Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in hemoglobinopathies is modified by age and race.

Prior literature has established a positive association between sickle cell disease and risk of contracting SARS-CoV-2. Data from a cross-sectional study evaluating COVID-19 testing devices (n = 10,567) was used to examine the association between underlying health conditions and SARS-CoV-2 infection in an urban metropolis in the southern United States. Firth's logistic regression was used to fit the model predicting SARS-CoV-2 positivity using vaccine status and different medical conditions commonly associated with COVID-19. Another model using the same method was built using SARS-CoV-2 positivity as the outcome and hemoglobinopathy presence, age (<16 Years vs. ≥16 Years), race/ethnicity and comorbidities, including hemoglobinopathy, as the factors. Our first model showed a significant association between hemoglobinopathy and SARS-CoV-2 infection (OR: 2.28, 95 % CI: (1.17,4.35), P = 0.016). However, in the second model, this association was not maintained (OR: 1.35, 95 % CI: (0.72,2.50), P = 0.344). We conclude that the association between SARS-CoV-2 positivity and presence of hemoglobinopathies like sickle cell disease is confounded by race, age, and comorbidity status. Our results illuminate previous findings by identifying underlying clinical/demographic factors that confound the reported association between hemoglobinopathies and SARS-CoV-2. These findings demonstrate how social determinants of health may influence disease manifestations more than genetics alone.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccine breakthrough infections: A single metro-based testing network experience.

Objectives: Understanding the incidence and characteristics that influence severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine breakthrough infections (VBIs) is imperative for developing public health policies to mitigate the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We examined these factors and post-vaccination mitigation practices in individuals partially and fully vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. Materials and methods: Adults >18 years old were voluntarily enrolled from a single metro-based SARS-CoV-2 testing network from January to July 2021. Participants were categorized as asymptomatic or symptomatic, and as unvaccinated, partially vaccinated, or fully vaccinated. All participants had confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection based on standard of care (SOC) testing with nasopharyngeal swabs. Variant analysis by rRT-PCR was performed in a subset of time-matched vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. A subgroup of partially and fully vaccinated individuals with a positive SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR was contacted to assess disease severity and post-vaccination mitigation practices. Results: Participants (n = 1,317) voluntarily underwent testing for SARS-CoV-2 during the enrollment period. A total of 29.5% of the population received at least one SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (n = 389), 12.8% partially vaccinated (n = 169); 16.1% fully vaccinated (n = 213). A total of 21.3% of partially vaccinated individuals tested positive (n = 36) and 9.4% of fully vaccinated individuals tested positive (n = 20) for SARS-CoV-2. Pfizer/BioNTech mRNA-1273 was the predominant vaccine received (1st dose = 66.8%, 2nd dose = 67.9%). Chronic liver disease and immunosuppression were more prevalent in the vaccinated (partially/fully) group compared to the unvaccinated group (p = 0.003, p = 0.021, respectively). There were more asymptomatic individuals in the vaccinated group compared to the unvaccinated group [n = 6 (10.7%), n = 16 (4.1%), p = 0.045]. CT values were lower for the unvaccinated group (median 24.3, IQR 19.1-30.5) compared to the vaccinated group (29.4, 22.0-33.7, p = 0.004). In the vaccinated group (n = 56), 18 participants were successfully contacted, 7 were lost to follow-up, and 2 were deceased. A total of 50% (n = 9) required hospitalization due to COVID-19 illness. Adherence to nationally endorsed mitigation strategies varied post-vaccination. Conclusion: The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection at this center was 21.3% in the partially vaccinated group and 9.4% in the fully vaccinated group. Chronic liver disease and immunosuppression were more prevalent in the vaccinated SARS-CoV-2 positive group, suggesting that these may be risk factors for VBIs. Partially and fully vaccinated individuals had a higher incidence of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 and higher CT values compared to unvaccinated SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccine breakthrough infections: A single metro-based testing network experience

Objectives Understanding the incidence and characteristics that influence severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine breakthrough infections (VBIs) is imperative for developing public health policies to mitigate the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We examined these factors and post-vaccination mitigation practices in individuals partially and fully vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. Materials and methods Adults >18 years old were voluntarily enrolled from a single metro-based SARS-CoV-2 testing network from January to July 2021. Participants were categorized as asymptomatic or symptomatic, and as unvaccinated, partially vaccinated, or fully vaccinated. All participants had confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection based on standard of care (SOC) testing with nasopharyngeal swabs. Variant analysis by rRT-PCR was performed in a subset of time-matched vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. A subgroup of partially and fully vaccinated individuals with a positive SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR was contacted to assess disease severity and post-vaccination mitigation practices. Results Participants (n = 1,317) voluntarily underwent testing for SARS-CoV-2 during the enrollment period. A total of 29.5% of the population received at least one SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (n = 389), 12.8% partially vaccinated (n = 169);16.1% fully vaccinated (n = 213). A total of 21.3% of partially vaccinated individuals tested positive (n = 36) and 9.4% of fully vaccinated individuals tested positive (n = 20) for SARS-CoV-2. Pfizer/BioNTech mRNA-1273 was the predominant vaccine received (1st dose = 66.8%, 2nd dose = 67.9%). Chronic liver disease and immunosuppression were more prevalent in the vaccinated (partially/fully) group compared to the unvaccinated group (p = 0.003, p = 0.021, respectively). There were more asymptomatic individuals in the vaccinated group compared to the unvaccinated group [n = 6 (10.7%), n = 16 (4.1%), p = 0.045]. CT values were lower for the unvaccinated group (median 24.3, IQR 19.1–30.5) compared to the vaccinated group (29.4, 22.0–33.7, p = 0.004). In the vaccinated group (n = 56), 18 participants were successfully contacted, 7 were lost to follow-up, and 2 were deceased. A total of 50% (n = 9) required hospitalization due to COVID-19 illness. Adherence to nationally endorsed mitigation strategies varied post-vaccination. Conclusion The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection at this center was 21.3% in the partially vaccinated group and 9.4% in the fully vaccinated group. Chronic liver disease and immunosuppression were more prevalent in the vaccinated SARS-CoV-2 positive group, suggesting that these may be risk factors for VBIs. Partially and fully vaccinated individuals had a higher incidence of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 and higher CT values compared to unvaccinated SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals.

Clinical evaluation of the Diagnostic Analyzer for Selective Hybridization (DASH): A point-of-care PCR test for rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

BACKGROUND: An ideal test for COVID-19 would combine the sensitivity of laboratory-based PCR with the speed and ease of use of point-of-care (POC) or home-based rapid antigen testing. We evaluated clinical performance of the Diagnostic Analyzer for Selective Hybridization (DASH) SARS-CoV-2 POC rapid PCR test. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of adults with and without symptoms of COVID-19 at four clinical sites where we collected two bilateral anterior nasal swabs and information on COVID-19 symptoms, vaccination, and exposure. One swab was tested with the DASH SARS-CoV-2 POC PCR and the second in a central laboratory using Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 PCR. We assessed test concordance and calculated sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values using Xpert as the "gold standard". RESULTS: We enrolled 315 and analyzed 313 participants with median age 42 years; 65% were female, 62% symptomatic, 75% had received ≥2 doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, and 16% currently SARS-CoV-2 positive. There were concordant results for 307 tests indicating an overall agreement for DASH of 0.98 [95% CI 0.96, 0.99] compared to Xpert. DASH performed at 0.96 [95% CI 0.86, 1.00] sensitivity and 0.98 [95% CI 0.96, 1.00] specificity, with a positive predictive value of 0.85 [95% CI 0.73, 0.96] and negative predictive value of 0.996 [95% CI 0.99, 1.00]. The six discordant tests between DASH and Xpert all had high Ct values (>30) on the respective positive assay. DASH and Xpert Ct values were highly correlated (R = 0.89 [95% CI 0.81, 0.94]). CONCLUSIONS: DASH POC SARS-CoV-2 PCR was accurate, easy to use, and provided fast results (approximately 15 minutes) in real-life clinical settings with an overall performance similar to an EUA-approved laboratory-based PCR.

SARS-CoV-2 reliably detected in frozen saliva samples stored up to one year.

Viability of saliva samples stored for longer than 28 days has not been reported in the literature. The COVID-19 pandemic has spawned new research evaluating various sample types, thus large biobanks have been started. Residual saliva samples from university student surveillance testing were retested on SalivaDirect and compared with original RT-PCR (cycle threshold values) and quantitative antigen values for each month in storage. We conclude that saliva samples stored at -80°C are still viable in detecting SARS-CoV-2 after 12 months of storage, establishing the validity of these samples for future testing.

Predictive Value of Isolated Symptoms for Diagnosis of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection in Children Tested During Peak Circulation of the Delta Variant.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) testing policies for symptomatic children attending US schools or daycare vary, and whether isolated symptoms should prompt testing is unclear. We evaluated children presenting for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing to determine if the likelihood of having a positive SARS-CoV-2 test differed between participants with 1 symptom vs ≥2 symptoms, and to examine the predictive capability of isolated symptoms. METHODS: Participants aged <18 years presenting for clinical SARS-CoV-2 molecular testing in 6 sites in urban/suburban/rural Georgia (July-October, 2021; Delta variant predominant) were queried about individual symptoms. Participants were classified into 3 groups: asymptomatic, 1 symptom only, or ≥2 symptoms. SARS-CoV-2 test results and clinical characteristics of the 3 groups were compared. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values (PPVs), and negative predictive values (NPVs) for isolated symptoms were calculated by fitting a saturated Poisson model. RESULTS: Of 602 participants, 21.8% tested positive and 48.7% had a known or suspected close contact. Children reporting 1 symptom (n = 82; odds ratio [OR], 6.00 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 2.70-13.33]) and children reporting ≥2 symptoms (n = 365; OR, 5.25 [95% CI, 2.66-10.38]) were significantly more likely to have a positive COVID-19 test than asymptomatic children (n = 155), but they were not significantly different from each other (OR, 0.88 [95% CI, .52-1.49]). Sensitivity and PPV were highest for isolated fever (33% and 57%, respectively), cough (25% and 32%), and sore throat (21% and 45%); headache had low sensitivity (8%) but higher PPV (33%). Sensitivity and PPV of isolated congestion/rhinorrhea were 8% and 9%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: With high Delta variant prevalence, children with isolated symptoms were as likely as those with multiple symptoms to test positive for COVID-19. Isolated fever, cough, sore throat, or headache, but not congestion/rhinorrhea, offered the highest predictive value.

Don't forget about human factors: Lessons learned from COVID-19 point-of-care testing.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the development of point-of-care (POC) diagnostic testing accelerated in an unparalleled fashion. As a result, there has been an increased need for accurate, robust, and easy-to-use POC testing in a variety of non-traditional settings (i.e., pharmacies, drive-thru sites, schools). While stakeholders often express the desire for POC technologies that are "as simple as digital pregnancy tests," there is little discussion of what this means in regards to device design, development, and assessment. The design of POC technologies and systems should take into account the capabilities and limitations of the users and their environments. Such "human factors" are important tenets that can help technology developers create POC technologies that are effective for end-users in a multitude of settings. Here, we review the core principles of human factors and discuss lessons learned during the evaluation process of SARS-CoV-2 POC testing.

Treatment strategies for postviral olfactory dysfunction: A systematic review.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been associated with a dramatic increase in postviral olfactory dysfunction (PVOD) among patients who are infected. A contemporary evidence-based review of current treatment options for PVOD is both timely and relevant to improve patient care. Objective: This review seeks to impact patient care by qualitatively reviewing available evidence in support of medical and procedural treatment options for PVOD. Systematic evaluation of data quality and of the level of evidence was completed to generate current treatment recommendations. Methods: A systematic review was conducted to identify primary studies that evaluated treatment outcomes for PVOD. A number of medical literature data bases were queried from January 1998 to May 2020, with completion of subsequent reference searches of retrieved articles to identify all relevant studies. Validated tools for the assessment of bias among both interventional and observational studies were used to complete quality assessment. The summary level of evidence and associated outcomes were used to generate treatment recommendations. Results: Twenty-two publications were identified for qualitative review. Outcomes of alpha-lipoic acid, intranasal and systemic corticosteroids, minocycline, zinc sulfate, vitamin A, sodium citrate, caroverine, intranasal insulin, theophylline, and Gingko biloba are reported. In addition, outcomes of traditional Chinese acupuncture and olfactory training are reviewed. Conclusion: Several medical and procedural treatments may expedite the return of olfactory function after PVOD. Current evidence supports olfactory training as a first-line intervention. Additional study is required to define specific treatment recommendations and expected outcomes for PVOD in the setting of COVID-19.

Correlation of SARS-CoV-2 Subgenomic RNA with Antigen Detection in Nasal Midturbinate Swab Specimens.

Among symptomatic outpatients, subgenomic RNA of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in nasal midturbinate swab specimens was concordant with antigen detection but remained detectable in 13 (82.1%) of 16 nasopharyngeal swab specimens from antigen-negative persons. Subgenomic RNA in midturbinate swab specimens might be useful for routine diagnostics to identify active virus replication.

Impact of repeated nasal sampling on detection and quantification of SARS-CoV-2.

The impact of repeated sample collection on COVID-19 test performance is unknown. The FDA and CDC currently recommend the primary collection of diagnostic samples to minimize the perceived risk of false-negative findings. We therefore evaluated the association between repeated sample collection and test performance among 325 symptomatic patients undergoing COVID-19 testing in Atlanta, GA. High concordance was found between consecutively collected mid-turbinate samples with both molecular (n = 74, 100% concordance) and antigen-based (n = 147, 97% concordance, kappa = 0.95, CI = 0.88-1.00) diagnostic assays. Repeated sample collection does not decrease COVID-19 test performance, demonstrating that multiple samples can be collected for assay validation and clinical diagnosis.

Multidisciplinary assessment of the Abbott BinaxNOW SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care antigen test in the context of emerging viral variants and self-administration.

While there has been significant progress in the development of rapid COVID-19 diagnostics, as the pandemic unfolds, new challenges have emerged, including whether these technologies can reliably detect the more infectious variants of concern and be viably deployed in non-clinical settings as "self-tests". Multidisciplinary evaluation of the Abbott BinaxNOW COVID-19 Ag Card (BinaxNOW, a widely used rapid antigen test, included limit of detection, variant detection, test performance across different age-groups, and usability with self/caregiver-administration. While BinaxNOW detected the highly infectious variants, B.1.1.7 (Alpha) first identified in the UK, B.1.351 (Beta) first identified in South Africa, P.1 (Gamma) first identified in Brazil, B.1.617.2 (Delta) first identified in India and B.1.2, a non-VOC, test sensitivity decreased with decreasing viral loads. Moreover, BinaxNOW sensitivity trended lower when devices were performed by patients/caregivers themselves compared to trained clinical staff, despite universally high usability assessments following self/caregiver-administration among different age groups. Overall, these data indicate that while BinaxNOW accurately detects the new viral variants, as rapid COVID-19 tests enter the home, their already lower sensitivities compared to RT-PCR may decrease even more due to user error.

COVID-19 survivorship: How otolaryngologist-head and neck surgeons can restore quality of life after critical illness.

Mortality from COVID-19 has obscured a subtler crisis - the swelling ranks of COVID-19 survivors. After critical illness, patients often suffer post-intensive care syndrome (PICS), which encompasses physical, cognitive, and/or mental health impairments that are often long-lasting barriers to resuming a meaningful life. Some deficits after COVID-19 critical illness will require otolaryngologic expertise for years after hospital discharge. There are roles for all subspecialties in preventing, diagnosing, or treating sequelae of COVID-19. Otolaryngologist leadership in multidisciplinary efforts ensures coordinated care. Timely tracheostomy, when indicated, may shorten the course of intensive care unit stay and thereby potentially reduce the impairments associated with PICS. Otolaryngologists can provide expertise in olfactory disorders; thrombotic sequelae of hearing loss and vertigo; and laryngotracheal injuries that impair speech, voice, swallowing, communication, and breathing. In the aftermath of severe COVID-19, otolaryngologists are poised to lead efforts in early identification and intervention for impairments affecting patients' quality of life.

A survey of personal protective equipment use among US otolaryngologists during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: Describe current practices and challenges in personal protective equipment (PPE) use among US otolaryngologists during the COVID-19 pandemic. STUDY DESIGN: Online survey. SETTING: Academic and non-academic healthcare institutions. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Subjects included US otolaryngology physicians. Emails were sent on April 17, 2020 to program coordinators at 121 residency programs, who were requested to forward the email to program directors for distribution. Further recruitment occurred through snowball recruitment. The survey was closed on June 15, 2020. RESULTS: Sixty-one participants completed the survey. 95.1% reported routine access to full PPE (N95 ± powered air purifying respirator [PAPR], gown, gloves, eye protection) for aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) in COVID-19 patients, while 68.9% had routine access to full PPE for AGPs in patients without confirmed COVID-19. 88.5% had routine access to full PPE for potential aerosol-generating procedures (pAGPs) in COVID patients, while 80.3% had routine access to full PPE for pAGPs in patients without confirmed COVID. All participants felt that they "always" or "usually" had necessary PPE to safely perform procedures and surgeries on COVID patients. 83.6% received N95 fitting in the past year, and 93.4% reported adequate PPE training. CONCLUSION: The majority of participants reported routine access to full PPE for AGPs and pAGPs in all patients, regardless of COVID status. There was a high perception of security, as well as adequate N95 fitting and PPE training. Areas for improvement include: optimizing PPE availability for AGPs in patients without confirmed COVID and wider recognition of otolaryngologic procedures as high risk for aerosolization.