Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add filters

Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
Infection prevention in practice ; 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2167471

ABSTRACT

Background Whether healthcare workers with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at increased risk of Novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) due to occupational exposure is unknown. Aim To assess the risk of COVID-19 in healthcare workers with IBD. Methods A case control study enrolled 326 healthcare workers with IBD from 17 GETAID centres and matched non-healthcare workers with IBD controls (1:1) for gender, age, disease subtype and year of diagnosis. The study period was year 2020 during the COVID-19 outbreak. Results In total, 59 COVID-19 were recorded among cases (n = 32) and controls (n = 27), including 2 severe COVID-19 (requiring hospitalization, mechanic ventilation) but no death. No difference was observed between healthcare workers and controls regarding the overall incidence rates of COVID-19 4.9 ± 2.2 vs. 3.8 ± 1.9 per 100 patient-semesters, p = 0.34) and the overall incidence rates of severe COVID-19 (0.6 ± 7.8 vs. 0.3 ± 5.5 per 100 patient-semesters, p = 0.42). In multivariate analysis in the entire study population, COVID-19 was associated with patients with body mass index > 30 kg/m2 (HR = 2.48, 95%CI[1.13-5.44], p = 0.02). Conclusion Healthcare workers with IBD do not have an increased risk of COVID-19 compared with other patients with IBD.

2.
Infect Prev Pract ; 5(1): 100267, 2023 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2165417

ABSTRACT

Background: Whether healthcare workers with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at increased risk of Novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) due to occupational exposure is unknown. Aim: To assess the risk of COVID-19 in healthcare workers with IBD. Methods: A case control study enrolled 326 healthcare workers with IBD from 17 GETAID centres and matched non-healthcare workers with IBD controls (1:1) for gender, age, disease subtype and year of diagnosis. The study period was year 2020 during the COVID-19 outbreak. Results: In total, 59 COVID-19 were recorded among cases (n = 32) and controls (n = 27), including 2 severe COVID-19 (requiring hospitalization, mechanic ventilation) but no death. No difference was observed between healthcare workers and controls regarding the overall incidence rates of COVID-19 4.9 ± 2.2 vs. 3.8 ± 1.9 per 100 patient-semesters, P = 0.34) and the overall incidence rates of severe COVID-19 (0.6 ± 7.8 vs. 0.3 ± 5.5 per 100 patient-semesters, P = 0.42). In multivariate analysis in the entire study population, COVID-19 was associated with patients with body mass index > 30 kg/m2 (HR = 2.48, 95%CI [1.13-5.44], P = 0.02). Conclusion: Healthcare workers with IBD do not have an increased risk of COVID-19 compared with other patients with IBD.

3.
J Patient Exp ; 9: 23743735221143736, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2162264

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Global lockdown in the context of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is an unprecedented experience. We report here the results of an anonymous questionnaire-based survey on the healthcare and control of chronic IMIDs (chronic immune-mediated inflammatory diseases) within the IMMINENT network during the French lockdown (March 17, 2020-May 11, 2020) and the 2-month period following the end of the lockdown (July 11, 2020). Methods: Two anonymous questionnaires were sent by email to 4500 patients who were followed in a university hospital for an IMID in the departments of gastroenterology, rheumatology, dermatology, pneumology, neurology, and internal medicine. Results: A total of 921/4500 (20.46%) responded to the first survey (impact of the lockdown), and 553/4500 (12.28%) to the second (impact at 2-months post-lockdown). Concerning the impact of the lockdown, 420/915 (45.9%) reported affected follow-up. Similarly, after the lockdown, 248/544 (45.6%) declared a negative impact on their follow-up. The repartition by departments of patients' perception of an altered follow-up during (P = .72) and at the end of the lockdown (P = .77) was not statistically different. Our study highlighted the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and the restriction measures implemented on the self-reported impact felt by patients on the follow-up of their chronic IMIDs without significant differences among all departments. Conclusion: Our study is original by showing that patients, whatever the type of IMID, shared this same negative perception. This transdisciplinary study demonstrated the importance of a collaborative network among all departments.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL