Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
2.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; : 1-24, 2021 Nov 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1527934

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Characterize and compare SARS-CoV-2-specific immune responses in plasma and gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) from nursing home residents during and after natural infection. DESIGN: Prospective cohort. SETTING: Nursing home. PARTICIPANTS: SARS-CoV-2-infected nursing home residents. METHODS: A convenience sample of 14 SARS-CoV-2-infected nursing home residents, enrolled 4-13 days after real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction diagnosis, were followed for 42 days. Post diagnosis, plasma SARS-CoV-2-specific pan-Immunoglobulin (Ig), IgG, IgA, IgM, and neutralizing antibodies were measured at 5 timepoints and GCF SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG and IgA were measured at 4 timepoints. RESULTS: All participants demonstrated immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Among 12 phlebotomized participants, plasma was positive for pan-Ig and IgG in all 12, neutralizing antibodies in 11, IgM in 10, and IgA in 9. Among 14 participants with GCF specimens, GCF was positive for IgG in 13 and IgA in 12. Immunoglobulin responses in plasma and GCF had similar kinetics; median times to peak antibody response was similar across specimen types (4 weeks for IgG; 3 weeks for IgA). Participants with pan-Ig, IgG, and IgA detected in plasma and GCF IgG remained positive through this evaluation's end 46-55 days post-diagnosis. All participants were viral culture negative by the first detection of antibodies. CONCLUSIONS: Nursing home residents had detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in plasma and GCF after infection. Kinetics of antibodies detected in GCF mirrored those from plasma. Non-invasive GCF may be useful for detecting and monitoring immunologic responses in populations unable or unwilling to be phlebotomized.

3.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(Suppl 1): S58-S64, 2021 07 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1315676

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing remains essential for early identification and clinical management of cases. We compared the diagnostic performance of 3 specimen types for characterizing SARS-CoV-2 in infected nursing home residents. METHODS: A convenience sample of 17 residents were enrolled within 15 days of first positive SARS-CoV-2 result by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and prospectively followed for 42 days. Anterior nasal swabs (AN), oropharyngeal swabs (OP), and saliva specimens (SA) were collected on the day of enrollment, every 3 days for the first 21 days, and then weekly for 21 days. Specimens were tested for presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA using RT-PCR and replication-competent virus by viral culture. RESULTS: Comparing the 3 specimen types collected from each participant at each time point, the concordance of paired RT-PCR results ranged from 80% to 88%. After the first positive result, SA and OP were RT-PCR-positive for ≤48 days; AN were RT-PCR-positive for ≤33 days. AN had the highest percentage of RT-PCR-positive results (21/26 [81%]) when collected ≤10 days of participants' first positive result. Eleven specimens were positive by viral culture: 9 AN collected ≤19 days following first positive result and 2 OP collected ≤5 days following first positive result. CONCLUSIONS: AN, OP, and SA were effective methods for repeated testing in this population. More AN than OP were positive by viral culture. SA and OP remained RT-PCR-positive longer than AN, which could lead to unnecessary interventions if RT-PCR detection occurred after viral shedding has likely ceased.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Arkansas , Humans , Nursing Homes , RNA, Viral/genetics
4.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(Suppl 1): S58-S64, 2021 07 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1205577

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing remains essential for early identification and clinical management of cases. We compared the diagnostic performance of 3 specimen types for characterizing SARS-CoV-2 in infected nursing home residents. METHODS: A convenience sample of 17 residents were enrolled within 15 days of first positive SARS-CoV-2 result by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and prospectively followed for 42 days. Anterior nasal swabs (AN), oropharyngeal swabs (OP), and saliva specimens (SA) were collected on the day of enrollment, every 3 days for the first 21 days, and then weekly for 21 days. Specimens were tested for presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA using RT-PCR and replication-competent virus by viral culture. RESULTS: Comparing the 3 specimen types collected from each participant at each time point, the concordance of paired RT-PCR results ranged from 80% to 88%. After the first positive result, SA and OP were RT-PCR-positive for ≤48 days; AN were RT-PCR-positive for ≤33 days. AN had the highest percentage of RT-PCR-positive results (21/26 [81%]) when collected ≤10 days of participants' first positive result. Eleven specimens were positive by viral culture: 9 AN collected ≤19 days following first positive result and 2 OP collected ≤5 days following first positive result. CONCLUSIONS: AN, OP, and SA were effective methods for repeated testing in this population. More AN than OP were positive by viral culture. SA and OP remained RT-PCR-positive longer than AN, which could lead to unnecessary interventions if RT-PCR detection occurred after viral shedding has likely ceased.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Arkansas , Humans , Nursing Homes , RNA, Viral/genetics
5.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 8(3): ofab048, 2021 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1135878

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: To estimate the infectious period of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in older adults with underlying conditions, we assessed duration of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms, reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) positivity, and culture positivity among nursing home residents. METHODS: We enrolled residents within 15 days of their first positive SARS-CoV-2 test (diagnosis) at an Arkansas facility from July 7 to 15, 2020 and instead them for 42 days. Every 3 days for 21 days and then weekly, we assessed COVID-19 symptoms, collected specimens (oropharyngeal, anterior nares, and saliva), and reviewed medical charts. Blood for serology was collected on days 0, 6, 12, 21, and 42. Infectivity was defined by positive culture. Duration of culture positivity was compared with duration of COVID-19 symptoms and RT-PCR positivity. Data were summarized using measures of central tendency, frequencies, and proportions. RESULTS: We enrolled 17 of 39 (44%) eligible residents. Median participant age was 82 years (range, 58-97 years). All had ≥3 underlying conditions. Median duration of RT-PCR positivity was 22 days (interquartile range [IQR], 8-31 days) from diagnosis; median duration of symptoms was 42 days (IQR, 28-49 days). Of 9 (53%) participants with any culture-positive specimens, 1 (11%) severely immunocompromised participant remained culture-positive 19 days from diagnosis; 8 of 9 (89%) were culture-positive ≤8 days from diagnosis. Seroconversion occurred in 12 of 12 (100%) surviving participants with ≥1 blood specimen; all participants were culture-negative before seroconversion. CONCLUSIONS: Duration of infectivity was considerably shorter than duration of symptoms and RT-PCR positivity. Severe immunocompromise may prolong SARS-CoV-2 infectivity. Seroconversion indicated noninfectivity in this cohort.

6.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 43(1): 99-101, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1065728

ABSTRACT

The sensitivity of the BinaxNOW coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Ag Card test (BinaxNOW) was 51.6% among asymptomatic healthcare employees relative to real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR). The odds of a positive BinaxNOW test decreased as cycle threshold value increased. BinaxNOW could facilitate rapid detection and isolation of asymptomatically infected persons in some settings while rRT-PCR results are pending.


Subject(s)
Antigens, Viral/analysis , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19 , Asymptomatic Infections , COVID-19/diagnosis , Health Personnel , Humans , RNA-Directed DNA Polymerase , Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , Sensitivity and Specificity
7.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 69(32): 1095-1099, 2020 Aug 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-705516

ABSTRACT

Undetected infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) contributes to transmission in nursing homes, settings where large outbreaks with high resident mortality have occurred (1,2). Facility-wide testing of residents and health care personnel (HCP) can identify asymptomatic and presymptomatic infections and facilitate infection prevention and control interventions (3-5). Seven state or local health departments conducted initial facility-wide testing of residents and staff members in 288 nursing homes during March 24-June 14, 2020. Two of the seven health departments conducted testing in 195 nursing homes as part of facility-wide testing all nursing homes in their state, which were in low-incidence areas (i.e., the median preceding 14-day cumulative incidence in the surrounding county for each jurisdiction was 19 and 38 cases per 100,000 persons); 125 of the 195 nursing homes had not reported any COVID-19 cases before the testing. Ninety-five of 22,977 (0.4%) persons tested in 29 (23%) of these 125 facilities had positive SARS-CoV-2 test results. The other five health departments targeted facility-wide testing to 93 nursing homes, where 13,443 persons were tested, and 1,619 (12%) had positive SARS-CoV-2 test results. In regression analyses among 88 of these nursing homes with a documented case before facility-wide testing occurred, each additional day between identification of the first case and completion of facility-wide testing was associated with identification of 1.3 additional cases. Among 62 facilities that could differentiate results by resident and HCP status, an estimated 1.3 HCP cases were identified for every three resident cases. Performing facility-wide testing immediately after identification of a case commonly identifies additional unrecognized cases and, therefore, might maximize the benefits of infection prevention and control interventions. In contrast, facility-wide testing in low-incidence areas without a case has a lower proportion of test positivity; strategies are needed to further optimize testing in these settings.


Subject(s)
Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Nursing Homes , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Aged , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Health Personnel , Humans , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Infectious Disease Transmission, Professional-to-Patient/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , United States/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL