Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Intern Med J ; 53(4): 619-624, 2023 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2272984

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in immunocompromised patients can lead to severe and prolonged illness. Data are limited with regard to management of COVID-19 in this setting, particularly in persistent or recrudescent infection. The authors conducted an online survey among infectious diseases doctors to determine current approaches to treatment across Australasia. There was marked variability in responses relating to the diagnostic modalities and use of antiviral agents in patients with immunocompromise, highlighting the need for high-quality studies to guide treatment decisions in this group.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Immunocompromised Host , Surveys and Questionnaires , Australasia/epidemiology
2.
BMJ Open ; 12(12): e065568, 2022 12 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2193790

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To determine the negative predictive value (NPV) of the FebriDx point-of-care host response device in patients presenting with symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 infection in a mostly immunised Australian emergency department (ED) population during the late 2021 phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Observational diagnostic accuracy study comparing FebriDx point-of-care test to SARS-CoV-2 PCR. SETTING: An ED in Melbourne, Australia, with 63 000 annual presentations in 2021. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 16 and over who met the Victorian Department of Health case definition for suspected COVID-19 infection PCR testing. Patients meeting any of the following criteria were excluded: <16 years of age; acute respiratory symptom(s) with onset>14 days prior to testing; current immunosuppressive or interferon therapy; live immunisation within the last 30 days; fever lasting>7 days; antibiotic or antiviral use in the preceding 14 days; experience of major trauma, major surgical intervention or severe burns within the last 30 days. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: COVID-19 PCR results (detected, not detected) and FebriDx results (bacterial positive, viral negative, viral positive). RESULTS: 94 participants were enrolled (female: 46; male: 48), 34% of participants (tested positive for COVID-19 according to PCR results, with a background incidence among all adult ED attenders of 2.5%. The sensitivity of FebriDx for detection of COVID-19 was 56% (95% CI 40% to 100%) and specificity was 92% (95% CI 84% to 100%). For the population tested, this resulted in an NPV of 80% (95% CI 71% to 100%) and a positive predictive value of 78% (95% CI 60% to 100%). CONCLUSIONS: In the context of a population with low COVID-19 infection rates, an evolved variant of COVID-19 and a very high community COVID-19 vaccination rate, FebriDx demonstrated reduced sensitivity and NPV relative to results from earlier international tests. These contextual factors should be considered during any attempt to generalise the current results. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12620001029987 (Australian Clinical Trials).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Humans , Male , Female , Adolescent , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Predictive Value of Tests , SARS-CoV-2 , Pandemics , COVID-19 Vaccines , Australia/epidemiology , Point-of-Care Testing , Emergency Service, Hospital
3.
Lancet Reg Health West Pac ; 25: 100487, 2022 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1945950

ABSTRACT

Background: COVID-19 has affected many healthcare workers (HCWs) globally. We performed state-wide SARS-CoV-2 genomic epidemiological investigations to identify HCW transmission dynamics and provide recommendations to optimise healthcare system preparedness for future outbreaks. Methods: Genome sequencing was attempted on all COVID-19 cases in Victoria, Australia. We combined genomic and epidemiologic data to investigate the source of HCW infections across multiple healthcare facilities (HCFs) in the state. Phylogenetic analysis and fine-scale hierarchical clustering were performed for the entire dataset including community and healthcare cases. Facilities provided standardised epidemiological data and putative transmission links. Findings: Between March-October 2020, approximately 1,240 HCW COVID-19 infection cases were identified; 765 are included here, requested for hospital investigations. Genomic sequencing was successful for 612 (80%) cases. Thirty-six investigations were undertaken across 12 HCFs. Genomic analysis revealed that multiple introductions of COVID-19 into facilities (31/36) were more common than single introductions (5/36). Major contributors to HCW acquisitions included mobility of staff and patients between wards and facilities, and characteristics and behaviours of patients that generated numerous secondary infections. Key limitations at the HCF level were identified. Interpretation: Genomic epidemiological analyses enhanced understanding of HCW infections, revealing unsuspected clusters and transmission networks. Combined analysis of all HCWs and patients in a HCF should be conducted, supported by high rates of sequencing coverage for all cases in the population. Established systems for integrated genomic epidemiological investigations in healthcare settings will improve HCW safety in future pandemics. Funding: The Victorian Government, the National Health and Medical Research Council Australia, and the Medical Research Future Fund.

4.
Intern Med J ; 52(5): 859-863, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1774809

ABSTRACT

This audit reviewed the impact on access to routine medical care and adverse outcomes in patients with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection managed on a 'COVID-19' (CV) ward compared with a general medicine ward at Box Hill Hospital, Victoria. Data were collected at two time points to capture changes associated with onsite testing. We found no healthcare delays from admission to CV wards and observed faster exits from CV wards with improved testing efficiency. This critical finding is relevant as Victoria manages a third wave of infections.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Hospitals , Humans , Infection Control , Inpatients
5.
BJPsych Open ; 7(S1):S177, 2021.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1430495

ABSTRACT

AimsThe aim of this project is to improve the quality of documentation and recording of the assessment and monitoring of patients commencing clozapine in BHSCT.BackgroundClozapine is an effective treatment for patients with schizophrenia who have not responded to at least two other antipsychotics. Due to clozapine's significant side effect profile patients must be carefully assessed prior to treatment initiation with close monitoring of their physical observations and reported side effects during initiation.The BHSCT Clozapine Pathway currently uses a Clozapine Assessment Integrated Care Pathway (ICP) common to inpatient and outpatient clozapine titrations and a Clozapine Titration ICP which varies slightly between inpatient and outpatient titrations.MethodThe Clozapine ICPs of patients commenced on clozapine in BHSCT in a 9 month period commencing January 2019 were reviewed. Handwritten clinical records were used to collect data on rates of completion of all aspects of the pathway.These results were used to identify areas of the pathway that were being poorly completed and the “Method for Improvement Model” used to trial changes to the pathway using Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles.Result20 patients in BHSCT were commenced on clozapine in the 9 month period. 1 Clozapine Initiation Pathway could not be located;therefore data were collected on 19 patients. 2 patients were initiated in the community and 17 patients initiated as inpatients.The results showed that sections of the Clozapine Assessment ICP were poorly completed;for example only 27% of the “Patient Baseline Preparation Checklist” were complete, with 60% partially complete and 13% completely blank.In the inpatient clozapine titration ICP the physical observations record was complete in only 20% of patients and the side effects monitoring record complete in only 13% of patients. Conversely the physical observations and side effects monitoring records were complete in 100% (n = 2) of patients.ConclusionBHSCT Clozapine Pathways were being poorly completed, with outpatient pathways being completed better than inpatient pathways. Analysis of the data shows that repetition of information in various parts of the pathway leads to gaps in documentation.Parts of the pathway that were poorly completed have been redesigned and the impact of these changes assessed using the PDSA cycle method. It is hoped that this along with education of staff will lead to an improvement in the assessment and monitoring of patients being commenced on clozapine.

6.
Infect Dis Health ; 26(3): 208-213, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1179513

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers (HCW) are exposed to an increased risk of COVID-19 through direct contact with patients and patient environments. We calculated the; seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in HCW at Eastern Health, a tertiary healthcare network in Victoria, and assessed associations with demographics, work location and role. METHODS: A cross-sectional cohort study of HCW at Eastern Health was conducted. Serum was analysed for the presence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2, and all participants completed; an online survey collecting information on demographics, place of work, role, and exposures; to COVID-19. Seroprevalence was calculated as the proportion participants with SARS-CoV-2; antibodies out of all tested individuals. RESULTS: The crude seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in this study was 2.17% (16/736). Thirteen of the 16 (81.2%) positive cases had previously been diagnosed with COVID-19 by PCR: the seroprevalence in the group not previously diagnosed with COVID by PCR was 0.42% (3/720). Having direct contact with COVID-19 patients did not increase the likelihood of having positive serology. A prior history of symptoms consistent with COVID-19 was associated with a higher likelihood of having positive serology (OR 17.2, p = 0.006, 95%CI: 2.25-131.55). CONCLUSION: Our calculated seroprevalence of 2.17% is higher than estimated in the general Australian population, but lower than that reported in HCW internationally. The; majority of those with positive serology in our study had previously been diagnosed with COVID-19 by PCR based testing. Seropositivity was not associated with interaction with COVID-19 positive patients, highlighting effective infection prevention and control practices within the workplace.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19/blood , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Tertiary Healthcare/statistics & numerical data , Victoria/epidemiology , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL