine COVID-19 vaccine rumors and conspiracy theories circulating on online platforms, understand their context, and then review interventions to manage this misinformation and increase vaccine acceptance. METHOD: In June 2020, a multi-disciplinary team was formed to review and collect online rumors and conspiracy theories between 31 December 2019-30 November 2020. Sources included Google, Google Fact Check, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, fact-checking agency websites, and television and newspaper websites. Quantitative data were extracted, entered in an Excel spreadsheet, and analyzed descriptively using the statistical package R version 4.0.3. We conducted a content analysis of the qualitative information from news articles, online reports and blogs and compared with findings from quantitative data. Based on the fact-checking agency ratings, information was categorized as true, false, misleading, or exaggerated. RESULTS: We identified 637 COVID-19 vaccine-related items: 91% were rumors and 9% were conspiracy theories from 52 countries. Of the 578 rumors, 36% were related to vaccine development, availability, and access, 20% related to morbidity and mortality, 8% to safety, efficacy, and acceptance, and the rest were other categories. Of the 637 items, 5% (30/) were true, 83% (528/637) were false, 10% (66/637) were misleading, and 2% (13/637) were exaggerated. CONCLUSIONS: Rumors and conspiracy theories may lead to mistrust contributing to vaccine hesitancy. Tracking COVID-19 vaccine misinformation in real-time and engaging with social media to disseminate correct information could help safeguard the public against misinformation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Information Dissemination/methods , Vaccination Refusal/psychology , COVID-19 Vaccines/pharmacology , Communication , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Information Dissemination/ethics , Public Health , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Social Media , Surveys and Questionnaires , Vaccination/methods
16.
Int J Nurs Stud ; 114: 103811, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-988055

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: There are no publicly available national data on healthcare worker infections in Australia. It has been documented in many countries that healthcare workers (HCW) are at increased occupational risk of COVID-19. We aimed to estimate the burden of COVID-19 on Australia HCW and the health system by obtaining and organizing data on HCW infections, analyzing national HCW cases in regards to occupational risk and analyzing healthcare outbreak. METHODS: We searched government reports and websites and media reports to create a comprehensive line listing of Australian HCW infections and nosocomial outbreaks between January 25th and July 8th, 2020. A line list of HCW related COVID-19 reported cases was created and enhanced by matching data extracted from media reports of healthcare related COVID-19 relevant outbreaks and reports, using matching criteria. Rates of infections and odds ratios (ORs) for HCW were calculated per state, by comparing overall cases to HCW cases. To investigate the sources of infection amongst HCW, transmission data were collated and graphed to show distribution of sources. RESULTS: We identified 36 hospital outbreaks or HCW infection reports between January 25th and July 8th, 2020. According to our estimates, at least 536 HCW in Australia had been infected with COVID-19, comprising 6.03% of all reported infections. The rate of HCW infection was 90/100000 and of community infection 34/100,000. HCW were 2.69 times more likely to contract COVID-19 (95% CI 2.48 to 2.93; P < 0.001). The timing of hospital outbreaks did not always correspond to community peaks. Where data were available, a total of 131 HCW across 21 outbreaks led to 1656 HCW being furloughed for quarantine. In one outbreak, one hospital was closed and 1200 HCW quarantined. CONCLUSION: The study shows that HCW were at nearly 3 times the risk of infection. Of concern, this nearly tripling of risk occurred during a period of low community prevalence suggesting failures at multiple hazard levels including PPE policies within the work environment. Even in a country with relatively good control of COVID-19, HCW are at greater risk of infection than the general community and nosocomial outbreaks can have substantial effects on workforce capacity by the quarantine of numerous HCW during an outbreak. The occurrence of hospital outbreaks even when community incidence was low highlights the high risk setting that hospitals present. Australia faced a resurgence of COVID-19 after the study period, with multiple hospital outbreaks. We recommend formal reporting of HCW infections, testing protocols for nosocomial outbreaks, cohorting of workforce to minimize the impact, and improved PPE guidelines to provide precautionary and optimal protection for HCW.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Occupational Diseases/epidemiology , Australia , Cost of Illness , Hospitals , Humans , National Health Programs , Occupational Diseases/virology , Occupational Exposure , Pandemics , Prevalence , Risk Factors
18.
BMJ Open ; 10(9): e042045, 2020 09 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-807320

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In a previous randomised controlled trial (RCT) in hospital healthcare workers (HCWs), cloth masks resulted in a higher risk of respiratory infections compared with medical masks. This was the only published RCT of cloth masks at the time of the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: To do a post hoc analysis of unpublished data on mask washing and mask contamination from the original RCT to further understand poor performance of the two-layered cotton cloth mask used by HCWs in that RCT. SETTING: 14 secondary-level/tertiary-level hospitals in Hanoi, Vietnam. PARTICIPANTS: A subgroup of 607 HCWs aged ≥18 years working full time in selected high-risk wards, who used a two-layered cloth mask and were part of a randomised controlled clinical trial comparing medical masks and cloth masks. INTERVENTION: Washing method for cloth masks (self-washing or hospital laundry). A substudy of contamination of a sample of 15 cloth and medical masks was also conducted. OUTCOME MEASURE: Infection rate over 4 weeks of follow up and viral contamination of masks tested by multiplex PCR. RESULTS: Viral contamination with rhinovirus was identified on both used medical and cloth masks. Most HCW (77% of daily washing) self-washed their masks by hand. The risk of infection was more than double among HCW self-washing their masks compared with the hospital laundry (HR 2.04 (95% CI 1.03 to 4.00); p=0.04). There was no significant difference in infection between HCW who wore cloth masks washed in the hospital laundry compared with medical masks (p=0.5). CONCLUSIONS: Using self-reported method of washing, we showed double the risk of infection with seasonal respiratory viruses if masks were self-washed by hand by HCWs. The majority of HCWs in the study reported hand-washing their mask themselves. This could explain the poor performance of two layered cloth masks, if the self-washing was inadequate. Cloth masks washed in the hospital laundry were as protective as medical masks. Both cloth and medical masks were contaminated, but only cloth masks were reused in the study, reiterating the importance of daily washing of reusable cloth masks using proper method. A well-washed cloth mask can be as protective as a medical mask. TRIAL RESGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12610000887077.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections , Disinfection , Equipment Contamination , Infection Control , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Masks , Pandemics , Personnel, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral , Adult , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Disinfection/methods , Disinfection/standards , Disinfection/statistics & numerical data , Equipment Contamination/prevention & control , Equipment Contamination/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Infection Control/instrumentation , Infection Control/methods , Infection Control/standards , Male , Masks/classification , Masks/standards , Masks/supply & distribution , Occupational Exposure/analysis , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , SARS-CoV-2 , Vietnam/epidemiology
19.
BMJ Open Respir Res ; 7(1)2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-760260

ABSTRACT

Face masks and respirators are the most widely used intervention measures for respiratory protection. In the wake of COVID-19, in response to shortages and lack of availability of surgical masks and respirators, the use of cloth masks has become a research focus. Various fabrics have been promoted with little evidence-based foundation and without guidelines on design principles for optimal performance. In these circumstances, it is essential to understand the properties, key performance factors, filter mechanisms and evidence on cloth masks materials. The general community might also need to decontaminate and reuse disposable, single-use devices as a last resort. We present an overview of the filter materials, filter mechanisms and effectiveness, key performance factors, and hydrophobicity of the common disposable masks, as well as cloth masks. We also reviewed decontamination methods for disposable respiratory devices. As an alternative to surgical masks and respirators, we recommend a cloth mask made of at least three layers (300-350 threads per inch) and adding a nylon stocking layer over the mask for a better fit. Water-resistant fabrics (polyesters/nylon), blends of fabrics and water-absorbing fabrics (cotton) should be in the outside layer, middle layer/layers and inside layer, respectively. The information outlined here will help people to navigate their choices if facing shortages of appropriate respiratory protection during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Communicable Disease Control , Coronavirus Infections , Decontamination , Masks , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , Communicable Disease Control/instrumentation , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Decontamination/methods , Decontamination/standards , Equipment Design , Humans , Masks/standards , Masks/supply & distribution , Medical Waste Disposal/methods , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2
20.
Am J Trop Med Hyg ; 103(4): 1621-1629, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-713541

ABSTRACT

Infodemics, often including rumors, stigma, and conspiracy theories, have been common during the COVID-19 pandemic. Monitoring social media data has been identified as the best method for tracking rumors in real time and as a possible way to dispel misinformation and reduce stigma. However, the detection, assessment, and response to rumors, stigma, and conspiracy theories in real time are a challenge. Therefore, we followed and examined COVID-19-related rumors, stigma, and conspiracy theories circulating on online platforms, including fact-checking agency websites, Facebook, Twitter, and online newspapers, and their impacts on public health. Information was extracted between December 31, 2019 and April 5, 2020, and descriptively analyzed. We performed a content analysis of the news articles to compare and contrast data collected from other sources. We identified 2,311 reports of rumors, stigma, and conspiracy theories in 25 languages from 87 countries. Claims were related to illness, transmission and mortality (24%), control measures (21%), treatment and cure (19%), cause of disease including the origin (15%), violence (1%), and miscellaneous (20%). Of the 2,276 reports for which text ratings were available, 1,856 claims were false (82%). Misinformation fueled by rumors, stigma, and conspiracy theories can have potentially serious implications on the individual and community if prioritized over evidence-based guidelines. Health agencies must track misinformation associated with the COVID-19 in real time, and engage local communities and government stakeholders to debunk misinformation.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Public Health , Social Media , COVID-19 , Data Analysis , Data Collection/methods , Global Health , Humans , Public Health/trends , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Discrimination/psychology , Social Media/standards , Social Media/trends , Social Stigma
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL