Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
J Gen Intern Med ; 2022 Nov 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2235327

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: As the COVID-19 pandemic evolves, it is critical to understand characteristics that have allowed US healthcare systems, including the Veterans Affairs (VA) and non-federal hospitals, to mount an effective response in the setting of limited resources and unpredictable clinical demands generated by this system shock. OBJECTIVE: To compare the impact of and response to resource shortages to both VA and non-federal healthcare systems during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Cross-sectional national survey administered April 2021 through May 2022. PARTICIPANTS: Lead infection preventionists from VA and non-federal hospitals across the US. MAIN MEASURES: Surveys collected hospital demographic factors along with 11 questions aimed at assessing the effectiveness of the hospital's COVID response. KEY RESULTS: The response rate was 56% (71/127) from VA and 47% (415/881) from non-federal hospitals. Compared to VA hospitals, non-federal hospitals had a larger average number of acute care (214 vs. 103 beds, p<.001) and intensive care unit (24 vs. 16, p<.001) beds. VA hospitals were more likely to report no shortages of personal protective equipment or medical supplies during the pandemic (17% vs. 9%, p=.03) and more frequently opened new units to care specifically for COVID patients (71% vs. 49%, p<.001) compared with non-federal hospitals. Non-federal hospitals more frequently experienced increased loss of staff due to resignations (76% vs. 53%, p=.001) and financial hardships stemming from the pandemic (58% vs. 7%, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In our survey-based national study, lead infection preventionists noted several distinct advantages in VA versus non-federal hospitals in their ability to expand bed capacity, retain staff, mitigate supply shortages, and avoid financial hardship. While these benefits appear to be inherent to the VA's structure, non-federal hospitals can adapt their infrastructure to better weather future system shocks.

2.
Microbiol Spectr ; : e0274722, 2022 Nov 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2137477

ABSTRACT

SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines have been critical to curbing pandemic COVID-19; however, a major shortcoming has been the inability to assess levels of protection after vaccination. This study assessed serologic status of breakthrough infections in vaccinated patients at a Veterans Administration medical center from June through December 2021 during a SARS-CoV-2 delta variant wave. Breakthrough occurred mostly beyond 150 days after two-dose vaccination with a mean of 239 days. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) IgG levels were low at 0 to 2 days postsymptoms but increased in subjects presenting thereafter. Population measurements of anti-S IgG and angiotensin converting enzyme-2 receptor (ACE2-R) binding inhibition among uninfected, vaccinated patients suggested immune decay occurred after 150 days with 62% having anti-S IgG levels at or below 1,000 AU comparable with breakthrough patients at 0 to 2 days postsymptom onset. In contrast, vaccination after resolved infection conferred robust enduring anti-S IgG levels (5,000 to >50,000 AU) with >90% ACE2-R binding inhibition. However, monoclonal antibody (MAb)-treated patients did not benefit from their prior infection suggesting impaired establishment of B cell memory. Analysis of boosted patients confirmed the benefit of a third vaccine dose with most having anti-S IgG levels above 5,000 AU with >90% ACE2-R binding inhibition, but a subset had levels <5,000 AU. Anti-S IgG levels >5,000 AU were associated with >90% ACE2-R binding inhibition and no documented breakthrough infections, whereas levels falling below 5,000 AU and approaching 1,000 AU were associated with breakthrough infections. Thus, quantitative antibody measurements may provide a means to guide vaccination intervals for the individual. IMPORTANCE Currently, clinicians have no guidance for the serologic assessment of SARS-Cov-2 postvaccination status regarding protection and risk of infection. Vaccination and boosters are administered blindly without evaluation of need or outcome at the individual level. The recent development of automated quantitative assays for anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein IgG antibodies permits accurate measurement of humoral immunity in standardized units. Clinical studies, such as reported here, will help establish protective antibody levels allowing identification and targeted management of poor vaccine responders and vaccinated subjects undergoing immune decay.

3.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 42(4): 392-398, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2096426

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The seroprevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) IgG antibody was evaluated among employees of a Veterans Affairs healthcare system to assess potential risk factors for transmission and infection. METHODS: All employees were invited to participate in a questionnaire and serological survey to detect antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 as part of a facility-wide quality improvement and infection prevention initiative regardless of clinical or nonclinical duties. The initiative was conducted from June 8 to July 8, 2020. RESULTS: Of the 2,900 employees, 51% participated in the study, revealing a positive SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence of 4.9% (72 of 1,476; 95% CI, 3.8%-6.1%). There were no statistically significant differences in the presence of antibody based on gender, age, frontline worker status, job title, performance of aerosol-generating procedures, or exposure to known patients with coronavirus infectious disease 2019 (COVID-19) within the hospital. Employees who reported exposure to a known COVID-19 case outside work had a significantly higher seroprevalence at 14.8% (23 of 155) compared to those who did not 3.7% (48 of 1,296; OR, 4.53; 95% CI, 2.67-7.68; P < .0001). Notably, 29% of seropositive employees reported no history of symptoms for SARS-CoV-2 infection. CONCLUSIONS: The seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 among employees was not significantly different among those who provided direct patient care and those who did not, suggesting that facility-wide infection control measures were effective. Employees who reported direct personal contact with COVID-19-positive persons outside work were more likely to have SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Employee exposure to SARS-CoV-2 outside work may introduce infection into hospitals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2 , Seroepidemiologic Studies , United States Department of Veterans Affairs/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/etiology , Female , Humans , Male , Michigan/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Occupational Exposure/statistics & numerical data , Risk Factors , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
4.
Clin Immunol ; 236: 108959, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1850856

ABSTRACT

Monoclonal antibody treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has been widely implemented. Effects of treatment on the endogenous primary humoral response to the virus are unknown. A retrospective cohort study performed at a Veterans Health Administration medical center compared serologic responses of treated and untreated COVID-19 patients at high risk for severe outcomes. Three anti-viral spike protein IgG monoclonal treatments were used during the study period, 1) bamlanivimab, 2) casirivimab with imdevimab, and 3) bamlanivimab with etesevimab. Data were analyzed at acute (0-9 days), seroconversion (10-19 days), and maximum antibody (20-39 days) stages. SARS-Cov-2 infection induced a dynamic primary humoral response with anti-spike IgM and anti-nucleocapsid IgG seroconversion occurring after 9 days with maximum serologic indices achieved by 20-39 days. All monoclonal antibody treatments suppressed the endogenous anti-spike IgM response by 85-90% with minor effect on the anti-nucleocapsid response. Thus, passive immunization therapy may cause immunologic interference.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Antibodies, Neutralizing , Antibodies, Viral , Antibody Formation , Humans , Retrospective Studies
5.
Am J Infect Control ; 50(3): 273-276, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1465991

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: While Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 vaccine breakthrough infections are expected, reporting on breakthrough infections requiring hospitalization remains limited. This observational case series report reviewed 10 individuals hospitalized with vaccine breakthrough infections to identify patient risk factors and serologic responses upon admission. METHODS: Electronic medical records of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) or mRNA-1732 (Moderna) vaccinated patients admitted to Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System with newly diagnosed Coronavirus Infectious Disease 2019 (COVID-19) between March 15, 2021 and April 15, 2021 were reviewed. Patient variables, COVID-19 lab testing including anti-S IgM, anti-N IgG antibodies, and hospital course were recorded. Based on lab testing, infections were defined as acute infection or resolving/resolved infection. RESULTS: Of the 10 patients admitted with breakthrough infections, all were >70 years of age with multiple comorbidities. Mean time between second vaccine dose and COVID-19 diagnosis was 49 days. In the 7 individuals with acute infection, none had observed serologic response to mRNA vaccination, 5 developed severe disease, and 1 died. Three individuals had anti-N IgG antibodies and a high polymerase chain reaction cycle threshold value, suggesting resolving/resolved infection. CONCLUSIONS: Given the variability of vaccine breakthrough infections requiring hospitalization, serologic testing may impart clarity on timing of infection and disease prognosis. Individuals at risk of diminished response to vaccines and severe COVID-19 may also benefit from selective serologic testing after vaccination to guide risk mitigation strategies in a post-pandemic environment.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Communicable Diseases , Veterans , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Testing , COVID-19 Vaccines , Hospitalization , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL