Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
J Infect ; 85(5): 557-564, 2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2007856

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To describe the risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection in UK healthcare workers (HCWs). METHODS: We conducted a prospective sero-epidemiological study of HCWs at a major UK teaching hospital using a SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay. Risk factors for seropositivity were analysed using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: 410/5,698 (7·2%) staff tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Seroprevalence was higher in those working in designated COVID-19 areas compared with other areas (9·47% versus 6·16%) Healthcare assistants (aOR 2·06 [95%CI 1·14-3·71]; p=0·016) and domestic and portering staff (aOR 3·45 [95% CI 1·07-11·42]; p=0·039) had significantly higher seroprevalence than other staff groups after adjusting for age, sex, ethnicity and COVID-19 working location. Staff working in acute medicine and medical sub-specialities were also at higher risk (aOR 2·07 [95% CI 1·31-3·25]; p<0·002). Staff from Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) backgrounds had an aOR of 1·65 (95% CI 1·32 - 2·07; p<0·001) compared to white staff; this increased risk was independent of COVID-19 area working. The only symptoms significantly associated with seropositivity in a multivariable model were loss of sense of taste or smell, fever, and myalgia; 31% of staff testing positive reported no prior symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection amongst HCWs is highly heterogeneous and influenced by COVID-19 working location, role, age and ethnicity. Increased risk amongst BAME staff cannot be accounted for solely by occupational factors.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel , Hospitals, Teaching , Humans , Prospective Studies , Risk Factors , Seroepidemiologic Studies , United Kingdom/epidemiology
2.
Lab Med ; 53(5): 509-513, 2022 Sep 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1873968

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, more peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) allogeneic grafts are being frozen and infused thawed. Our objective was to study the influence of graft viability on engraftment outcome in patients treated with PBSCs. METHODS: Using trypan blue stain, we compared total nucleated cell (TNC) viability of both fresh and thawed grafts in allogeneic PBSCs. RESULTS: The viability of thawed PBSC grafts median was 74%, and fresh was 99.0%. The median number of CD34 + cells/kg infused thawed was 6.3 × 106/kg and median time to neutrophil and platelet engraftment was 17.5 and 20 days. Median number of CD34 + cells/kg infused fresh was 5.1 × 106/kg and median time to neutrophil and platelet engraftment was 18 and 19 days. There were no statistically significant differences in the time to engraftment between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: A low TNC viability of thawed PBSC grafts does not have an effect on time to neutrophil and platelet engraftment when more than 2.85 × 106 CD34 + cells/kg are infused.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation , Antigens, CD34 , Cryopreservation , Hematopoietic Stem Cells , Humans , Pandemics
3.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys ; 113(1): 14-20, 2022 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1734540

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Early in the pandemic, the American Society for Radiation Oncology surveyed physician leaders at radiation oncology practices in the United States to understand how the field was responding to the outbreak of COVID-19. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Surveys were repeated at multiple points during the pandemic, with a response rate of 43% in April 2020 and 23% in January 2021. To our knowledge, this is the only longitudinal COVID-19 practice survey in oncology in the United States. RESULTS: The surveys indicate that patient access to essential radiation oncology services in the United States has been preserved throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Safety protocols were universally adopted, telehealth was widely adopted and remains in use, and most clinics no longer deferred or postponed radiation treatments as of early 2021. Late-stage disease presentation, treatment interruptions, shortages of personal protective equipment, and vaccination barriers were reported significantly more at community-based practices than at academic practices, and rural practices appear to have faced increased obstacles. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide unique insights into the initial longitudinal effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the delivery of radiation therapy in the United States. Downstream lessons in service adaptation and improvement can potentially be guided by formal concepts of resilience, which have been broadly embraced across the US economy.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Radiation Oncology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
4.
New Sci ; 246(3283): 2, 2020 May 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-798576
5.
New Scientist ; 247(3300):2, 2020.
Article | ScienceDirect | ID: covidwho-783440
6.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys ; 108(2): 356-361, 2020 Oct 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-739860

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: In February 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic reached the United States. The impact of the pandemic on the US radiation oncology field remains unknown. The American Society for Radiation Oncology surveyed US radiation oncology practice leaders to gauge initial impact and immediate operational responses to the pandemic. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From April 16 to April 30, 2020, the American Society for Radiation Oncology surveyed US radiation oncology practice leaders by email to gauge initial impact and immediate operational responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-two (43%) of 517 leaders responded from community and academic practices (62% and 34%, respectively), hospital-based and free-standing centers (69% and 29%), and metro and rural locations (88% and 12%). Practices reported treating an average of 1086 patients per year in 2019 (range, 0-7900) with an average daily treatment volume of 70 patients (range, 5-400). All practices reported uninterrupted operation. On average, practices were treating 68% of their typical volume (range, 10%-95%), with 92% implementing planned treatment postponement for lower risk patients. An estimated revenue decrease of 20% or more was experienced by 71% of practices. Confirmed COVID-19 patient cases were treated by 39% of practices. Seventy percent experienced staff shortages. Almost all (98%) practices implemented formal operational procedures to protect patients and staff, although personal protective equipment/infection control supply shortages were reported by 78% of practices. Seventy-four percent used telemedicine for virtual follow-up surveillance, and 15% leveraged telemedicine for on-treatment assessment. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical and financial impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on US radiation oncology were deep and broad. Despite reported shortages in personal protective equipment, declines in revenue, and reduced patient volumes, practices adapted quickly by refining standard processes of care, implementing recommended safety measures, and employing telemedicine to facilitate treatment continuity. Patients with higher risk disease experienced uninterrupted access to care. We plan to continue regular surveying across the lifespan of the pandemic to document the geographic and temporal impact of COVID-19 on the field and its patients.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Radiation Oncology , Societies, Medical , COVID-19 , Humans , Medical Staff/supply & distribution , Telemedicine , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL