Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Clin Infect Dis ; 74(9): 1579-1585, 2022 05 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1707816

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is limited information on the risk of hospital-acquired coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among high-risk hospitalized patients after exposure to an infected patient or healthcare worker (HCW) in a nonoutbreak setting. METHODS: This study was conducted at a tertiary care cancer center in New York City from 10 March 2020 until 28 February 2021. In early April 2020, the study institution implemented universal severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing at admission and retesting every 3 days through the hospital stay. Contact tracing records were reviewed for all exposures to SARS-CoV-2 positive patients and HCWs. RESULTS: From 10 March 2020 to 28 February 2021, 11 348 unique patients who were SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) negative at the time of admission underwent 31 662 postadmission tests during their hospitalization, and 112 tested positive (0.98%). Among these, 49 patients housed in semiprivate rooms during admission resulted in 74 close contacts and 14 secondary infections within 14 days, for an overall attack rate of 18.9%. Among those exposed to a roommate undergoing an aerosol-generating procedure (AGP), the attack rate was 35.7%. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) corroborated transmission in 6/8 evaluated pairs. In addition, three transmission events occurred in 214 patients with significant exposure to 105 COVID-19 positive healthcare workers (1.4%). CONCLUSIONS: The overall risk of hospital-acquired COVID-19 is low for hospitalized cancer patients, even during periods of high community prevalence. However, shared occupancy with an unrecognized case is associated with a high secondary attack rate in exposed roommates.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Contact Tracing , Delivery of Health Care , Health Personnel , Humans , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional , Neoplasms/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
2.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(9): e3013-e3018, 2021 11 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1501022

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: New York City (NYC) experienced a surge of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases in March and April 2020. Since then, universal polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based surveillance testing and personal protective equipment (PPE) measures are in wide use in procedural settings. There is limited published experience on the utility and sustainability of PCR-based surveillance testing in areas with receding and consistently low community COVID-19 rates. METHODS: The study was conducted at a tertiary care cancer center in NYC from 22 March to 22 August 2020. Asymptomatic patients underwent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing before surgeries, interventional radiology procedures, and endoscopy. Contact tracing in procedural areas was done if a patient with an initial negative screen retested positive within 48 hours of the procedure. RESULTS: From March 22 until August 22, 2020, 11 540 unique patients underwent 14 233 tests before surgeries or procedures at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Overall, 65 patients were positive, with a peak rate of 4.3% that fell below 0.3% after April 2020. Among the 65 positive cases, 3 were presymptomatic and 38 were asymptomatic. Among asymptomatic test-positive patients, 76% had PCR cycle threshold >30 at first detection. Five patients tested newly positive in the immediate postoperative period, exposing 82 employees with 1 case of probable transmission (1.2%). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection identified on preprocedural surveillance was low in our study, which was conducted in an area with limited community spread at the later stage of the study. Universal PPE is protective in procedural settings. Optimal and flexible diagnostic strategies are needed to accomplish and sustain the goals of comprehensive preprocedure surveillance testing.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , New York City/epidemiology , Personal Protective Equipment , Policy
3.
AEM Educ Train ; 5(4): e10627, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1233165

ABSTRACT

NEED FOR INNOVATION: There is a clear need for physician leaders with expertise in wellness given the high incidence of physician burnout, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. A fellowship in physician wellness provides structured opportunity for the development of expertise in the science and administration of physician wellness through a tailored curriculum and academic scholarship. BACKGROUND: Currently, limited opportunities exist to pursue formal wellness training in graduate medical education. This lack of specific training may make the path to expertise and leadership in physician wellness difficult. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to design and implement a physician wellness fellowship in a department of emergency medicine. Completion of this fellowship, with ongoing professional development, will give physicians the skills to fill various leadership roles within the house of medicine, such as chief wellness officer, department, organization, national wellness leader, or wellness consultant. DEVELOPMENT PROCESS: The fellowship curriculum was developed according to Kern's six-step approach with expert consultation. The Stanford WellMD Model of Professional Fulfillment was used as a framework to define the core content. The curriculum has five principal components developed utilizing competency-based education in medicine: dissemination of knowledge (teaching), clinical, educational foundation, implementation (administrative), and critical investigation (research). IMPLEMENTATION PHASE: The physician wellness fellowship was implemented for the academic year 2019-2020. The fellow completed all the required fellowship activities. In addition, the fellow completed the American College of Emergency Physician's teaching fellowship program. The fellowship is budget neutral because the fellow's half-time clinical revenue is sufficient to cover the fellow's salary and education and support for fellowship direction. REFLECTIVE DISCUSSION: Outcomes of this novel program will be measured over time. Although the format of this fellowship is designed for emergency medicine, the skills and content are relevant to and may be adopted in other medical specialties at other institutions.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL