Coinfection with Strongyloides and SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Treatments for COVID-19, including steroids, might exacerbate Strongyloides disease in patients with coinfection. We aimed to systematically review clinical and laboratory features of SARS-CoV-2 and Strongyloides coinfection, investigate possible interventions, assess outcomes, and identify research gaps requiring further attention. METHODS: We searched two electronic databases, LitCOVID and WHO, up to August 2022, including SARS-CoV-2 and Strongyloides coinfection studies. We adapted the World Health Organization-Uppsala Monitoring Centre (WHO-UMC) system for standardized case causality assessment to evaluate if using corticosteroids or other immunosuppressive drugs in COVID-19 patients determined acute manifestations of strongyloidiasis. RESULTS: We included 16 studies reporting 25 cases of Strongyloides and SARS-CoV-2 coinfection: 4 with hyperinfection syndrome; 2 with disseminated strongyloidiasis; 3 with cutaneous reactivation of strongyloidiasis; 3 with isolated digestive symptoms; and 2 with solely eosinophilia, without clinical manifestations. Eleven patients were asymptomatic regarding strongyloidiasis. Eosinopenia or normal eosinophil count was reported in 58.3% of patients with Strongyloides reactivation. Steroids were given to 18/21 (85.7%) cases. A total of 4 patients (19.1%) received tocilizumab and/or Anakirna in addition to steroids. Moreover, 2 patients (9.5%) did not receive any COVID-19 treatment. The causal relationship between Strongyloides reactivation and COVID-19 treatments was considered certain (4% of cases), probable (20% of patients), and possible (20% of patients). For 8% of cases, it was considered unlikely that COVID-19 treatment was associated with strongyloidiasis reactivations; the relationship between the Strongyloides infection and administration of COVID-19 treatment was unassessable/unclassifiable in 48% of cases. Of 13 assessable cases, 11 (84.6%) were considered to be causally associated with Strongyloides, ranging from certain to possible. CONCLUSIONS: Further research is needed to assess the frequency and risk of Strongyloides reactivation in SARS-CoV-2 infection. Our limited data using causality assessment supports recommendations that clinicians should screen and treat for Strongyloides infection in patients with coinfection who receive immunosuppressive COVID-19 therapies. In addition, the male gender and older age (over 50 years) may be predisposing factors for Strongyloides reactivation. Standardized guidelines should be developed for reporting future research.

Respiratory virus coinfections with severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continue to be rare one year into the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Alberta, Canada (June 2020-May 2021).

To assess the burden of respiratory virus coinfections with severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), this study reviewed 4,818 specimens positive for SARS-CoV-2 and tested using respiratory virus multiplex testing. Coinfections with SARS-CoV-2 were uncommon (2.8%), with enterovirus or rhinovirus as the most prevalent target (88.1%). Respiratory virus coinfection with SARS-CoV-2 remains low 1 year into the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

Trends in Severe Outcomes Among Adult and Pediatric Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19 in the Canadian Nosocomial Infection Surveillance Program, March 2020 to May 2022.

Importance: Trends in COVID-19 severe outcomes have significant implications for the health care system and are key to informing public health measures. However, data summarizing trends in severe outcomes among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Canada are not well described. Objective: To describe trends in severe outcomes among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 during the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: Active prospective surveillance in this cohort study was conducted from March 15, 2020, to May 28, 2022, at a sentinel network of 155 acute care hospitals across Canada. Participants included adult (aged ≥18 years) and pediatric (aged 0-17 years) patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 at a Canadian Nosocomial Infection Surveillance Program (CNISP)-participating hospital. Exposures: COVID-19 waves, COVID-19 vaccination status, and age group. Main Outcomes and Measures: The CNISP collected weekly aggregate data on the following severe outcomes: hospitalization, admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), receipt of mechanical ventilation, receipt of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and all-cause in-hospital death. Results: Among 1 513 065 admissions, the proportion of adult (n = 51 679) and pediatric (n = 4035) patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 was highest in waves 5 and 6 of the pandemic compared with waves 1 to 4 (77.3 vs 24.7 per 1000 patient admissions). Despite this, the proportion of patients with positive test results for COVID-19 who were admitted to an ICU, received mechanical ventilation, received extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and died were each significantly lower in waves 5 and 6 when compared with waves 1 through 4. Admission to the ICU and in-hospital all-cause death rates were significantly higher among those who were unvaccinated against COVID-19 when compared with those who were fully vaccinated (incidence rate ratio, 4.3 and 3.9, respectively) or fully vaccinated with an additional dose (incidence rate ratio, 12.2 and 15.1, respectively). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study of patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 suggest that COVID-19 vaccination is important to reduce the burden on the Canadian health care system as well as severe outcomes associated with COVID-19.

Patient and ward related risk factors in a multi-ward nosocomial outbreak of COVID-19: Outbreak investigation and matched case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Risk factors for nosocomial COVID-19 outbreaks continue to evolve. The aim of this study was to investigate a multi-ward nosocomial outbreak of COVID-19 between 1st September and 15th November 2020, occurring in a setting without vaccination for any healthcare workers or patients. METHODS: Outbreak report and retrospective, matched case-control study using incidence density sampling in three cardiac wards in an 1100-bed tertiary teaching hospital in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Patients were confirmed/probable COVID-19 cases and contemporaneous control patients without COVID-19. COVID-19 outbreak definitions were based on Public Health guidelines. Clinical and environmental specimens were tested by RT-PCR and as applicable quantitative viral cultures and whole genome sequencing were conducted. Controls were inpatients on the cardiac wards during the study period confirmed to be without COVID-19, matched to outbreak cases by time of symptom onset dates, age within ± 15 years and were admitted in hospital for at least 2 days. Demographics, Braden Score, baseline medications, laboratory measures, co-morbidities, and hospitalization characteristics were collected on cases and controls. Univariate and multivariate conditional logistical regression was used to identify independent risk factors for nosocomial COVID-19. RESULTS: The outbreak involved 42 healthcare workers and 39 patients. The strongest independent risk factor for nosocomial COVID-19 (IRR 3.21, 95% CI 1.47-7.02) was exposure in a multi-bedded room. Of 45 strains successfully sequenced, 44 (97.8%) were B.1.128 and differed from the most common circulating community lineages. SARS-CoV-2 positive cultures were detected in 56.7% (34/60) of clinical and environmental specimens. The multidisciplinary outbreak team observed eleven contributing events to transmission during the outbreak. CONCLUSIONS: Transmission routes of SARS-CoV-2 in hospital outbreaks are complex; however multi-bedded rooms play a significant role in the transmission of SARS-CoV-2.

Surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 and its variants in wastewater of tertiary care hospitals correlates with increasing case burden and outbreaks.

Wastewater-based SARS-CoV-2 surveillance enables unbiased and comprehensive monitoring of defined sewersheds. We performed real-time monitoring of hospital wastewater that differentiated Delta and Omicron variants within total SARS-CoV-2-RNA, enabling correlation to COVID-19 cases from three tertiary-care facilities with >2100 inpatient beds in Calgary, Canada. RNA was extracted from hospital wastewater between August/2021 and January/2022, and SARS-CoV-2 quantified using RT-qPCR. Assays targeting R203M and R203K/G204R established the proportional abundance of Delta and Omicron, respectively. Total and variant-specific SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater was compared to data for variant specific COVID-19 hospitalizations, hospital-acquired infections, and outbreaks. Ninety-six percent (188/196) of wastewater samples were SARS-CoV-2 positive. Total SARS-CoV-2 RNA levels in wastewater increased in tandem with total prevalent cases (Delta plus Omicron). Variant-specific assessments showed this increase to be mainly driven by Omicron. Hospital-acquired cases of COVID-19 were associated with large spikes in wastewater SARS-CoV-2 and levels were significantly increased during outbreaks relative to nonoutbreak periods for total SARS-CoV2, Delta and Omicron. SARS-CoV-2 in hospital wastewater was significantly higher during the Omicron-wave irrespective of outbreaks. Wastewater-based monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 and its variants represents a novel tool for passive COVID-19 infection surveillance, case identification, containment, and potentially to mitigate viral spread in hospitals.

Barriers and Facilitators to the Use of Personal Protective Equipment in Long-Term Care: A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVE: To review existing literature evaluating barriers and facilitators to the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) by health care workers in long-term care (LTC). DESIGN: Scoping review. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Health care workers in LTC settings. METHODS: Several online databases were searched and a gray literature search was conducted. Study inclusion criteria were (1) conducted in nursing homes or LTC settings, (2) focused on LTC health care workers as the study population, and (3) identified barriers and/or facilitators to PPE use. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), which assesses barriers to implementation across 14 behavioral change domains, was used to extract and organize data about barriers and facilitators to appropriate use of PPE from the included studies. RESULTS: A total of 5216 references were screened for eligibility and 10 studies were included in this review. Eight of the 10 studies were conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic. Several barriers and facilitators to PPE use were identified. The most common TDF domain identified was environmental context and resources, which was observed in 9 of the 10 studies. Common barriers to PPE use included supply issues (n = 7 studies), the cost of acquisition (n = 3 studies), unclear guidelines on appropriate use of PPE (n = 2 studies), difficulty providing care (n = 2 studies), and anxiety about frightening patients (n = 2 studies). Having PPE readily available facilitated the use of PPE (n = 2 studies). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Further research is necessary to identify barriers and facilitators more extensively across behavior change domains to develop effective strategies to improve PPE use and prevent infection transmission within LTC.

Viral Cultures, Cycle Threshold Values and Viral Load Estimation for Assessing SARS-CoV-2 Infectiousness in Haematopoietic Stem Cell and Solid Organ Transplant Patients: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Solid organ and haematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients are at increased vulnerability to SARS-CoV-2 due to immunosuppression and may pose a continued transmission risk especially within hospital settings. Detailed case reports including symptoms, viral load and infectiousness, defined by the presence of replication-competent viruses in culture, provide an opportunity to examine the relationship between clinical course, burden and contagiousness, and provide guidance on release from isolation. OBJECTIVES: We performed a systematic review to investigate the relationship in transplant recipients between serial SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) value or cycle of quantification value (Cq), or other measures of viral burden and the likelihood and duration of the presence of infectious virus based on viral culture including the influence of age, sex, underlying pathologies, degree of immunosuppression, and/or vaccination on this relationship. METHODS: We searched LitCovid, medRxiv, Google Scholar and WHO Covid-19 databases, from 1 November 2019 until 26 October 2022. We included studies reporting relevant data for transplantees with SARS-CoV-2 infection: results from serial RT-PCR testing and viral culture data from the same respiratory samples. We assessed methodological quality using five criteria, and synthesised the data narratively and graphically. RESULTS: We included 13 case reports and case series reporting on 41 transplantees including 22 renal, 5 cardiac, 1 bone marrow, 2 liver, 1 bilateral lung, and 10 blood stem cell transplants. We observed a relationship between proxies of viral burden and likelihood of shedding replication-competent SARS-CoV-2. Three individuals shed replication-competent viruses for over 100 days after infection onset. Lack of standardisation of testing and reporting platforms precludes establishing a definitive viral burden cut-off. However, the majority of transplantees stopped shedding replication-competent viruses when the RT-PCR cycle threshold was above 30 despite differences across platforms. CONCLUSIONS: Viral burden is a reasonable proxy for infectivity when considered within the context of the clinical status of each patient. Standardised study design and reporting are essential to standardise guidance based on an increasing evidence base.

Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses.

BACKGROUND: Viral epidemics or pandemics of acute respiratory infections (ARIs) pose a global threat. Examples are influenza (H1N1) caused by the H1N1pdm09 virus in 2009, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2003, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by SARS-CoV-2 in 2019. Antiviral drugs and vaccines may be insufficient to prevent their spread. This is an update of a Cochrane Review last published in 2020. We include results from studies from the current COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of acute respiratory viruses. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and two trials registers in October 2022, with backwards and forwards citation analysis on the new studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs investigating physical interventions (screening at entry ports, isolation, quarantine, physical distancing, personal protection, hand hygiene, face masks, glasses, and gargling) to prevent respiratory virus transmission.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. MAIN RESULTS: We included 11 new RCTs and cluster-RCTs (610,872 participants) in this update, bringing the total number of RCTs to 78. Six of the new trials were conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic; two from Mexico, and one each from Denmark, Bangladesh, England, and Norway. We identified four ongoing studies, of which one is completed, but unreported, evaluating masks concurrent with the COVID-19 pandemic. Many studies were conducted during non-epidemic influenza periods. Several were conducted during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic, and others in epidemic influenza seasons up to 2016. Therefore, many studies were conducted in the context of lower respiratory viral circulation and transmission compared to COVID-19. The included studies were conducted in heterogeneous settings, ranging from suburban schools to hospital wards in high-income countries; crowded inner city settings in low-income countries; and an immigrant neighbourhood in a high-income country. Adherence with interventions was low in many studies. The risk of bias for the RCTs and cluster-RCTs was mostly high or unclear. Medical/surgical masks compared to no masks We included 12 trials (10 cluster-RCTs) comparing medical/surgical masks versus no masks to prevent the spread of viral respiratory illness (two trials with healthcare workers and 10 in the community). Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza-like illness (ILI)/COVID-19 like illness compared to not wearing masks (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.09; 9 trials, 276,917 participants; moderate-certainty evidence. Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory-confirmed influenza/SARS-CoV-2 compared to not wearing masks (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.42; 6 trials, 13,919 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Harms were rarely measured and poorly reported (very low-certainty evidence). N95/P2 respirators compared to medical/surgical masks We pooled trials comparing N95/P2 respirators with medical/surgical masks (four in healthcare settings and one in a household setting). We are very uncertain on the effects of N95/P2 respirators compared with medical/surgical masks on the outcome of clinical respiratory illness (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.10; 3 trials, 7779 participants; very low-certainty evidence). N95/P2 respirators compared with medical/surgical masks may be effective for ILI (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.03; 5 trials, 8407 participants; low-certainty evidence). Evidence is limited by imprecision and heterogeneity for these subjective outcomes. The use of a N95/P2 respirators compared to medical/surgical masks probably makes little or no difference for the objective and more precise outcome of laboratory-confirmed influenza infection (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.34; 5 trials, 8407 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Restricting pooling to healthcare workers made no difference to the overall findings. Harms were poorly measured and reported, but discomfort wearing medical/surgical masks or N95/P2 respirators was mentioned in several studies (very low-certainty evidence).  One previously reported ongoing RCT has now been published and observed that medical/surgical masks were non-inferior to N95 respirators in a large study of 1009 healthcare workers in four countries providing direct care to COVID-19 patients.  Hand hygiene compared to control Nineteen trials compared hand hygiene interventions with controls with sufficient data to include in meta-analyses. Settings included schools, childcare centres and homes. Comparing hand hygiene interventions with controls (i.e. no intervention), there was a 14% relative reduction in the number of people with ARIs in the hand hygiene group (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.90; 9 trials, 52,105 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), suggesting a probable benefit. In absolute terms this benefit would result in a reduction from 380 events per 1000 people to 327 per 1000 people (95% CI 308 to 342). When considering the more strictly defined outcomes of ILI and laboratory-confirmed influenza, the estimates of effect for ILI (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.09; 11 trials, 34,503 participants; low-certainty evidence), and laboratory-confirmed influenza (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.30; 8 trials, 8332 participants; low-certainty evidence), suggest the intervention made little or no difference. We pooled 19 trials (71, 210 participants) for the composite outcome of ARI or ILI or influenza, with each study only contributing once and the most comprehensive outcome reported. Pooled data showed that hand hygiene may be beneficial with an 11% relative reduction of respiratory illness (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.94; low-certainty evidence), but with high heterogeneity. In absolute terms this benefit would result in a reduction from 200 events per 1000 people to 178 per 1000 people (95% CI 166 to 188). Few trials measured and reported harms (very low-certainty evidence). We found no RCTs on gowns and gloves, face shields, or screening at entry ports. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The high risk of bias in the trials, variation in outcome measurement, and relatively low adherence with the interventions during the studies hampers drawing firm conclusions. There were additional RCTs during the pandemic related to physical interventions but a relative paucity given the importance of the question of masking and its relative effectiveness and the concomitant measures of mask adherence which would be highly relevant to the measurement of effectiveness, especially in the elderly and in young children. There is uncertainty about the effects of face masks. The low to moderate certainty of evidence means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited, and that the true effect may be different from the observed estimate of the effect. The pooled results of RCTs did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks. There were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection. Hand hygiene is likely to modestly reduce the burden of respiratory illness, and although this effect was also present when ILI and laboratory-confirmed influenza were analysed separately, it was not found to be a significant difference for the latter two outcomes. Harms associated with physical interventions were under-investigated. There is a need for large, well-designed RCTs addressing the effectiveness of many of these interventions in multiple settings and populations, as well as the impact of adherence on effectiveness, especially in those most at risk of ARIs.

Medical Masks Versus N95 Respirators for Preventing COVID-19 Among Health Care Workers : A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: It is uncertain if medical masks offer similar protection against COVID-19 compared with N95 respirators. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether medical masks are noninferior to N95 respirators to prevent COVID-19 in health care workers providing routine care. DESIGN: Multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04296643). SETTING: 29 health care facilities in Canada, Israel, Pakistan, and Egypt from 4 May 2020 to 29 March 2022. PARTICIPANTS: 1009 health care workers who provided direct care to patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19. INTERVENTION: Use of medical masks versus fit-tested N95 respirators for 10 weeks, plus universal masking, which was the policy implemented at each site. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was confirmed COVID-19 on reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat analysis, RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 occurred in 52 of 497 (10.46%) participants in the medical mask group versus 47 of 507 (9.27%) in the N95 respirator group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.14 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.69]). An unplanned subgroup analysis by country found that in the medical mask group versus the N95 respirator group RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 occurred in 8 of 131 (6.11%) versus 3 of 135 (2.22%) in Canada (HR, 2.83 [CI, 0.75 to 10.72]), 6 of 17 (35.29%) versus 4 of 17 (23.53%) in Israel (HR, 1.54 [CI, 0.43 to 5.49]), 3 of 92 (3.26%) versus 2 of 94 (2.13%) in Pakistan (HR, 1.50 [CI, 0.25 to 8.98]), and 35 of 257 (13.62%) versus 38 of 261 (14.56%) in Egypt (HR, 0.95 [CI, 0.60 to 1.50]). There were 47 (10.8%) adverse events related to the intervention reported in the medical mask group and 59 (13.6%) in the N95 respirator group. LIMITATION: Potential acquisition of SARS-CoV-2 through household and community exposure, heterogeneity between countries, uncertainty in the estimates of effect, differences in self-reported adherence, differences in baseline antibodies, and between-country differences in circulating variants and vaccination. CONCLUSION: Among health care workers who provided routine care to patients with COVID-19, the overall estimates rule out a doubling in hazard of RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 for medical masks when compared with HRs of RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 for N95 respirators. The subgroup results varied by country, and the overall estimates may not be applicable to individual countries because of treatment effect heterogeneity. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, World Health Organization, and Juravinski Research Institute.

Cost-effectiveness of remdesivir plus usual care versus usual care alone for hospitalized patients with COVID-19: an economic evaluation as part of the Canadian Treatments for COVID-19 (CATCO) randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The role of remdesivir in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 remains ill-defined. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis alongside the Canadian Treatments for COVID-19 (CATCO) open-label, randomized clinical trial evaluating remdesivir. METHODS: Patients with COVID-19 in Canadian hospitals from Aug. 14, 2020, to Apr. 1, 2021, were randomly assigned to receive remdesivir plus usual care versus usual care alone. Taking a public health care payer's perspective, we collected in-hospital outcomes and health care resource utilization alongside estimated unit costs in 2020 Canadian dollars over a time horizon from randomization to hospital discharge or death. Data from 1281 adults admitted to 52 hospitals in 6 Canadian provinces were analyzed. RESULTS: The total mean cost per patient was $37 918 (standard deviation [SD] $42 413; 95% confidence interval [CI] $34 617 to $41 220) for patients randomly assigned to the remdesivir group and $38 026 (SD $46 021; 95% CI $34 480 to $41 573) for patients receiving usual care (incremental cost -$108 [95% CI -$4953 to $4737], p > 0.9). The difference in proportions of in-hospital deaths between remdesivir and usual care groups was -3.9% (18.7% v. 22.6%, 95% CI -8.3% to 1.0%, p = 0.09). The difference in proportions of incident invasive mechanical ventilation events between groups was -7.0% (8.0% v. 15.0%, 95% CI -10.6% to -3.4%, p = 0.006), whereas the difference in proportions of total mechanical ventilation events between groups was -5.7% (16.4% v. 22.1%, 95% CI -10.0% to -1.4%, p = 0.01). Remdesivir was the dominant intervention (but only marginally less costly, with mildly lower mortality) with an incalculable incremental cost effectiveness ratio; we report results of incremental costs and incremental effects separately. For willingness-to-pay thresholds of $0, $20 000, $50 000 and $100 000 per death averted, a strategy using remdesivir was cost-effective in 60%, 67%, 74% and 79% of simulations, respectively. The remdesivir costs were the fifth highest cost driver, offset by shorter lengths of stay and less mechanical ventilation. INTERPRETATION: From a health care payer perspective, treating patients hospitalized with COVID-19 with remdesivir and usual care appears to be preferrable to treating with usual care alone, albeit with marginal incremental cost and small clinical effects. The added cost of remdesivir was offset by shorter lengths of stay in the intensive care unit and less need for ventilation. STUDY REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials. gov, no. NCT04330690.

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 Associated with Cruise Ship Travel: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Maritime and river travel may be associated with respiratory viral spread via infected passengers and/or crew and potentially through other transmission routes. The transmission models of SARS-CoV-2 associated with cruise ship travel are based on transmission dynamics of other respiratory viruses. We aimed to provide a summary and evaluation of relevant data on SARS-CoV-2 transmission aboard cruise ships, report policy implications, and highlight research gaps. METHODS: We searched four electronic databases (up to 26 May 2022) and included studies on SARS-CoV-2 transmission aboard cruise ships. The quality of the studies was assessed based on five criteria, and relevant findings were reported. RESULTS: We included 23 papers on onboard SARS-CoV-2 transmission (with 15 reports on different aspects of the outbreak on Diamond Princess and nine reports on other international cruises), 2 environmental studies, and 1 systematic review. Three articles presented data on both international cruises and the Diamond Princess. The quality of evidence from most studies was low to very low. Index case definitions were heterogeneous. The proportion of traced contacts ranged from 0.19 to 100%. Studies that followed up >80% of passengers and crew reported attack rates (AR) up to 59%. The presence of a distinct dose-response relationship was demonstrated by findings of increased ARs in multi-person cabins. Two studies performed viral cultures with eight positive results. Genomic sequencing and phylogenetic analyses were performed in individuals from three cruises. Two environmental studies reported PCR-positive samples (cycle threshold range 26.21-39.00). In one study, no infectious virus was isolated from any of the 76 environmental samples. CONCLUSION: Our review suggests that crowding and multiple persons per cabin were associated with an increased risk of transmission on cruise ships. Variations in design, methodology, and case ascertainment limit comparisons across studies and quantification of transmission risk. Standardized guidelines for conducting and reporting studies on cruise ships of acute respiratory infection transmission should be developed.

The use of drones for the delivery of diagnostic test kits and medical supplies to remote First Nations communities during Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Health care inequity in remote and rural Indigenous communities often involves difficulty accessing health care services and supplies. Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems, or drones, offer a potentially cost-effective method for reducing inequity by removing geographic barriers, increasing timeliness, and improving accessibility of supplies, equipment, and remote care. METHODS: We assessed the feasibility of drones for delivery of supplies, medical equipment, and medical treatment across multiple platforms, including drone fleet development and testing; payload system integration (custom fixed-mount, winch, and parachute); and medical delivery simulations (COVID-19 test kit delivery and return, delivery of personal protective equipment, and remote ultrasound delivery and testing). RESULTS: Drone operational development has led to a finalized, scalable fleet of small to large drones with functional standard operating procedures across a range of scenarios, and custom payload systems including a fixed-mount, winch-based and parachute-based system. Simulation scenarios were successful, with COVID-19 test swabs returned to the lab with no signal degradation and a remote ultrasound successfully delivered and remotely guided in the field. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS: Drone-based medical delivery models offer an innovative approach to addressing longstanding issues of health care access and equity and are particularly relevant in the context of SARS-CoV-2.

Risk of transmission of respiratory viruses during aerosol-generating medical procedures (AGMPs) revisited in the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: In many jurisdictions healthcare workers (HCWs) are using respirators for aerosol-generating medical procedures (AGMPs) performed on adult and pediatric populations with all suspect/confirmed viral respiratory infections (VRIs). This systematic review assessed the risk of VRIs to HCWs in the presence of AGMPs, the role respirators versus medical/surgical masks have on reducing that risk, and if the risk to HCWs during AGMPs differed when caring for adult or pediatric patient populations. MAIN TEXT: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, Cochrane SR, CINAHL, COVID-19 specific resources, and MedRxiv for English and French articles from database inception to September 9, 2021. Independent reviewers screened abstracts using pre-defined criteria, reviewed full-text articles, selected relevant studies, abstracted data, and conducted quality assessments of all studies using the ROBINS-I risk of bias tool. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. Thirty-eight studies were included; 23 studies on COVID-19, 10 on SARS, and 5 on MERS/ influenza/other respiratory viruses. Two of the 16 studies which assessed associations found that HCWs were 1.7 to 2.5 times more likely to contract COVID-19 after exposure to AGMPs vs. not exposed to AGMPs. Eight studies reported statistically significant associations for nine specific AGMPs and transmission of SARS to HCWS. Intubation was consistently associated with an increased risk of SARS. HCWs were more likely (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.2-3.4) to contract human coronaviruses when exposed to an AGMP in one study. There were no reported associations between AGMP exposure and transmission of influenza or in a single study on MERS. There was limited evidence supporting the use of a respirator over a medical/surgical mask during an AGMP to reduce the risk of viral transmission. One study described outcomes of HCWs exposed to a pediatric patient during intubation. CONCLUSION: Exposure to an AGMP may increase the risk of transmission of COVID-19, SARS, and human coronaviruses to HCWs, however the evidence base is heterogenous and prone to confounding, particularly related to COVID-19. There continues to be a significant research gap in the epidemiology of the risk of VRIs among HCWs during AGMPs, particularly for pediatric patients. Further evidence is needed regarding what constitutes an AGMP.

Tracking Emergence and Spread of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant in Large and Small Communities by Wastewater Monitoring in Alberta, Canada.

Wastewater monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 enables early detection and monitoring of the COVID-19 disease burden in communities and can track specific variants of concern. We determined proportions of the Omicron and Delta variants across 30 municipalities covering >75% of the province of Alberta (population 4.5 million), Canada, during November 2021-January 2022. Larger cities Calgary and Edmonton exhibited more rapid emergence of Omicron than did smaller and more remote municipalities. Notable exceptions were Banff, a small international resort town, and Fort McMurray, a medium-sized northern community that has many workers who fly in and out regularly. The integrated wastewater signal revealed that the Omicron variant represented close to 100% of SARS-CoV-2 burden by late December, before the peak in newly diagnosed clinical cases throughout Alberta in mid-January. These findings demonstrate that wastewater monitoring offers early and reliable population-level results for establishing the extent and spread of SARS-CoV-2 variants.

A Hierarchical Framework for Assessing Transmission Causality of Respiratory Viruses.

Systematic reviews of 591 primary studies of the modes of transmission for SARS-CoV-2 show significant methodological shortcomings and heterogeneity in the design, conduct, testing, and reporting of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. While this is partly understandable at the outset of a pandemic, evidence rules of proof for assessing the transmission of this virus are needed for present and future pandemics of viral respiratory pathogens. We review the history of causality assessment related to microbial etiologies with a focus on respiratory viruses and suggest a hierarchy of evidence to integrate clinical, epidemiologic, molecular, and laboratory perspectives on transmission. The hierarchy, if applied to future studies, should narrow the uncertainty over the twin concepts of causality and transmission of human respiratory viruses. We attempt to address the translational gap between the current research evidence and the assessment of causality in the transmission of respiratory viruses with a focus on SARS-CoV-2. Experimentation, consistency, and independent replication of research alongside our proposed framework provide a chain of evidence that can reduce the uncertainty over the transmission of respiratory viruses and increase the level of confidence in specific modes of transmission, informing the measures that should be undertaken to prevent transmission.