ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Healthcare professionals are among the main risk groups for COVID-19 and can also be a source of transmission to patients to whom they provide care. The identification of symptoms is important in the clinical presumption of COVID-19. However, the infection may be asymptomatic or paucysymptomatic. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Cross-sectional study, with retrospective analysis of the clinical records of health professionals who went by self-initiative to the Occupational Health Service of a University Hospital Center, between March and August 2020, for presenting symptoms, risk contact with a confirmed case of COVID-19, or by both and, who in this context, performed the RT PCR SARS-CoV-2 test. RESULTS: 613 professionals were evaluated. Of the 420 symptomatic professionals, in 27 COVID-19 was confirmed, while only 3 of the 193 asymptomatic professionals being positive (95% CI, p = 0,009). In turn, of the 371 who had respiratory symptoms, 19 were positive for COVID-19, versus 11 among the 242 who had no respiratory symptoms, not being difference statistically significant (95% CI;p = 0,75). Nasal congestion and rhinorrhea were the respiratory symptoms with the highest proportion of positive cases (11,43% and 8,97%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Although COVID-19 is typically associated with respiratory symptoms, not all these symptoms were predictive of disease. It becomes crucial to value mild symptoms among healthcare professionals, even in the absence of risk contact.
ABSTRACT
As with the SARS-CoV-1 outbreak in 2003-2004 and the MERS outbreak in 2012, there were early reports of frequent transmission to healthcare workers (HCW) in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Our hospital center identified its first COVID-19 confirmed case on March 9, 2020, in a 6-day hospitalized patient. The first confirmed COVID-19 case in a HCW happened 3 days later, in a nurse with a probable epidemiological link related to the first confirmed patient. Our study's first objective is to describe and characterize the impact of the first 3 months of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on the Centro Hospitalar Universitário Lisboa Norte (CHULN). Our second objective is to report the performance of the CHULN Occupational Health Department (OHD) and the impact of the pandemic on CHULN HCW and its adaptation across national, regional, and institutional epidemiological evolution. Over the first 3 months, 2,152 HCW were screened (which represent 29.8% of the total HCW population), grouped in 100 separate identifiable clusters, each one ranging from 2 to 98 HCW. The most prevalent profession screened were nurses (n = 800;37.2%) followed by doctors (n = 634;29.5%). The main source of potential infection and cluster generating screening procedures was co-worker related (n = 1,216;56.5%). A patient source or a combined patient co-worker source was only accountable for 559 (26%) and 43 (2%) of cases, respectively. Our preliminary results demonstrate a lower infection rate among HCW than the ones commonly found in the literature. The main source of infection seemed to be co-worker related rather than patient related. New preventive strategies would have to be implemented in order to control SARS-CoV-2 spread.