SARS-CoV-2 Infection Rates Following Use of Regular Compared With Defective Respirators When Caring for COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective Follow-up Study.

BACKGROUND: There is strong observational evidence that respirators are highly effective in protecting the users from being infected with Middle East respiratory syndrome and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV), but the evidence for SARS-CoV-2 during daily work is limited. This study utilized a subset of healthcare workers' temporary use of a new brand respirator with frequent defects when caring for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients to assess the protective effect of regular respirators against SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: We retrospectively followed 463 participants wearing a regular respirator and 168 wearing the new brand respirator day-by-day when caring for COVID-19 patients until testing polymerase chain reaction positive for SARS-CoV-2 between 27th December 2020 and 14th January 2021. RESULTS: We observed seven and eight incident SARS-CoV-2-infected cases. This corresponded with daily infection rates of 0.2 and 0.5%, an incidence rate ratio of 0.4 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.1; 1.0], and an incidence rate difference of 0.3% (95% CI -0.1; 0.8) when comparing a regular with the new brand respirator. DISCUSSION: We regard the new brand respirator a sham intervention, and this study thus provides further evidence for the protective effect of respirators when exposed to SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Diagnostic performance, user acceptability, and safety of unsupervised SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen-detecting tests performed at home.

BACKGROUND: One strategy for reducing spread of COVID-19 is to contain the infection with broad screening, isolating infected individuals, and tracing contacts. This strategy requires widely available, reliable SARS-CoV-2 testing. To increase testing, rapid antigen detection tests (RADTs) were developed for self-sampling, self-testing, and self-interpretation. This study examined diagnostic performance, user acceptability, and safety of nasal self-RADTs compared with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing. METHODS: Self-RADT kits were distributed at a public COVID-19 test center in Aarhus, Denmark or delivered to participants. Participants reported test results and test preferences. During enrollment, participants reported occurrence and duration of symptoms consistent with COVID-19. Sensitivity and specificity of self-RADT, relative to oropharyngeal PCR testing, were calculated. RESULTS: Among 827 participants, 102 showed positive PCR test results. Sensitivities of the self-RADTs were 65.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 49.2-79.2; DNA Diagnostic) and 62.1% (95% CI: 50.1-72.9; Hangzhou), and specificities were 100% (95% CI: 99.0-100; DNA Diagnostic) and 100% (95% CI: 98.9-100; Hangzhou). The sensitivities of both self-RADTs appeared higher in symptomatic participants than in asymptomatic participants. Two of every 3 participants preferred self-RADT over PCR test. CONCLUSION: Self-performed RADTs were reliable, user-acceptable, and safe among laypeople as a supplement to professionally collected oropharyngeal PCR testing.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Seroprevalence Survey Among 17 971 Healthcare and Administrative Personnel at Hospitals, Prehospital Services, and Specialist Practitioners in the Central Denmark Region.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to perform a seroprevalence survey on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among Danish healthcare workers to identify high-risk groups. METHODS: All healthcare workers and administrative personnel at the 7 hospitals, prehospital services, and specialist practitioner clinics in the Central Denmark Region were invited to be tested by a commercial SARS-CoV-2 total antibody enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (Wantai Biological Pharmacy Enterprise Co, Ltd, Beijing, China). RESULTS: A total of 25 950 participants were invited. Of these, 17 971 had samples available for SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing. After adjustment for assay sensitivity and specificity, the overall seroprevalence was 3.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.5%-3.8%). The seroprevalence was higher in the western part of the region than in the eastern part (11.9% vs 1.2%; difference: 10.7 percentage points [95% CI, 9.5-12.2]). In the high-prevalence area, the emergency departments had the highest seroprevalence (29.7%), whereas departments without patients or with limited patient contact had the lowest seroprevalence (2.2%). Among the total 668 seropositive participants, 433 (64.8%) had previously been tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA, and 50.0% had a positive reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (PCR) result. CONCLUSIONS: We found large differences in the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in staff working in the healthcare sector within a small geographical area of Denmark. Half of all seropositive staff had been tested positive by PCR prior to this survey. This study raises awareness of precautions that should be taken to avoid in-hospital transmission. Regular testing of healthcare workers for SARS-CoV-2 should be considered to identify areas with increased transmission.

Day-by-day symptoms following positive and negative PCR tests for SARS-CoV-2 in non-hospitalized healthcare workers: A 90-day follow-up study.

OBJECTIVE: Our study aimed to compare symptoms day by day for non-hospitalized individuals testing positive and negative for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). METHODS: In total, 210 positive-test and 630 negative-test healthcare workers in the Central Denmark Region were followed for up to 90 days after testing, between April and June, 2020. Their daily reported COVID-19-related symptoms were compared graphically and by logistic regression. RESULTS: Thirty per cent of the positive-test and close to 0% of the negative-test participants reported a reduced sense of taste and smell during all 90 days (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 86.07, 95% CI 22.86-323). Dyspnea was reported by an initial 20% of positive-test participants, declining to 5% after 30 days, without ever reaching the level of the negative-test participants (aOR 6.88, 95% CI 2.41-19.63). Cough, headache, sore throat, muscle pain, and fever were temporarily more prevalent among the positive-test participants; after 30 days, no increases were seen. Women and older participants were more susceptible to long-lasting COVID-19 symptoms. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of long-lasting reduced sense of taste and smell is highly increased in mild COVID-19 patients. This pattern is also seen for dyspnea at a low level, but not for cough, sore throat, headache, muscle pain, or fever.

Symptoms reported by SARS-CoV-2 seropositive and seronegative healthcare and administrative employees in Denmark from May to August 2020.

BACKGROUND: The distribution and nature of symptoms among SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals need to be clarified. METHODS: Between May and August 2020, 11 138 healthcare and administrative personnel from Central Denmark Region were tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and subsequently completed a questionnaire. Symptom prevalence and overall duration for symptoms persisting for more than 30 days were calculated. Logistic regression models were used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs. RESULTS: In total, 447 (4%) of the participants were SARS-CoV-2-seropositive. Loss of sense of smell and taste was reported by 50% of seropositives compared with 3% of seronegatives. Additionally, seropositives more frequently reported fever, dyspnoea, muscle or joint ache, fatigue, cough, headache and sore throat, and they were more likely to report symptoms persisting for more than 30 days. In adjusted models, they had a higher risk of reporting symptoms, with the strongest association observed for loss of sense of taste and smell (OR = 35.6; 95% CI: 28.6-44.3). CONCLUSION: In this large study, SARS-CoV-2-seropositive participants reported COVID-19-associated symptoms more frequently than those who were seronegative, especially loss of sense of taste and smell. Overall, their symptoms were also more likely to persist for more than 30 days.