Incidence of unknown COVID-19 infection in a cohort of emergency physicians and advance practice providers.

INTRODUCTION: In United States, health care workers have been immersed in the COVID-19 pandemic since February 2020. Since availability of COVID-19 vaccines, there is limited literature investigating the incidence of unknown COVID-19 infections in physicians and Advanced Practitioner Providers (APPs) working in emergency departments (EDs). The primary objective is to determine the incidence unknown COVID-19 infection within a cohort of emergency physicians (EPs) and APPs. METHODS: Prospective observational study at a tertiary academic center with emergency medicine residency and 64,000 annual ED visits. EPs/APPs providing care to ED patients over the prior 12 months were eligible. Serum samples were collected between May 1 and June 30, 2022. Analysis utilized Luminex xMAP® SARS-CoV-2 Multi-Antigen IgG Assay for antibodies to Nucleocapsid, Receptor-binding domain, and Spike subunit 1. Mean Fluorescent Intensity (MFI) ≥ 700 was considered positive. Subjects completed 12 question survey assessing demographics and previously confirmed COVID-19 infection. Fisher's exact test evaluated associations of demographics and clinical characteristics with confirmed COVID-19 status. Analyses performed using SAS, Version 9.4. P < 0.05 considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Sixty-nine of 81 eligible subjects (85.2%) participated, 58.0% were male, 97.1% white, with mean age of 37. Eighteen subjects had MFI ≥ 700 strongly suggestive of prior infection, with 17.7% unknown. No statistically significant difference between age, gender, race, children in home, or household member with previously COVID-19 infection. CONCLUSION: Unknown previous COVID-19 infection was less then expected in this cohort of EPs/APPs, and no association with individual characteristics, previously infected household member, or children in the home.

Pandemic driven innovation: A pilot evaluation of an alternative respiratory pathogen collection device.

BACKGROUND: The nasopharyngeal swab is the gold standard collection method for COVID-19, but is invasive and painful, subsequently resulting in poor patient acceptance. This investigation explores the process of developing and validating an alternative respiratory pathogen collection device that relies on a nasopharyngeal irrigation mechanic. The primary objective was to determine if sufficient pathological sampling can be achieved by mechanism of nasopharyngeal irrigation that is proportionate to the nasopharyngeal swab method. METHODS: The study device was designed using Shapr3D modeling software and fabricated on a fused deposition modeling printer. Fifteen participants were enrolled with each receiving a saline nasopharyngeal washing using the study device. Specimen adequacy was evaluated by two real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing methods to identify the presence of the human RNase P gene. Results were evaluated quantitatively through interpretation of the PCR cycle threshold (Ct). RESULTS: All 15 specimens tested positive for the presence of RNaseP, demonstrating specimen cellularity, adequate extraction of nucleic acids, and the absence of inhibitors to amplification. The mean Ct value was 29.5 (Applied Biosystems TaqPath RT-qPCR) and 30.7 (NECoV19). All participants felt the study device irrigation procedure was faster than the nasopharyngeal swab, with none experiencing any discomfort from the irrigation mechanism. CONCLUSION: The importance of early diagnostic testing and its role in countermeasures for communicable diseases such as COVID-19 is well established in the literature. Innovation to bolster our testing infrastructure is more important now than ever. This study was successful in developing and validating an alternative nasopharyngeal respiratory pathogen collection device that utilizes fluid debridement as its core mechanic. Data from this pilot study demonstrated the study device was successful in producing high-quality specimens for PCR testing. Feedback from the study participants was also in favor of the study device when compared to the nasopharyngeal swab.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical research activities: Survey of study participants and health care workers participating in a hypertension trial in Vietnam.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound worldwide impact. Vietnam, a lower middle-income country with limited resources, has successfully slowed this pandemic. The objectives of this report are to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the research activities of an ongoing hypertension trial using a storytelling intervention in Vietnam. METHODS: Data were collected in a mixed-methods study among 86 patients and 10 health care workers participating in a clinical trial designed to improve hypertension control. Several questions related to the impact of COVID-19 on patient's daily activities and adherence to the study interventions were included in the follow-up visits. A focus group discussion was conducted among health care workers to discuss the impact of COVID-19 on research related activities. RESULTS: Fewer patients in the intervention group reported that they faced difficulties in adhering to prescribed study interventions, wanted to receive a call from a dedicated hotline, or have a visit from a community health worker as compared with those in the comparison group. Most study patients are willing to participate in future health research studies. When asked about the potential use of mobile phones in health research studies, fewer patients in the intervention group felt comfortable using a mobile phone for the delivery of intervention and interviews compared with those in the comparison condition. Community health workers shared that they visited patient's homes more often than previously due to the pandemic and health care workers had to perform more virus containment activities without a corresponding increase in ancillary staff. CONCLUSIONS: Both patients and health care workers in Vietnam faced difficulties in adhering to recommended trial interventions and procedures. Multiple approaches for intervention delivery and data collection are needed to overcome these difficulties during future health crises and enhance the implementation of future research studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov. Registration number: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03590691 (registration date July 17, 2018).

Accuracy and Acceptance of a Self-Collection Model for Respiratory Tract Infection Diagnostics: A Concise Clinical Literature Review.

BACKGROUND: Nurses are the primary clinicians who collect specimens for respiratory tract infection testing. The specimen collection procedure is time and resource-consuming, but more importantly, it places nurses at risk for potential infection. The practice of allowing patients to self-collect their diagnostic specimens may provide an alternative testing model for the current COVID-19 outbreaks. The objective of this paper was to evaluate the accuracy and patient perception of self-collected specimens for respiratory tract infection diagnostics. METHODS: A concise clinical review of the recently published literature was conducted. RESULTS: A total of 11 articles were included the review synthesis. The concept of self-collected specimens has a high patient acceptance rate of 83-99%. Self-collected nasal-swab specimens demonstrated strong diagnostic fidelity for respiratory tract infections with a sensitivity between 80-100%, this is higher than the 76% sensitivity observed with self-collected throat specimens. In a comparative study evaluating a professionally collected to a self-collected specimen for COVID-19 testing, a high degree of agreement (k = 0.89) was observed between the two methods. CONCLUSION: As we continue to explore for testing models to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, self-collected specimens is a practical alternative to nurse specimen collection.