Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 11 de 11
Filter
1.
Sci Rep ; 13(1): 7296, 2023 05 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2319042

ABSTRACT

The majority of SARS-CoV-2 transmissions originates from either asymptomatic or presymptomatic individuals. To prevent unnoticed introduction of SARS-CoV-2, many hospitals have implemented universal admission screening during the COVID-19 pandemic. The present study aimed to investigate associations between results of an universal SARS-CoV-2 admission screening and public SARS-CoV-2 incidence. Over a study period of 44 weeks, all patients admitted to a large tertiary care hospital were tested for SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction. SARS-CoV-2 positive patients were retrospectively categorized as symptomatic or asymptomatic at admission. Cantonal data were used to calculate weekly incidence rates per 100,000 inhabitants. We used regression models for count data to assess the association of the weekly cantonal incidence rate and the proportion of positive SARS-CoV-2 tests in the canton with (a) the proportion of SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals and (b) the proportion of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals identified in universal admission screening, respectively. In a 44-week period, a total of 21,508 admission screenings were performed. SARS-CoV-2 PCR was positive in 643 (3.0%) individuals. In 97 (15.0%) individuals, the positive PCR reflected residual viral replication after recent COVID-19, 469 (72.9%) individuals had COVID-19 symptoms and 77 (12.0%) SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals were asymptomatic. Cantonal incidence correlated with the proportion of SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals [rate ratio (RR): 2.03 per 100 point increase of weekly incidence rate, 95%CI 1.92-2.14] and the proportion of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals (RR: 2.40 per 100 point increase of weekly incidence rate, 95%CI 2.03-2.82). The highest correlation between dynamics in cantonal incidence and results of admission screening was observed at a lag time of one week. Similarly, the proportion of positive SARS-CoV-2 tests in the canton of Zurich correlated with the proportion of SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals (RR: 2.86 per log increase in the proportion of positive SARS-CoV-2 tests in the canton, 95%CI 2.56-3.19) and the proportion of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals (RR: 6.50 per log increase in the proportion of positive SARS-CoV-2 tests in the canton, 95%CI 3.93-10.75) in admission screening. Around 0.36% of admission screenings were positive in asymptomatic patients. Admission screening results paralleled changes in population incidence with a brief lag.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Incidence , Retrospective Studies , Pandemics
2.
Adv Sci (Weinh) ; : e2204774, 2022 Oct 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2094140

ABSTRACT

On-site quantification and early-stage infection risk assessment of airborne severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) with high spatiotemporal resolution is a promising approach for mitigating the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and informing life-saving decisions. Here, a condensation (hygroscopic growth)-assisted bioaerosol collection and plasmonic photothermal sensing (CAPS) system for on-site quantitative risk analysis of SARS-CoV-2 virus-laden aerosols is presented. The CAPS system provided rapid thermoplasmonic biosensing results after an aerosol-to-hydrosol sampling process in COVID-19-related environments including a hospital and a nursing home. The detection limit reached 0.25 copies/µL in the complex aerosol background without further purification. More importantly, the CAPS system enabled direct measurement of the SARS-CoV-2 virus exposures with high spatiotemporal resolution. Measurement and feedback of the results to healthcare workers and patients via a QR-code are completed within two hours. Based on a dose-responseµ model, it is used the plasmonic biosensing signal to calculate probabilities of SARS-CoV-2 infection risk and estimate maximum exposure durations to an acceptable risk threshold in different environmental settings.

3.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 28(10): 2087-2090, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2022573

ABSTRACT

Of 1,118 patients with COVID-19 at a university hospital in Switzerland during October 2020-June 2021, we found 83 (7.4%) had probable or definite healthcare-associated COVID-19. After in-hospital exposure, we estimated secondary attack rate at 23.3%. Transmission was associated with longer contact times and with lower cycle threshold values among index patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Humans , Incidence , SARS-CoV-2 , Switzerland/epidemiology , Tertiary Care Centers
4.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 28(10): 2134-2137, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2002463

ABSTRACT

We assessed the risk for different exposures to SARS-CoV-2 during a COVID-19 outbreak among healthcare workers on a hospital ward in late 2020. We found working with isolated COVID-19 patients did not increase the risk of COVID-19 among workers, but working shifts with presymptomatic healthcare coworkers did.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , Health Personnel , Hospitals , Humans
5.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control ; 11(1): 51, 2022 03 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1753127

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We investigated the contribution of both occupational and community exposure for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among employees of a university-affiliated long-term care facility (LTCF), during the 1st pandemic wave in Switzerland (March-June 2020). METHODS: We performed a nested analysis of a seroprevalence study among all volunteering LTCF staff to determine community and nosocomial risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity using modified Poison regression. We also combined epidemiological and genetic sequencing data from a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak investigation in a LTCF ward to infer transmission dynamics and acquisition routes of SARS-CoV-2, and evaluated strain relatedness using a maximum likelihood phylogenetic tree. RESULTS: Among 285 LTCF employees, 176 participated in the seroprevalence study, of whom 30 (17%) were seropositive for SARS-CoV-2. Most (141/176, 80%) were healthcare workers (HCWs). Risk factors for seropositivity included exposure to a COVID-19 inpatient (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] 2.6; 95% CI 0.9-8.1) and community contact with a COVID-19 case (aPR 1.7; 95% CI 0.8-3.5). Among 18 employees included in the outbreak investigation, the outbreak reconstruction suggests 4 likely importation events by HCWs with secondary transmissions to other HCWs and patients. CONCLUSIONS: These two complementary epidemiologic and molecular approaches suggest a substantial contribution of both occupational and community exposures to COVID-19 risk among HCWs in LTCFs. These data may help to better assess the importance of occupational health hazards and related legal implications during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Long-Term Care , Nursing Homes , Pandemics , Phylogeny , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Seroepidemiologic Studies
6.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control ; 10(1): 144, 2021 10 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1463271

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: With the current COVID-19 pandemic, many healthcare facilities have been lacking a steady supply of filtering facepiece respirators. To better address this challenge, the decontamination and reuse of these respirators is a strategy that has been studied by an increasing number of institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review in PubMed, PubMed Central, Embase, and Google Scholar. Studies were eligible when (electronically or in print) up to 17 June 2020, and published in English, French, German, or Spanish. The primary outcome was reduction of test viruses or test bacteria by log3 for disinfection and log6 for sterilization. Secondary outcome was physical integrity (fit/filtration/degradation) of the respirators after reprocessing. Materials from the grey literature, including an unpublished study were added to the findings. FINDINGS: Of 938 retrieved studies, 35 studies were included in the analysis with 70 individual tests conducted. 17 methods of decontamination were found, included the use of liquids (detergent, benzalkonium chloride, hypochlorite, or ethanol), gases (hydrogen peroxide, ozone, peracetic acid or ethylene oxide), heat (either moist with or without pressure or dry heat), or ultra violet radiation (UVA and UVGI); either alone or in combination. Ethylene oxide, gaseous hydrogen peroxide (with or without peracetic acid), peracetic acid dry fogging system, microwave-generated moist heat, and steam seem to be the most promising methods on decontamination efficacy, physical integrity and filtration capacity. INTERPRETATION: A number of methods can be used for N95/FFP2 mask reprocessing in case of shortage, helping to keep healthcare workers and patients safe. However, the selection of disinfection or sterilization methods must take into account local availability and turnover capacity as well as the manufacturer; meaning that some methods work better on specific models from specific manufacturers. SYSTEMATIC REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020193309.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Decontamination/methods , Equipment Reuse , N95 Respirators , Humans
7.
J Glob Health ; 11: 05011, 2021 Jul 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1296176

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Variation in the approaches taken to contain the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic at country level has been shaped by economic and political considerations, technical capacity, and assumptions about public behaviours. To address the limited application of learning from previous pandemics, this study aimed to analyse perceived facilitators and inhibitors during the pandemic and to inform the development of an assessment tool for pandemic response planning. METHODS: A cross-sectional electronic survey of health and non-health care professionals (5 May - 5 June 2020) in six languages, with respondents recruited via email, social media and website posting. Participants were asked to score inhibitors (-10 to 0) or facilitators (0 to +10) impacting country response to COVID-19 from the following domains - Political, Economic, Sociological, Technological, Ecological, Legislative, and wider Industry (the PESTELI framework). Participants were then asked to explain their responses using free text. Descriptive and thematic analysis was followed by triangulation with the literature and expert validation to develop the assessment tool, which was then compared with four existing pandemic planning frameworks. RESULTS: 928 respondents from 66 countries (57% health care professionals) participated. Political and economic influences were consistently perceived as powerful negative forces and technology as a facilitator across high- and low-income countries. The 103-item tool developed for guiding rapid situational assessment for pandemic planning is comprehensive when compared to existing tools and highlights the interconnectedness of the 7 domains. CONCLUSIONS: The tool developed and proposed addresses the problems associated with decision making in disciplinary silos and offers a means to refine future use of epidemic modelling.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires
8.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control ; 10(1): 83, 2021 05 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1247602

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: With the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, many healthcare facilities are lacking a steady supply of masks worldwide. This emergency situation warrants the taking of extraordinary measures to minimize the negative health impact from an insufficient supply of masks. The decontamination, and reuse of healthcare workers' N95/FFP2 masks is a promising solution which needs to overcome several pitfalls to become a reality. AIM: The overall aim of this article is to provide the reader with a quick overview of the various methods for decontamination and the potential issues to be taken into account when deciding to reuse masks. Ultraviolet germicidal irradiation (UVGI), hydrogen peroxide, steam, ozone, ethylene oxide, dry heat and moist heat have all been methods studied in the context of the pandemic. The article first focuses on the logistical implementation of a decontamination system in its entirety, and then aims to summarize and analyze the different available methods for decontamination. METHODS: In order to have a clear understanding of the research that has already been done, we conducted a systematic literature review for the questions: what are the tested methods for decontaminating N95/FFP2 masks, and what impact do those methods have on the microbiological contamination and physical integrity of the masks? We used the results of a systematic review on the methods of microbiological decontamination of masks to make sure we covered all of the recommended methods for mask reuse. To this systematic review we added articles and studies relevant to the subject, but that were outside the limits of the systematic review. These include a number of studies that performed important fit and function tests on the masks but took their microbiological outcomes from the existing literature and were thus excluded from the systematic review, but useful for this paper. We also used additional unpublished studies and internal communication from the University of Geneva Hospitals and partner institutions. RESULTS: This paper analyzes the acceptable methods for respirator decontamination and reuse, and scores them according to a number of variables that we have defined as being crucial (including cost, risk, complexity, time, etc.) to help healthcare facilities decide which method of decontamination is right for them. CONCLUSION: We provide a resource for healthcare institutions looking at making informed decisions about respirator decontamination. This informed decision making will help to improve infection prevention and control measures, and protect healthcare workers during this crucial time. The overall take home message is that institutions should not reuse respirators unless they have to. In the case of an emergency situation, there are some safe ways to decontaminate them.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Decontamination/methods , Equipment Reuse , N95 Respirators/standards , SARS-CoV-2 , Ethylene Oxide/pharmacology , Health Personnel , Humans , Hydrogen Peroxide/pharmacology , N95 Respirators/virology , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , SARS-CoV-2/radiation effects , Steam , Ultraviolet Rays
9.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control ; 10(1): 33, 2021 02 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1081336

ABSTRACT

The global COVID-19 pandemic due to the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has challenged the availability of traditional surface disinfectants. It has also stimulated the production of ultraviolet-disinfection robots by companies and institutions. These robots are increasingly advocated as a simple solution for the immediate disinfection of rooms and spaces of all surfaces in one process and as such they seem attractive to hospital management, also because of automation and apparent cost savings by reducing cleaning staff. Yet, there true potential in the hospital setting needs to be carefully evaluated. Presently, disinfection robots do not replace routine (manual) cleaning but may complement it. Further design adjustments of hospitals and devices are needed to overcome the issue of shadowing and free the movement of robots in the hospital environment. They might in the future provide validated, reproducible and documented disinfection processes. Further technical developments and clinical trials in a variety of hospitals are warranted to overcome the current limitations and to find ways to integrate this novel technology in to the hospitals of to-day and the future.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Disinfection/instrumentation , Disinfection/methods , Hospitals , Robotics/methods , Ultraviolet Rays , COVID-19/virology , Disinfectants , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2/radiation effects
10.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control ; 10(1): 7, 2021 01 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1060156

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To compile current published reports on nosocomial outbreaks of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), evaluate the role of healthcare workers (HCWs) in transmission, and evaluate outbreak management practices. METHODS: Narrative literature review. SHORT CONCLUSION: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has placed a large burden on hospitals and healthcare providers worldwide, which increases the risk of nosocomial transmission and outbreaks to "non-COVID" patients or residents, who represent the highest-risk population in terms of mortality, as well as HCWs. To date, there are several reports on nosocomial outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2, and although the attack rate is variable, it can be as high as 60%, with high mortality. There is currently little evidence on transmission dynamics, particularly using genomic sequencing, and the role of HCWs in initiating or amplifying nosocomial outbreaks is not elucidated. There has been a paradigm shift in management practices of viral respiratory outbreaks, that includes widespread testing of patients (or residents) and HCWs, including asymptomatic individuals. These expanded testing criteria appear to be crucial in identifying and controlling outbreaks.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/transmission , Disease Outbreaks , Health Personnel , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/virology , Cross Infection/virology , Health Facilities , Hospitalization , Humans , Population Surveillance , Research
11.
Swiss Med Wkly ; 151: w20459, 2021 01 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1055197

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 is a respiratory virus. Transmission occurs by droplets, contact and aerosols. In medical settings, filtering facepiece (FFP) respirators are recommended for use by personnel exposed to aerosol-generating procedures. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the demand for FFP respirators exceeded their supply worldwide and low-quality products appeared on the market, potentially putting healthcare workers at risk. AIMS: To raise awareness about variations in quality of imported FFP respirators in Switzerland during the COVID-19 pandemic, to draw attention to the current directives regulating the market launch of FFP respirators in Switzerland, to provide practical support in identifying suspicious products or documents and, finally, to offer strategies aimed at reducing the distribution of low-quality FFP respirators in the future. METHODS: Three Swiss laboratories, Spiez Laboratory and Unisanté in partnership with TOXpro SA individually set up testing procedures to evaluate aerosol penetration and fit testing of FFP respirators imported into Switzerland during COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, Spiez Laboratory visually inspected the products, examined the certification documents and crosschecked the product information with international databases. RESULTS: Between 31 March and 15 June 2020, 151 FFP respirators were analysed. The initial assessment performed before testing allowed a reduction of up to 35% in the number of FFP respirators sent to Spiez Laboratory for evaluation, for which product information found to be faulty. After filtration efficiency evaluation and fit testing, 52% and 60% of all products tested by Spiez Laboratory and Unisanté-TOXpro SA, respectively, did not meet the minimum performance requirements established independently by the three Swiss laboratories. CONCLUSION: The demand for FFP respirators exceeded the supply capacity from established suppliers of the Swiss market. New production and import channels emerged, as did the number of poor-quality FFP respirators. FFP respirators remaining in stocks should be checked for conformity before being used, or eliminated and replaced if quality does not meet standards.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , N95 Respirators/standards , COVID-19/transmission , Humans , In Vitro Techniques , N95 Respirators/supply & distribution , Product Labeling , Respiratory Protective Devices/standards , Respiratory Protective Devices/supply & distribution , SARS-CoV-2 , Switzerland
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL