Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
PLoS Med ; 20(6): e1004240, 2023 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20243081

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Circulation of multidrug-resistant bacteria (MRB) in healthcare facilities is a major public health problem. These settings have been greatly impacted by the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, notably due to surges in COVID-19 caseloads and the implementation of infection control measures. We sought to evaluate how such collateral impacts of COVID-19 impacted the nosocomial spread of MRB in an early pandemic context. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We developed a mathematical model in which Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and MRB cocirculate among patients and staff in a theoretical hospital population. Responses to COVID-19 were captured mechanistically via a range of parameters that reflect impacts of SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks on factors relevant for pathogen transmission. COVID-19 responses include both "policy responses" willingly enacted to limit SARS-CoV-2 transmission (e.g., universal masking, patient lockdown, and reinforced hand hygiene) and "caseload responses" unwillingly resulting from surges in COVID-19 caseloads (e.g., abandonment of antibiotic stewardship, disorganization of infection control programmes, and extended length of stay for COVID-19 patients). We conducted 2 main sets of model simulations, in which we quantified impacts of SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks on MRB colonization incidence and antibiotic resistance rates (the share of colonization due to antibiotic-resistant versus antibiotic-sensitive strains). The first set of simulations represents diverse MRB and nosocomial environments, accounting for high levels of heterogeneity across bacterial parameters (e.g., rates of transmission, antibiotic sensitivity, and colonization prevalence among newly admitted patients) and hospital parameters (e.g., rates of interindividual contact, antibiotic exposure, and patient admission/discharge). On average, COVID-19 control policies coincided with MRB prevention, including 28.2% [95% uncertainty interval: 2.5%, 60.2%] fewer incident cases of patient MRB colonization. Conversely, surges in COVID-19 caseloads favoured MRB transmission, resulting in a 13.8% [-3.5%, 77.0%] increase in colonization incidence and a 10.4% [0.2%, 46.9%] increase in antibiotic resistance rates in the absence of concomitant COVID-19 control policies. When COVID-19 policy responses and caseload responses were combined, MRB colonization incidence decreased by 24.2% [-7.8%, 59.3%], while resistance rates increased by 2.9% [-5.4%, 23.2%]. Impacts of COVID-19 responses varied across patients and staff and their respective routes of pathogen acquisition. The second set of simulations was tailored to specific hospital wards and nosocomial bacteria (methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, extended-spectrum beta-lactamase producing Escherichia coli). Consequences of nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks were found to be highly context specific, with impacts depending on the specific ward and bacteria evaluated. In particular, SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks significantly impacted patient MRB colonization only in settings with high underlying risk of bacterial transmission. Yet across settings and species, antibiotic resistance burden was reduced in facilities with timelier implementation of effective COVID-19 control policies. CONCLUSIONS: Our model suggests that surges in nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 transmission generate selection for the spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Timely implementation of efficient COVID-19 control measures thus has 2-fold benefits, preventing the transmission of both SARS-CoV-2 and MRB, and highlighting antibiotic resistance control as a collateral benefit of pandemic preparedness.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Pandemics/prevention & control , Infection Control/methods , Anti-Bacterial Agents/pharmacology , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Hospitals , Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial
2.
Occup Environ Med ; 80(5): 268-272, 2023 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2281917

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To quantify the burden of COVID-19-related sick leave during the first pandemic wave in France, accounting for sick leaves due to symptomatic COVID-19 ('symptomatic sick leaves') and those due to close contact with COVID-19 cases ('contact sick leaves'). METHODS: We combined data from a national demographic database, an occupational health survey, a social behaviour survey and a dynamic SARS-CoV-2 transmission model. Sick leave incidence from 1 March 2020 to 31 May 2020 was estimated by summing daily probabilities of symptomatic and contact sick leaves, stratified by age and administrative region. RESULTS: There were an estimated 1.70M COVID-19-related sick leaves among France's 40M working-age adults during the first pandemic wave, including 0.42M due to COVID-19 symptoms and 1.28M due to COVID-19 contacts. There was great geographical variation, with peak daily sick leave incidence ranging from 230 in Corse (Corsica) to 33 000 in Île-de-France (the greater Paris region), and greatest overall burden in regions of north-eastern France. Regional sick leave burden was generally proportional to local COVID-19 prevalence, but age-adjusted employment rates and contact behaviours also contributed. For instance, 37% of symptomatic infections occurred in Île-de-France, but 45% of sick leaves. Middle-aged workers bore disproportionately high sick leave burden, owing predominantly to greater incidence of contact sick leaves. CONCLUSIONS: France was heavily impacted by sick leave during the first pandemic wave, with COVID-19 contacts accounting for approximately three-quarters of COVID-19-related sick leaves. In the absence of representative sick leave registry data, local demography, employment patterns, epidemiological trends and contact behaviours can be synthesised to quantify sick leave burden and, in turn, predict economic consequences of infectious disease epidemics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Sick Leave , Adult , Middle Aged , Humans , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Employment , France/epidemiology
3.
Sci Rep ; 12(1): 19773, 2022 Nov 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2119294

ABSTRACT

In response to the COVID-19 epidemic, Egypt established a unique care model based on quarantine hospitals where only externally-referred confirmed COVID-19 patients were admitted, and healthcare workers resided continuously over 1- to 2-week working shifts. Using a mathematical model accounting for the false-negative rates of RT-PCR tests, we computed the incidence rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs, while unveiling the proportion of infections remaining undiagnosed despite routine testing. We relied on longitudinal data, including results of routine RT-PCR tests, collected within three Egyptian quarantine hospitals. We estimated an incidence rate (per 100 person-day, PD) of 1.05 (95% CrI 0.58-1.65) at Hospital 1, 1.92 (95% CrI 0.93-3.28) at Hospital 2 and 7.62 (95% CrI 3.47-13.70) at Hospital 3. We found that the risk for an HCW to be infected during a working shift lay within the range of risk levels previously documented in standard healthcare settings for Hospitals 1-2, whereas it was > threefold higher for Hospital 3. This large variation suggests that HCWs from quarantine hospitals may face a high occupational risk of infection, but that, with sufficient infection control measures, this risk can be brought down to levels similar to those observed in standard healthcare settings.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Personnel , Quarantine , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Egypt/epidemiology , Hospitals , SARS-CoV-2 , Risk Assessment
4.
Responsabilité & Environnement ; - (108):52-56,124,134, 2022.
Article in French | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-2073869

ABSTRACT

Les modèles mathématiques sont très utiles pour bien comprendre et gérer le risque épidémique, comme l'a illustré leur usage lors de la pandémie de Covid-19. Utilisés depuis plus d'un siècle, ils permettent, en proposant une simplification de la réalité informée par des données, d'explorer une large gamme de scénarios hypothétiques. Cependant, leur bonne utilisation pour aider à la décision en santé publique suppose un travail en interaction avec les acteurs de terrain, la prise en compte des incertitudes et un effort de communication.Alternate :Mathematical models are very useful for understanding and managing epidemic risk, as illustrated by their use during the Covid-19 pandemic. Used for more than a century, they allow, by proposing a simplification of reality informed by data, to explore a wide range of hypothetical scenarios. However, their proper use to help public health decision making requires interaction with the actors in the field, taking into account uncertainties and a communication effort.

5.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 28(7): 1345-1354, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1847125

ABSTRACT

Outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2 infection frequently occur in hospitals. Preventing nosocomial infection requires insight into hospital transmission. However, estimates of the basic reproduction number (R0) in care facilities are lacking. Analyzing a closely monitored SARS-CoV-2 outbreak in a hospital in early 2020, we estimated the patient-to-patient transmission rate and R0. We developed a model for SARS-CoV-2 nosocomial transmission that accounts for stochastic effects and undetected infections and fit it to patient test results. The model formalizes changes in testing capacity over time, and accounts for evolving PCR sensitivity at different stages of infection. R0 estimates varied considerably across wards, ranging from 3 to 15 in different wards. During the outbreak, the hospital introduced a contact precautions policy. Our results strongly support a reduction in the hospital-level R0 after this policy was implemented, from 8.7 to 1.3, corresponding to a policy efficacy of 85% and demonstrating the effectiveness of nonpharmaceutical interventions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Basic Reproduction Number , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Humans , Infection Control/methods , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med ; 41(2): 101054, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1783119
7.
Med Sci (Paris) ; 38(3): 303-308, 2022 Mar.
Article in French | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1764229

ABSTRACT

Technological advances in synthetic biology have made in vitro modification, or even creation, of viruses easier and more affordable. Several research studies using synthesis of potential pandemic pathogens led to controversies in the 2010's. More recently, the hypothesis that Covid-19 pandemics could originate from a lab escape is still under debate. In France, a legislative vacuum remains concerning the synthesis of modified pathogens. Initiating a collective reflection process towards setting of a legal framework on this type of work is timely so that research continues to provide profit to society rather than hazard.


Title: Recherche à usage dual sur les pathogènes modifiés en laboratoire - Quel encadrement pour quels enjeux ? Abstract: Les avancées techniques en biologie de synthèse rendent de plus en plus accessibles la modification ou même la fabrication de virus en laboratoire. Plusieurs travaux de recherche fondés sur la synthèse de pathogènes à potentiel pandémique ont créé la polémique au cours des années 2010 et, aujourd'hui encore, l'éventualité qu'une fuite de laboratoire soit à l'origine de la pandémie de Covid-19 fait débat. En France, un vide juridique subsiste concernant la synthèse de pathogènes modifiés. Une réflexion concertée vers un encadrement légal de ce type de recherche apparaît donc nécessaire et urgent pour que la recherche continue de représenter un bénéfice, plutôt qu'un risque, pour la société.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , France/epidemiology , Humans , Laboratories , Pandemics
8.
Nat Commun ; 13(1): 236, 2022 01 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1621241

ABSTRACT

Healthcare facilities are vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 introductions and subsequent nosocomial outbreaks. Antigen rapid diagnostic testing (Ag-RDT) is widely used for population screening, but its health and economic benefits as a reactive response to local surges in outbreak risk are unclear. We simulate SARS-CoV-2 transmission in a long-term care hospital with varying COVID-19 containment measures in place (social distancing, face masks, vaccination). Across scenarios, nosocomial incidence is reduced by up to 40-47% (range of means) with routine symptomatic RT-PCR testing, 59-63% with the addition of a timely round of Ag-RDT screening, and 69-75% with well-timed two-round screening. For the latter, a delay of 4-5 days between the two screening rounds is optimal for transmission prevention. Screening efficacy varies depending on test sensitivity, test type, subpopulations targeted, and community incidence. Efficiency, however, varies primarily depending on underlying outbreak risk, with health-economic benefits scaling by orders of magnitude depending on the COVID-19 containment measures in place.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross Infection/diagnosis , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , SARS-CoV-2 , Antigens, Viral , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Cross Infection/transmission , Diagnostic Tests, Routine , Epidemiological Monitoring , Hospitals , Humans , Risk Factors , Vaccination
9.
Clin Infect Dis ; 72(1): 141-143, 2021 01 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1045886

ABSTRACT

To date, no specific estimate of R0 for SARS-CoV-2 is available for healthcare settings. Using interindividual contact data, we highlight that R0 estimates from the community cannot translate directly to healthcare settings, with pre-pandemic R0 values ranging 1.3-7.7 in 3 illustrative healthcare institutions. This has implications for nosocomial COVID-19 control.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Basic Reproduction Number , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , Pandemics
10.
BMC Med ; 18(1): 386, 2020 12 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-962808

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are vulnerable to outbreaks of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Timely epidemiological surveillance is essential for outbreak response, but is complicated by a high proportion of silent (non-symptomatic) infections and limited testing resources. METHODS: We used a stochastic, individual-based model to simulate transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) along detailed inter-individual contact networks describing patient-staff interactions in a real LTCF setting. We simulated distribution of nasopharyngeal swabs and reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests using clinical and demographic indications and evaluated the efficacy and resource-efficiency of a range of surveillance strategies, including group testing (sample pooling) and testing cascades, which couple (i) testing for multiple indications (symptoms, admission) with (ii) random daily testing. RESULTS: In the baseline scenario, randomly introducing a silent SARS-CoV-2 infection into a 170-bed LTCF led to large outbreaks, with a cumulative 86 (95% uncertainty interval 6-224) infections after 3 weeks of unmitigated transmission. Efficacy of symptom-based screening was limited by lags to symptom onset and silent asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic transmission. Across scenarios, testing upon admission detected just 34-66% of patients infected upon LTCF entry, and also missed potential introductions from staff. Random daily testing was more effective when targeting patients than staff, but was overall an inefficient use of limited resources. At high testing capacity (> 10 tests/100 beds/day), cascades were most effective, with a 19-36% probability of detecting outbreaks prior to any nosocomial transmission, and 26-46% prior to first onset of COVID-19 symptoms. Conversely, at low capacity (< 2 tests/100 beds/day), group testing strategies detected outbreaks earliest. Pooling randomly selected patients in a daily group test was most likely to detect outbreaks prior to first symptom onset (16-27%), while pooling patients and staff expressing any COVID-like symptoms was the most efficient means to improve surveillance given resource limitations, compared to the reference requiring only 6-9 additional tests and 11-28 additional swabs to detect outbreaks 1-6 days earlier, prior to an additional 11-22 infections. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 surveillance is challenged by delayed or absent clinical symptoms and imperfect diagnostic sensitivity of standard RT-PCR tests. In our analysis, group testing was the most effective and efficient COVID-19 surveillance strategy for resource-limited LTCFs. Testing cascades were even more effective given ample testing resources. Increasing testing capacity and updating surveillance protocols accordingly could facilitate earlier detection of emerging outbreaks, informing a need for urgent intervention in settings with ongoing nosocomial transmission.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Long-Term Care/organization & administration , Public Health Surveillance/methods , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Mass Screening/methods , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Practice Guidelines as Topic , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL