Long-Term Consequences of COVID-19: A 1-Year Analysis.

Long-lasting symptoms after SARS-CoV-2 infection have been described many times in the literature and are referred to as Long COVID. In this prospective, longitudinal, monocentric, observational study, we collected the health complaints of 474 patients (252 ambulatory and 222 hospitalized) at Lausanne University Hospital 1 year after COVID-19 diagnosis. Using a self-reported health survey, we explored cardiopulmonary, vascular, neurological, and psychological complaints. Our results show that age, Charlson comorbidity index, and smoking habits were associated with hospital admission. Regarding the vascular system, we found that having had thromboembolism before SARS-CoV-2 infection was significantly associated with a higher risk of recurrence of thromboembolism at 1 year. In the neurologic evaluation, the most frequent symptom was fatigue, which was observed in 87.5% of patients, followed by "feeling slowed down", headache, and smell disturbance in 71.5%, 68.5%, and 60.7% of cases, respectively. Finally, our cohort subjects scored higher overall in the STAI, CESD, Maastricht, and PSQI scores (which measure anxiety, depression, fatigue, and sleep, respectively) than the healthy population. Using cluster analysis, we identified two phenotypes of patients prone to developing Long COVID. At baseline, CCS score, prior chronic disease, stroke, and atrial fibrillation were associated with Long COVID. During COVID infection, mechanical ventilation and five neurological complaints were also associated with Long COVID. In conclusion, this study confirms the wide range of symptoms developed after COVID with the involvement of all the major systems. Early identification of risk factors associated with the development of Long COVID could improve patient follow-up; nevertheless, the low specificity of these factors remains a challenge to building a systematic approach.

SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in healthcare workers of a Swiss tertiary care centre at the end of the first wave: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the SARS-CoV-2 transmission in healthcare workers (HCWs) using seroprevalence as a surrogate marker of infection in our tertiary care centre according to exposure. DESIGN: Seroprevalence cross-sectional study. SETTING: Single centre at the end of the first COVID-19 wave in Lausanne, Switzerland. PARTICIPANTS: 1874 of 4074 responders randomly selected (46% response rate), stratified by work category among the 13 474 (13.9%) HCWs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 serostatus paired with a questionnaire of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition risk factors internal and external to the workplace. RESULTS: The overall SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence rate among HCWs was 10.0% (95% CI 8.7% to 11.5%). HCWs with daily patient contact did not experience increased rates of seropositivity relative to those without (10.3% vs 9.6%, respectively, p=0.64). HCWs with direct contact with patients with COVID-19 or working in COVID-19 units did not experience increased seropositivity rates relative to their counterparts (10.4% vs 9.8%, p=0.69 and 10.6% vs 9.9%, p=0.69, respectively). However, specific locations of contact with patients irrespective of COVID-19 status-in patient rooms or reception areas-did correlate with increased rates of seropositivity (11.9% vs 7.5%, p=0.019 and 14.3% vs 9.2%, p=0.025, respectively). In contrast, HCWs with a suspected or proven SARS-CoV-2-infected household contact had significantly higher seropositivity rates than those without such contacts (19.0% vs 8.7%, p<0.001 and 42.1% vs 9.4%, p<0.001, respectively). Finally, consistent use of a mask on public transportation correlated with decreased seroprevalence (5.3% for mask users vs 11.2% for intermittent or no mask use, p=0.030). CONCLUSIONS: The overall seroprevalence was 10% without significant differences in seroprevalence between HCWs exposed to patients with COVID-19 and HCWs not exposed. This suggests that, once fully in place, protective measures limited SARS-CoV-2 occupational acquisition within the hospital environment. SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion among HCWs was associated primarily with community risk factors, particularly household transmission.

What face mask for what use in the context of COVID-19 pandemic? The French guidelines.

In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, wearing a face mask has become usual and ubiquitous, in both hospitals and community. However, the general public is consuming surgical or filtering face piece (FFP) masks irrespective of their specificity, leading to global supply shortage for the most exposed persons, which are healthcare workers. This underlines the urgent need to clarify the indications of the different categories of mask, in order to rationalize their use. The study herein specifies the French position for the rational use of respiratory protective equipment for healthcare workers.