Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
Clin Infect Dis ; 74(6): 1089-1092, 2022 03 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1703666

ABSTRACT

Across 20 vaccine breakthrough cases detected at our institution, all 20 (100%) infections were due to variants of concern (VOCs) and had a median Ct of 20.2 (IQR, 17.1-23.3). When compared with 5174 contemporaneous samples sequenced in our laboratory, VOCs were significantly enriched among breakthrough infections (P < .05).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Base Sequence , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Washington/epidemiology
2.
J Clin Microbiol ; 59(9): e0098921, 2021 08 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1501532

ABSTRACT

With the availability of widespread SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, high-throughput quantitative anti-spike protein serological testing will likely become increasingly important. Here, we investigated the performance characteristics of the recently FDA-authorized semiquantitative anti-spike protein AdviseDx SARS-CoV-2 IgG II assay compared to the FDA-authorized anti-nucleocapsid protein Abbott Architect SARS-CoV-2 IgG, Roche Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2-S, EuroImmun anti-SARS-CoV-2 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and GenScript surrogate virus neutralization assays and examined the humoral response associated with vaccination, natural protection, and vaccine breakthrough infection. The AdviseDx assay had a clinical sensitivity at 14 days after symptom onset or 10 days after PCR detection of 95.6% (65/68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 87.8 to 98.8%), with two discrepant individuals seroconverting shortly thereafter. The AdviseDx assay demonstrated 100% positive percent agreement with the four other assays examined using the same symptom onset or PCR detection cutoffs. Using a recently available WHO international standard for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody, we provide assay unit conversion factors to international units for each of the assays examined. We performed a longitudinal survey of healthy vaccinated individuals, finding that median AdviseDx immunoglobulin levels peaked 7 weeks after first vaccine dose at approximately 4,000 IU/ml. Intriguingly, among the five assays examined, there was no significant difference in antigen binding level or neutralizing activity between two seropositive patients protected against SARS-CoV-2 infection in a previously described fishing vessel outbreak and five health care workers who experienced vaccine breakthrough of SARS-CoV-2 infection, all with variants of concern. These findings suggest that protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection cannot currently be predicted exclusively using in vitro antibody assays against wild-type SARS-CoV-2 spike. Further work is required to establish protective correlates for SARS-CoV-2 infection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Sensitivity and Specificity
3.
J Med Libr Assoc ; 109(3): 422-431, 2021 Jul 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1463960

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic highlights the public's need for quality health information that is understandable. This study aimed to identify (1) the extent to which COVID-19 messaging by state public health departments is understandable, actionable, and clear; (2) whether materials produced by public health departments are easily readable; (3) relationships between material type and understandability, actionability, clarity, and reading grade level; and (4) potential strategies to improve public health messaging around COVID-19. METHODS: Based on US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention statistics from June 30, 2020, we identified the ten states with the most COVID-19 cases and selected forty-two materials (i.e., webpages, infographics, and videos) related to COVID-19 prevention according to predefined eligibility criteria. We applied three validated health literacy tools (i.e., Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool, CDC Clear Communication Index, and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level) to assess material understandability, actionability, clarity, and readability. We also analyzed correlations between scores on the three health literacy tools and material types. RESULTS: Overall, COVID-19 materials had high understandability and actionability but could be improved in terms of clarity and readability. Material type was significantly correlated with understandability, actionability, and clarity. Infographics and videos received higher scores on all tools. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our findings, we recommend public health entities apply a combination of these tools when developing health information materials to improve their understandability, actionability, and clarity. We also recommend using infographics and videos when possible, taking a human-centered approach to information design, and providing multiple modes and platforms for information delivery.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Education/methods , Health Literacy , Health Promotion/methods , Information Dissemination/methods , Public Health/education , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , State Government , United States
4.
J Intensive Care Med ; 36(10): 1167-1175, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1348262

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has a widely variable clinical syndrome that is difficult to distinguish from bacterial sepsis, leading to high rates of antibiotic use. Early studies indicate low rates of secondary bacterial infections (SBIs) but have included heterogeneous patient populations. Here, we catalogue all SBIs and antibiotic prescription practices in a population of mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of all patients with COVID-19 ARDS requiring mechanical ventilation from 3 Seattle, Washington hospitals in 2020. Data were obtained via electronic and manual review of the electronic medical record. We report the incidence and site of SBIs, mortality, and antibiotics per day using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: We identified 126 patients with COVID-19 induced ARDS during the study period. Of these patients, 61% developed clinical infection confirmed by bacterial culture. Ventilator associated pneumonia was confirmed in 55% of patients, bacteremia in 20%, and urinary tract infection (UTI) in 17%. Staphylococcus aureus was the most commonly isolated bacterial species. A total of 97% of patients received antibiotics during their hospitalization, and patients received nearly one antibiotic per day during their hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: Mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 induced ARDS are at high risk for secondary bacterial infections and have extensive antibiotic exposure.


Subject(s)
Bacterial Infections , COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Anti-Bacterial Agents/adverse effects , Humans , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/chemically induced , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Clin Infect Dis ; 71(10): 2702-2707, 2020 12 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1059704

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers (HCWs) who serve on the front lines of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have been at increased risk for infection due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in some settings. Healthcare-acquired infection has been reported in similar epidemics, but there are limited data on the prevalence of COVID-19 among HCWs and their associated clinical outcomes in the United States. METHODS: We established 2 high-throughput employee testing centers in Seattle, Washington, with drive-through and walk-through options for symptomatic employees in the University of Washington Medicine system and its affiliated organizations. Using data from these testing centers, we report the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among symptomatic employees and describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes among employees with COVID-19. RESULTS: Between 12 March 2020 and 23 April 2020, 3477 symptomatic employees were tested for COVID-19 at 2 employee testing centers; 185 (5.3%) employees tested positive for COVID-19. The prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 was similar when comparing frontline HCWs (5.2%) with nonfrontline staff (5.5%). Among 174 positive employees reached for follow-up at least 14 days after diagnosis, 6 reported COVID-related hospitalization; all recovered. CONCLUSIONS: During the study period, we observed that the prevalence of positive SARS-CoV-2 tests among symptomatic HCWs was comparable to that of symptomatic nonfrontline staff. Reliable and rapid access to testing for employees is essential to preserve the health, safety, and availability of the healthcare workforce during this pandemic and to facilitate the rapid return of SARS-CoV-2-negative employees to work.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Health Personnel , Humans , Prevalence , SARS-CoV-2 , Washington/epidemiology
7.
J. Libr. Adm. ; 7(60):830-851, 2020.
Article | ELSEVIER | ID: covidwho-740081

ABSTRACT

Supporting global health priorities through the development of robust health science librarianship partnerships is of significant importance. Increased demand for synthesizing evidence-based information, collating quality resources, and increasing research productivity to improve human health requires integration of library and information science skills and expertise. The Health Sciences Library (HSL) at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC), exists to be an indispensable partner in health information and knowledge, teaching and learning, and research. As global efforts at UNC expanded, the HSL sought to ensure that our global engagement strategy and integration were aligned with campus priorities and partner needs. The HSL created a global research partnership plan: identify resources that improve efficiency, increase access to information, build in-country capacity and expertise—all while strengthening collaborations across multiple countries. Creating a meaningful and sustainable engagement strategy was central to envisioning our path forward and can be used as a framework for consideration by librarians in similar settings.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL