Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
1.
Rev Med Virol ; 32(5): e2350, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1763293

ABSTRACT

Rapid antigen detection tests (RADTs) offer advantages over gold-standard reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests in that they are cheaper and provide faster results, thus enabling prompt isolation of positive SARS-CoV-2 cases and quarantine of close contacts. The aim of this study was to collate and synthesise empirical evidence on the effectiveness of rapid antigen testing for the screening (including serial testing) and surveillance of asymptomatic individuals to limit the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. A rapid review was undertaken in MEDLINE (EBSCO), EMBASE (OVID), Cochrane Library, Europe PMC and Google Scholar up until 19 July 2021, supplemented by a grey literature search. Of the identified 1222 records, 19 reports referring to 16 studies were included. Eight included studies examined the effectiveness of RADTs for population-level screening, four for pre-event screening and four for serial testing (schools, a prison, a university sports programme and in care homes). Overall, there is uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of rapid antigen testing for the screening of asymptomatic individuals to limit the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. This uncertainty is due to the inconsistent results, the relatively low number of studies identified, the predominantly observational and/or uncontrolled nature of the study designs used, and concerns regarding methodological quality. Given this uncertainty, more real-world research evidence in relevant settings, which is of good quality and timely, as well as economic evaluation, is required to inform public policy on the widespread use of RADTs in asymptomatic individuals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19 Testing , Humans , Mass Screening , Observational Studies as Topic , Quarantine
2.
BMC Public Health ; 21(1): 2238, 2021 12 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1566516

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Contact tracing is conducted with the primary purpose of interrupting transmission from individuals who are likely to be infectious to others. Secondary analyses of data on the numbers of close contacts of confirmed cases could also: provide an early signal of increases in contact patterns that might precede larger than expected case numbers; evaluate the impact of government interventions on the number of contacts of confirmed cases; or provide data information on contact rates between age cohorts for the purpose of epidemiological modelling. We analysed data from 140,204 close contacts of 39,861 cases in Ireland from 1st May to 1st December 2020. RESULTS: Negative binomial regression models highlighted greater numbers of contacts within specific population demographics, after correcting for temporal associations. Separate segmented regression models of the number of cases over time and the average number of contacts per case indicated that a breakpoint indicating a rapid decrease in the number of contacts per case in October 2020 preceded a breakpoint indicating a reduction in the number of cases by 11 days. CONCLUSIONS: We found that the number of contacts per infected case was overdispersed, the mean varied considerable over time and was temporally associated with government interventions. Analysis of the reported number of contacts per individual in contact tracing data may be a useful early indicator of changes in behaviour in response to, or indeed despite, government restrictions. This study provides useful information for triangulating assumptions regarding the contact mixing rates between different age cohorts for epidemiological modelling.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Contact Tracing , Government , Humans , Ireland
3.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 18(12)2021 06 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1264459

ABSTRACT

Like most countries worldwide, the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has adversely affected Ireland. The aim of this study was to (i) investigate the spatio-temporal trend of COVID-19 incidence; (ii) describe mobility trends as measured by aggregated mobile phone records; and (iii) investigate the association between deprivation index, population density and COVID-19 cases while accounting for spatial and temporal correlation. Standardised incidence ratios of cases were calculated and mapped at a high spatial resolution (electoral division level) over time. Trends in the percentage change in mobility compared to a pre-COVID-19 period were plotted to investigate the impact of lockdown restrictions. We implemented a hierarchical Bayesian spatio-temporal model (Besag, York and Mollié (BYM)), commonly used for disease mapping, to investigate the association between covariates and the number of cases. There have been three distinct "waves" of COVID-19 cases in Ireland to date. Lockdown restrictions led to a substantial reduction in human movement, particularly during the 1st and 3rd wave. Despite adjustment for population density (incidence ratio (IR) = 1.985 (1.915-2.058)) and the average number of persons per room (IR = 10.411 (5.264-22.533)), we found an association between deprivation index and COVID-19 incidence (IR = 1.210 (CI: 1.077-1.357) for the most deprived quintile compared to the least deprived). There is a large range of spatial heterogeneity in COVID-19 cases in Ireland. The methods presented can be used to explore locally intensive surveillance with the possibility of localised lockdown measures to curb the transmission of infection, while keeping other, low-incidence areas open. Our results suggest that prioritising densely populated deprived areas (that are at increased risk of comorbidities) during vaccination rollout may capture people that are at risk of infection and, potentially, also those at increased risk of hospitalisation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Bayes Theorem , Communicable Disease Control , Humans , Ireland/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
5.
BMC Public Health ; 21(1): 805, 2021 04 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1204065

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The serial interval is the period of time between the onset of symptoms in an infector and an infectee and is an important parameter which can impact on the estimation of the reproduction number. Whilst several parameters influencing infection transmission are expected to be consistent across populations, the serial interval can vary across and within populations over time. Therefore, local estimates are preferable for use in epidemiological models developed at a regional level. We used data collected as part of the national contact tracing process in Ireland to estimate the serial interval of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the Irish population, and to estimate the proportion of transmission events that occurred prior to the onset of symptoms. RESULTS: After data cleaning, the final dataset consisted of 471 infected close contacts from 471 primary cases. The median serial interval was 4 days, mean serial interval was 4.0 (95% confidence intervals 3.7, 4.3) days, whilst the 25th and 75th percentiles were 2 and 6 days respectively. We found that intervals were lower when the primary or secondary case were in the older age cohort (greater than 64 years). Simulating from an incubation period distribution from international literature, we estimated that 67% of transmission events had greater than 50% probability of occurring prior to the onset of symptoms in the infector. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst our analysis was based on a large sample size, data were collected for the primary purpose of interrupting transmission chains. Similar to other studies estimating the serial interval, our analysis is restricted to transmission pairs where the infector is known with some degree of certainty. Such pairs may represent more intense contacts with infected individuals than might occur in the overall population. It is therefore possible that our analysis is biased towards shorter serial intervals than the overall population.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Contact Tracing , Aged , Humans , Ireland/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Time Factors
6.
Rev Med Virol ; 31(4): e2185, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-884413

ABSTRACT

The collection of nasopharyngeal swabs to test for the presence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is an invasive technique with implications for patients and clinicians. Alternative clinical specimens from the upper respiratory tract may offer benefits in terms of collection, comfort and infection risk. The objective of this review was to synthesise the evidence for detection of SARS-CoV-2 ribonucleic acid (RNA) using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tested saliva or nasal specimens compared with RT-PCR tested nasopharyngeal specimens. Searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, Europe PMC and NHS evidence from December 2019 to 20 July 2020. Eighteen studies were identified; 12 for saliva, four for nasal and two included both specimen types. For saliva-based studies, the proportion of saliva samples testing positive relative to all positive samples in each study ranged from 82.9% to 100%; detection in nasopharyngeal specimens ranged from 76.7% to 100%; positive agreement between specimens for overall detection ranged from 65.4% to 100%. For nasal-based studies, the proportion of nasal swabs testing positive relative to all positive samples in each study ranged from 81.9% to 100%; detection in nasopharyngeal specimens ranged from 70% to 100%; positive agreement between specimens for overall detection ranged from 62.3% to 100%. The results indicate an inconsistency in the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in the specimen types included, often with neither the index nor the reference of interest detecting all known cases. Depending on the test environment, these clinical specimens may offer a viable alternative to standard. However, at present the evidence is limited, of variable quality, and relatively inconsistent.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , Nasal Mucosa/virology , Nasopharynx/virology , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , Saliva/virology , Specimen Handling/methods , Humans , Reproducibility of Results
7.
J Infect ; 81(6): 847-856, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-856877

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To summarise the evidence on the duration of infectiousness of individuals in whom SARS-CoV-2 ribonucleic acid is detected. METHODS: A rapid review was undertaken in PubMed, Europe PubMed Central and EMBASE from 1 January 2020 to 26 August 2020. RESULTS: We identified 15 relevant studies, including 13 virus culture and 2 contact tracing studies. For 5 virus culture studies, the last day on which SARS-CoV-2 was isolated occurred within 10 days of symptom onset. For another 5 studies, SARS-CoV-2 was isolated beyond day 10 for approximately 3% of included patients. The remaining 3 virus culture studies included patients with severe or critical disease; SARS-CoV-2 was isolated up to day 32 in one study. Two studies identified immunocompromised patients from whom SARS-CoV-2 was isolated for up to 20 days. Both contact tracing studies, when close contacts were first exposed greater than 5 days after symptom onset in the index case, found no evidence of laboratory-confirmed onward transmission of SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 patients with mild-to-moderate illness are highly unlikely to be infectious beyond 10 days of symptoms. However, evidence from a limited number of studies indicates that patients with severe-to-critical illness or who are immunocompromised, may shed infectious virus for longer.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Disease Transmission, Infectious/statistics & numerical data , RNA, Viral/isolation & purification , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , COVID-19/genetics , Contact Tracing , Humans , Patient Isolation , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , Severity of Illness Index , Time Factors , Viral Load
8.
Rev Med Virol ; 31(2): e2162, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-784378

ABSTRACT

In this review, we systematically searched and summarized the evidence on the immune response and reinfection rate following SARS-CoV-2 infection. We also retrieved studies on SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV to assess the long-term duration of antibody responses. A protocol based on Cochrane rapid review methodology was adhered to and databases were searched from 1/1/2000 until 26/5/2020. Of 4744 citations retrieved, 102 studies met our inclusion criteria. Seventy-four studies were retrieved on SARS-CoV-2. While the rate and timing of IgM and IgG seroconversion were inconsistent across studies, most seroconverted for IgG within 2 weeks and 100% (N = 62) within 4 weeks. IgG was still detected at the end of follow-up (49-65 days) in all patients (N = 24). Neutralizing antibodies were detected in 92%-100% of patients (up to 53 days). It is not clear if reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 is possible, with studies more suggestive of intermittent detection of residual RNA. Twenty-five studies were retrieved on SARS-CoV. In general, SARS-CoV-specific IgG was maintained for 1-2 years post-infection and declined thereafter, although one study detected IgG up to 12 years post-infection. Neutralizing antibodies were detected up to 17 years in another study. Three studies on MERS-CoV reported that IgG may be detected up to 2 years. In conclusion, limited early data suggest that most patients seroconvert for SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG within 2 weeks. While the long-term duration of antibody responses is unknown, evidence from SARS-CoV studies suggest SARS-CoV-specific IgG is sustained for 1-2 years and declines thereafter.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/immunology , Coronavirus Infections/immunology , Coronavirus/immunology , Immunity/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/immunology , Immunoglobulin M/immunology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL