Systemic reactogenicity following homologues and heterologous prime-boost AZD1222 and BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccination of 2862 healthcare workers compared with an unvaccinated population

During spring 2021, AZD1222 and BNT162b2 were used as prime and BNT162b2 as booster COVID-19 vaccines in Denmark. We obtained self-reported information on systemic reactogenicity day-by-day during two weeks for 2862 healthcare workers vaccinated with heterologous AZD1222+BNT162b2 or homologous BNT162b2+BNT162b2 regimens and compared prevalences of symptoms with unvaccinated healthcare workers. We found comparable systemic reactogenicity during the first week in the two vaccine regimens and no reactogenicity during the second week. Most of the symptoms returned to a level equal to the control population four days after booster vaccination.

Systemic reactogenicity following homologues and heterologous prime-boost AZD1222 and BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccination of 2862 healthcare workers compared with an unvaccinated population.

During spring 2021, AZD1222 and BNT162b2 were used as prime and BNT162b2 as booster COVID-19 vaccines in Denmark. We obtained self-reported information on systemic reactogenicity day-by-day during two weeks for 2862 healthcare workers vaccinated with heterologous AZD1222 + BNT162b2 or homologous BNT162b2 + BNT162b2 regimens and compared prevalences of symptoms with unvaccinated healthcare workers. We found comparable systemic reactogenicity during the first week in the two vaccine regimens and no reactogenicity during the second week. Most of the symptoms returned to a level equal to the control population four days after booster vaccination.

Musculoskeletal health climate is a prognostic determinant of sickness absence among female eldercare workers: a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: The present study investigated the association between musculoskeletal health climate, i.e. the shared perceptions among workers concerning musculoskeletal health, and sickness absence. METHODS: Questionnaire data on two domains of musculoskeletal health climate, perceived management priority (PMP) and pain acceptance at work (PAW), were collected at baseline. Data on sickness absence were extracted at one-year follow up. Data were analysed using negative binomial multivariable regression. RESULTS: The final study population comprised 390 female eldercare workers. Compared with participants with low PMP scores, participants with high PMP scores had lower risk of sickness absence [incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.4;0.9]. Participants with high PAW scores had higher risk of sickness absence than participants with low PAW scores [IRR 1.4, 95% CI 0.9;2.2]. CONCLUSION: The results showed an association between the musculoskeletal health climate and sickness absence.

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.

Use of Personal Protective Equipment Among Healthcare Workers During the First and the Second Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: To treat and properly care for COVID-19 patients it is vital to have healthy healthcare workers to ensure the continued function of the healthcare system and to prevent transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) to patients, co-workers, and the community. Personal protective equipment (PPE) can prevent healthcare workers from being infected with and transmitting SARS-CoV-2. Experience and training are pivotal to ensure optimal protection. This study aims to examine the use and failure of PPE and compliance with PPE guidelines during the first and the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic among Danish healthcare workers. METHODS: Healthcare workers from the Central Denmark Region and the Capital Region of Denmark were invited to participate April-June 2020 during the first wave and November 2020-April 2021 during the second wave. Day-by-day, participants reported work procedures, use and failure of PPE, and compliance with PPE guidelines. Register-based information on sex, age, department, and profession was available for all participants. RESULTS: In total, 21 684 and 10 097 healthcare workers participated during the first and the second wave, respectively. During the first wave, 1.7% used filtering face piece-2 or -3 (FFP2 or FFP3) respirators and 8.2% used face masks [fluid resistant (type IIR) masks, masks with visor (typically type IIR), and other unspecified face masks] during physical contact with patients. During the second wave, the corresponding figures increased to 17.8% and 80.7%. During respiratory procedures, the use of FFP2 or FFP3 respirators increased from 5.6 to 24.3%, and the use of face masks from 14.7 to 77.8%. The no PPE use decreased from 21.3% during the first wave to 0.4% in the second wave, during respiratory procedures. Total PPE failures decreased from 0.7 to 0.4% from the first to second wave. The proportion not complying with PPE guidelines declined from 3.6 to 2.2% during physical contact with patients and from 6.5 to 4.6% during respiratory procedures. PPE failure and non-compliance varied by age, sex and type of department. Frequent reasons for non-compliance were forgetfulness and lack of time, and during the first but not during the second wave, limited availability of PPE. CONCLUSION: We found a substantial increase in the use of PPE and a substantial decrease in PPE failures from the first to the second wave of COVID-19 in Denmark. However, there is still a need for continuous focus on compliance in use of PPE among healthcare workers.

Healthcare workers' SARS-CoV-2 infection rates during the second wave of the pandemic: follow-up study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess if, during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers had increased severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection rates, following close contact with patients, co-workers and persons outside work with COVID-19. METHODS: A follow-up study of 5985 healthcare workers from Denmark was conducted between November 2020 and April 2021 and provided day-to-day information on COVID-19 contacts. SARS-CoV-2 infection was defined by the first positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test ever. Data was analyzed in multivariable Poisson regression models. RESULTS: The SARS-CoV-2 infection rates following close contact 3-7 days earlier with patients, co-workers and persons outside work with COVID-19 were 153.7, 240.8, and 728.1 per 100 000 person-days, respectively. This corresponded with age, sex, month, number of PCR tests and mutually adjusted incidence rate ratios of 3.17 [40 cases, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.15-4.66], 2.54 (10 cases, 95% CI 1.30-4.96) and 17.79 (35 cases, 95% CI 12.05-26.28). The risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection was thus lower, but the absolute numbers affected was higher following COVID-19 contact at work than COVID-19 contact off work. CONCLUSIONS: Despite strong focus on preventive measures during the second wave of the pandemic, healthcare workers were still at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection when in close contact with patients or co-workers with COVID-19. There is a need for increased focus on infection control measures in order to secure healthcare workers' health and reduce transmission into the community during ongoing and future waves of SARS-CoV-2 and other infections.

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.