Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Int J Infect Dis ; 112: 269-277, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1654549

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To assess the seroprevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in Oman and longitudinal changes in antibody levels over time within the first 11 months of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: This nationwide cross-sectional study was conducted as a four-cycle serosurvey using a multi-stage stratified sampling method from July to November 2020. A questionnaire was used and included demographics, history of acute respiratory infection and list of symptoms, COVID-19 contact, previous diagnosis or admission, travel history and risk factors. RESULTS: In total, 17,457 participants were surveyed. Thirty percent were female and 66.3% were Omani. There was a significant increase in seroprevalence throughout the study cycles, from 5.5% (4.8-6.2%) in Cycle 1 to 22% (19.6-24.6%) in Cycle 4. There was no difference in seroprevalence between genders, but significant differences were found between age groups. There was a transition of seroprevalence from being higher in non-Omanis than Omanis in Cycle 1 [9.1% (7.6-10.9%) vs 3.2% (2.6-3.9%)] to being higher in Omanis than non-Omanis in Cycle 4 [24.3% (21.0-27.9%) vs 16.8% (14.9-18.9%)]. There was remarkable variation in the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 according to governorate. Close contacts of people with COVID-19 had a 96% higher risk of having the disease [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.96, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.64-2.34]. Labourers had 58% higher risk of infection compared with office workers (AOR 1.58, 95% CI 1.04-2.35). CONCLUSION: This study showed a wide variation in the spread of SARS-CoV-2 across governorates in Oman, with higher estimated seroprevalence in migrants in the first two cycles. Prevalence estimates remain low and are insufficient to provide herd immunity.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Oman/epidemiology , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Surveys and Questionnaires
2.
Oman Med J ; 36(5): e297, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526934

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Considering the increasing, significant burden that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) imposes on the healthcare system, the need for simple, rapid, and affordable diagnostic tests to support the existing costly and demanding polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay becomes required. This prospective diagnostic test accuracy study aims to evaluate the performance of four different COVID-19 rapid antigen tests compared to real-time reverse transcription PCR (rRT-PCR) between June and July 2020 to determine the feasibility of integrating these tests into the diagnostic algorithm in clinical settings. METHODS: Swabs were collected from 306 patients and analyzed using rRT-PCR and antigen tests from four different providers. RESULTS: The antigen tests' sensitivities were 65.8%, 69.8%, 64.0%, and 64.3% for the STANDARD™ Q COVID-19 Ag test, PCL COVID-19 Ag Rapid fluorescent immunoassay (FIA) test, BIOCREDIT COVID-19 Ag test, and Sofia SARS-CoV-2 antigen FIA test, respectively. Specificity was 94.1% for PCL COVID-19 Ag Rapid test and 100% for the other three assays. All assays showed a significant negative correlation between the reference rRT-PCR Ct values and Ag test results. Besides, sensitivities of the STANDARD™ Q COVID-19 Ag test, PCL COVID-19 Ag Rapid FIA test, and BIOCREDIT COVID-19 Ag test improved to ≥ 85% after exclusion of samples with PCR Ct values > 30. CONCLUSIONS: The high specificity of the rapid antigen tests and other parameters like simplicity, rapidity, and affordability suggest that antigen tests are likely to be helpful if integrated and interpreted appropriately in stepwise diagnostic algorithms. Given the low sensitivity of 64.0-69.8% of the antigen tests, we recommend that clinically relevant negative results undergo further testing Ag to confirm or exclude a COVID-19 diagnosis.

3.
Oman Med J ; 36(5): e302, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1485325

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to analyze the characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infected health care workers (HCWs) and to measure their immunoglobulin G (IgG) response. METHODS: This is a retrospective and prospective cohort study where details of COVID-19 infected HCWs were collected in a pre-designed database in Al-Nahdha Hospital between 2 April and 24 July 2020. A single serum sample was collected from participating HCWs to detect the presence of IgG in their sera. RESULTS: Out of 974 HCWs, 103 (10.6%) were infected and tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 by real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. Nurses and doctors were the most affected groups. The source of infection was the hospital in 50.0% of cases. Nurses were more than four times likely to have a hospital-acquired COVID-19 infection (odds ratio = 4.63, 95% confidence interval: 1.71-12.52, p-value = 0.002). HCWs working in COVID-19 areas were more likely to have hospital-acquired infection than community-acquired infection (p < 0.005). All infected HCWs made a full recovery, with only 3.9% requiring admission. Out of 74 tested HCWs for IgG, 60 (81.1%) were positive. IgG positivity rate was significantly higher among HCWs in COVID-19 areas (p =0.026) and among non-Omanis (p =0.008). Moreover, the median IgG level was significantly higher among non-Omanis (p =0.004). CONCLUSIONS: This study has highlighted the group at higher risk of hospital-acquired COVID-19 infection which was nurses and those working in COVID-19 areas. It highlighted as well the high seropositivity among this infected group. These findings support the national guidelines on priority groups for vaccination among HCWs working in COVID-19 areas with no previous laboratory-confirmed COVID-19.

4.
Pan Afr Med J ; 40: 2, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1449273

ABSTRACT

In response to the current COVID-19 pandemic, numerous commercial assays have been developed for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 for use in the clinical diagnostic laboratories. To date, there is limited comparison of testing methods performed in different hospital laboratory sites. The aims of the study were to evaluate the analytical performance of Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 when compared to RT-PCR. This is a cross-sectional study. A total of 155 nasopharyngeal swabs were taken in duplicate from patients presenting with suspected COVID-19 to 8 hospitals in Oman. One swab was tested by the hospital laboratory and the duplicate swab was sent to the national Central Public Health Laboratory (CPHL) for testing. We compared the analytical performance of the commercially available point of care Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay which was used in the 8 different hospitals with assays including Liferiver, Sansure, TIB MOL BIOL, Kingfisher and COBAS 6800 by Roche which were performed at the CPHL. Testing of the duplicate swabs revealed excellent agreement of results with the viral loads of Ct values ranging from 16-43 for the E gene, 18-44 for the N gene and 17-44 for the ORF gene using the Liferiver assay. The overall sample sensitivity and specificity of the Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay were both 100% and there was 100% agreement across specimens. We conclude that the rapid GeneXpert and RT-PCR kits assessed in this study may be used for routine diagnostic testing of COVID-19 patients by experienced clinical microbiology diagnostic laboratories. Our results highlight the importance of rapid molecular testing at different sites within a country in a public health emergency.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Laboratories, Hospital , Molecular Diagnostic Techniques/methods , Oman , Point-of-Care Testing , RNA, Viral/genetics , Sensitivity and Specificity , Specimen Handling , Viral Load
5.
Int J Infect Dis ; 107: 257-263, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1300801

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine the seroprevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in healthcare workers (HCWs) based on risk of exposure to COVID-19 patients. METHOD: This was a SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence cross-sectional study in risk-stratified HCWs randomly selected from three main district hospitals in Oman. RESULTS: 1078 HCWs were included, with an overall SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence of 21%. The seropositivity rates in low-, variable-, and high-risk groups were 29%, 18%, and 17%, respectively (p-value < 0.001). The study found higher positivity in males (crude odds ratio [COR] 1.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28-2.3), and workers residing in high-prevalence areas (COR 2.09, 95% CI 1.42-3.07). Compared with doctors, workers from supporting services, administration staff, and nurses were more likely to test positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (COR 9.81, 95% CI 5.26-18.27; 2.37, 95% CI 1.23-4.58; 2.08 95% CI 1.14-3.81). The overall rate of previously undetected infection was 12%, with higher values in low-risk HCWs. High district prevalence was a driving factor for seropositivity in the low-risk group (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 2.36, 95% CI 1.0-5.59). CONCLUSION: Low-risk supporting services workers can drive SARS-CoV-2 transmission in hospitals. More attention and innovation within this area will enhance the safety of health care during epidemics/pandemics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/transmission , Health Personnel , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Seroepidemiologic Studies
6.
Int J Infect Dis ; 104: 139-149, 2021 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-997022

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been proven to be lethal to human health, which affects almost every corner of the world. The objectives of this study were to add context to the global data and international genomic consortiums, and to give insight into the efficiency of the contact tracing system in Oman. METHODS: We combined epidemiological data and whole-genome sequence data from 94 samples of SARS-CoV-2 in Oman to understand the origins, genetic variation, and transmissibility. The whole-genome size of sequence data was obtained through a customized SARS-COV-2 research panel. Amplifier methods ranged from 26 Kbp to 30 Kbp and were submitted to GISAID. FINDINGS: The study found that P323L (94.7%) is the most common mutation, followed by D614G (92.6%) Spike protein mutation. A unique mutation, I280V, was first reported in Oman and was associated with a rare lineage, B.1.113 (10.6%). In addition, the study revealed a good agreement between genetic and epidemiological data. INTERPRETATION: Oman's robust surveillance system was very efficient in guiding the outbreak investigation processes in the country, the study illustrates the future importance of molecular epidemiology in leading the national response to outbreaks and pandemics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Genome, Viral/genetics , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19/virology , Child , Child, Preschool , Epidemiological Monitoring , Female , Humans , Infant , Male , Middle Aged , Molecular Epidemiology , Mutation , Oman/epidemiology , Phylogeny , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Whole Genome Sequencing , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL