Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 13 de 13
Filter
1.
J Med Virol ; 2022 Apr 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1772791
2.
Innovation in aging ; 5(Suppl 1):733-733, 2021.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1624161

ABSTRACT

Transferring long-term nursing home residents between facilities can compromise the quality of life and be associated with functional decline, hospitalizations, and even death. This study aimed to examine transfer rates and identify risk factors associated with transfers among long-term nursing home residents before (2018-2019) and during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020). Using the Michigan state Minimum Data Set data 2018-2020, we identified long-term residents as those who stayed in nursing homes for at least 100 days each year (N=39,693, 39,454, and 35,575, respectively). We defined a facility-to-facility transfer as a direct transfer between two nursing homes. We first examined the likelihood of transfer by year using logistic regression models, adjusting for residents’ age, sex, race, and marital status. We then examined two health statuses that could be associated with a transfer: activities of daily living (ADL) and cognitive impairment. Finally, we compared transfers that occurred before COVID-19 (2018-2019) and during COVID-19 (2020), adjusting for residents’ demographic characteristics and health statuses. After adjustment, age was the only factor associated with transfers for all three years (Age>=80: AOR=0.61, 95% CI: 0.54-0.69;AOR=0.63, 95% CI: 0.55-0.72;AOR=0.71, 95% CI: 0.63-0.80, respectively). New risk factors in 2020 were Black race (AOR=1.22, 95% CI: 1.07-1.40) and requiring ADL assistance (AOR=1.24, 95% CI: 1.03-1.49). The COVID-19 period had higher transfer rate (unadjusted rates 2.9%, 2.7%, 3.5%, respectively) with 10% higher odds of transfer compared to before COVID-19 (AOR=1.10, 95% CI: 1.01-1.20). This finding suggests that COVID-19 has an impact on how nursing home transferred their long-term residents.

4.
Open forum infectious diseases ; 8(Suppl 1):S291-S292, 2021.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1564544

ABSTRACT

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected nursing home (NH) patients, accounting for 5% of all cases and 32% of all COVID-19 deaths nationwide. Little is known about the frequency and persistence of SARS-CoV-2 environmental contamination in NHs. We characterize SARS-CoV-2 contamination in the rooms of COVID-19 patients and common areas in and around COVID-19 units. Methods A prospective cohort study was conducted at four NHs in Michigan between October 2020 and January 2021. Clinical research personnel obtained swab specimens from high-touch room surfaces of COVID-19 infected patients, up to three times per patient. Weekly swab specimens from six high-touch surfaces in common areas were also obtained. Demographic and clinical data were collected from patient clinical records. Our primary outcome of interest was the probability of SARS-CoV-2 detection from specific environmental surfaces in COVID-19 patient rooms. Results One hundred four patients with COVID-19 were enrolled and followed for 241 visits. Patient characteristics included: 61.5% over the age of 80;67.3% female;89.4% non-Hispanic white;50.1% short-stay. The study population had significant disabilities in activities of daily living (ADL;81.7% dependent in four or more ADLs) and comorbidities including dementia (55.8%), diabetes (40.4%) and heart failure (32.7) (Table 1). Over the 3-month study period, 2087 swab specimens were collected (1896 COVID-19 patient room surfaces, 191 common area swabs). Figure 1 shows contamination rates at sites proximate and distant to the patient bed. SARS-CoV-2 positivity was 28.4% (538/1896 swabs) on patient room surfaces and 3.7% (7/191 swabs) on common area surfaces. Over the course of follow-up, 89.4% (93/104) of patients had SARS-CoV-2 contamination in their room at least once (Figure 2). Environmental contamination detected on enrollment correlated with contamination of the same site during follow-up. Functional independence increased the odds of proximate contamination. Table 1. Clinical and Demographic Characteristics of the Study Population Including Short- and Long-stay Patients Figure 1. Contamination of Environmental Surfaces Relative to Distance from Patient Bed Figure 2. SARS-CoV-2 on Swab Specimens Collected – Patient-level, Visit-level, and Swab-level Conclusion We conclude that environmental contamination of surfaces in the rooms of COVID-19 patients is nearly universal and persistent. Patients with greater independence are more likely than fully dependent patients to contaminate their immediate environment. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

5.
Front Vet Sci ; 8: 779341, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1557478

ABSTRACT

In this study, we describe SARS-CoV-2 infection dynamics in one cat and three dogs from households with confirmed human cases of COVID-19 living in the Madrid Community (Spain) at the time of expansion (December 2020 through June 2021) of the alpha variant (lineage B.1.1.7). A thorough physical exam and nasopharyngeal, oropharyngeal, and rectal swabs were collected for real-time reverse-transcription PCR (RT-qPCR) SARS-CoV-2 testing on day 0 and in successive samplings on days 7, 14, 21, and 47 during monitoring. Blood was also drawn to determine complete blood counts, biochemical profiles, and serology of the IgG response against SARS-CoV-2. On day 0, the cat case 1 presented with dyspnea and fever associated with a mild bronchoalveolar pattern. The dog cases 2, 3, and 4 were healthy, but case 2 presented with coughing, dyspnea, and weakness, and case 4 exhibited coughing and bilateral nasal discharge 3 and 6 days before the clinical exam. Case 3 (from the same household as case 2) remained asymptomatic. SARS-CoV-2 detection by RT-qPCR showed that the cat case 1 and the dog case 2 exhibited the lowest cycle threshold (Ct) (Ct < 30) when they presented clinical signs. Viral detection failed in successive samplings. Serological analyses revealed a positive IgG response in cat case 1 and dog cases 3 and 4 shortly after or simultaneously to virus shedding. Dog case 2 was seronegative, but seroconverted 21 days after SARS-CoV-2 detection. SARS-CoV-2 genome sequencing was attempted, and genomes were classified as belonging to the B.1.1.7 lineage.

6.
J Am Geriatr Soc ; 70(1): 29-39, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1480181

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks in nursing homes (NHs) have been devastating and have led to the creation of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) units within NHs to care for affected patients. Frequency and persistence of SARS-CoV-2 environmental contamination in these units have not been studied. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted between October 2020 and January 2021 in four Michigan NHs. Swabs from high-touch surfaces in COVID-19-infected patient rooms were obtained at enrollment and follow-up. Demographic and clinical data were collected from clinical records. Primary outcome of interest was the probability of SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection from specific environmental surfaces in COVID-19 patient rooms. We used multivariable logistic regression to assess patient risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 contamination. Pairwise Phi coefficients were calculated to measure correlation of site-specific environmental detection upon enrollment and during follow-up. RESULTS: One hundred and four patients with COVID-19 were enrolled (61.5% >80 years; 67.3% female; 89.4% non-Hispanic White; 51% short stay) and followed up for 241 visits. The study population had significant disabilities in activities of daily living (ADL; 81.7% dependent in four or more ADLs) and comorbidities, including dementia (55.8%), diabetes (40.4%), and heart failure (32.7%). Over the 3-month study period, 2087 swab specimens were collected (1896 COVID-19 patient rooms, 191 common areas). SARS-CoV-2 positivity was 28.4% (538/1896 swabs) on patient room surfaces and 3.7% (7/191 swabs) on common area surfaces. Nearly 90% (93/104) of patients had SARS-CoV-2 contamination in their room at least once. Environmental contamination upon enrollment correlated with contamination of the same site during follow-up. Functional independence increased the odds of proximate contamination. CONCLUSIONS: Environmental detection of viral RNA from surfaces in the rooms of COVID-19 patients is nearly universal and persistent; more investigation is needed to determine the implications of this for infectiousness. Patients with greater independence are more likely than fully dependent patients to contaminate their immediate environment.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Environmental Pollution/adverse effects , Infection Control , RNA, Viral , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/therapy , Decontamination , Female , Humans , Male , Michigan , Nursing Homes , Prospective Studies , RNA, Viral/analysis
8.
Am J Infect Control ; 49(11): 1343-1349, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1213007

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Nursing home (NH) populations have borne the brunt of morbidity and mortality of COVID-19. We surveyed Michigan NHs to evaluate preparedness, staffing, testing, and adaptations to these challenges. METHODS: Interpandemic survey responses were collected May 1-12, 2020. We used Pearson's Chi-squared test, Fisher's exact test, and logistic regression to evaluate relationships. RESULTS: Of 452 Michigan NHs contacted via e-mail, 145 (32.1%) opened the survey and of these, 143 (98.6%) responded. Sixty-eight percent of respondents indicated their response plan addressed most issues. NHs reported receiving rapidly changing guidance from many sources. Two-thirds reported shortages of personal protective equipment and other supplies. Half (50%) lacked sufficient testing resources with only 36% able to test residents and staff with suspected COVID-19. A majority (55%) experienced staffing shortages. Sixty-three percent experienced resignations, with front-line clinical staff more likely to resign, particularly in facilities caring for COVID-19 patients (P < .001). Facilities adapted quickly, creating COVID-19 units (78%) to care for patients on site. To reduce isolation, NHs facilitated communication via phone calls (98%), videoconferencing (96%), and window visits (81%). A majority continued to provide requisite therapies (90%). CONCLUSIONS: NHs experienced shortages of resources, testing supplies, and staffing challenges. COVID-19 in the facility was a key predictor of staff resignations. Facilities relied on rapidly changing, often conflicting advice from multiple sources, suggesting high-yield areas of improvement.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Michigan , Nursing Homes , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires
9.
J Am Geriatr Soc ; 69(5): 1140-1146, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1150156

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Presently a median of 37.5% of the U.S. skilled nursing facility (SNF) workforce has been vaccinated for COVID-19. It is essential to understand vaccine hesitancy among SNF workers to inform vaccine campaigns going forward. OBJECTIVE: To describe the concerns raised among healthcare workers and staff from SNFs during town hall meetings. DESIGN: Sixty-three SNFs from four corporations were invited to send Opinion Leaders, outspoken staff from nursing, nurse aid, dietary, housekeeping or recreational therapy, to attend a 1-h virtual town hall meeting. Meetings used a similar format where the moderator solicited concerns that the attendees themselves had or had heard from others in the facility about the COVID-19 vaccine. Physicians and moderators used personal stories to address concerns and reaffirmed positive emotions. SETTING: Twenty-six video town hall meetings with SNF staff. PARTICIPANTS: Healthcare workers and staff, with physicians serving as content experts. MEASUREMENT: Questions and comments about the COVID-19 vaccines noted by physicians. RESULTS: One hundred and ninety three staff from 50 facilities participated in 26 meetings between December 30, 2020 and January 15, 2021. Most staff reported getting information about the vaccine from friends or social media. Concerns about how rapidly the vaccines were developed and side effects, including infertility or pregnancy related concerns, were frequently raised. There were no differences in concerns raised by discipline. Questions about returning to prior activities after being vaccinated were common and offered the opportunity to build on positive emotions to reduce vaccine hesitancy. CONCLUSIONS: Misinformation about the COVID-19 vaccine was widespread among SNF staff. Sharing positive emotions and stories may be more effective than sharing data when attempting to reduce vaccine hesitancy in SNF staff.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19/prevention & control , Nursing Staff/psychology , Skilled Nursing Facilities , Communication , Humans , Physicians/psychology , Vaccination Refusal/psychology
10.
J Am Geriatr Soc ; 69(1): 30-36, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1066714

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Almost half of deaths related to COVID-19 in the United States are linked to nursing homes (NHs). We describe among short-term and long-term residents at three NHs in Michigan the outbreak identification process, universal testing, point prevalence of COVID-19, and subsequent containment efforts, outcomes, and challenges. DESIGN: Outbreak investigation. SETTING: Three NHs in southeast Michigan. PARTICIPANTS: All residents (N = 215) at three NHs (total beds = 356) affiliated with a large academic healthcare system. METHODS: Upon detection of confirmed cases within the facility, each NH in collaboration and consultation with local hospital, public health officials, and parent corporation implemented immediate facility-wide testing and the following intervention measures: cohorting of COVID-19 positive residents; communication regarding testing and results with residents, healthcare professionals, and families; personal protective equipment reeducation and use throughout facilities; and dedicated staffing for infected patients cohorted in a dedicated COVID-19 wing. We collected patient data regarding demographics, symptoms, comorbidities, hospitalization, and 14-day outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 29 cases of COVID-19 were identified at three participating NHs. Nineteen cases of COVID-19 were identified through symptom-triggered testing from March 23 to April 23, 2020; 10 (4.7%) additional cases were identified through universal testing of 215 residents conducted from April 7 to 15, 2020. The hospitalization rate was 37.9%. The case fatality rate was 20.7% (6/29); these patients had multiple comorbidities. No residents who tested positive through the point-prevalence survey required hospitalization, and five were discharged home within 14 days. CONCLUSION: Proactive and coordinated steps between NH medical directors and administrators, referral hospitals including their laboratories, and local public health officials are necessary to rapidly respond to an outbreak and limit the transmission of COVID-19. This coordinated public health approach may save lives, minimize the burden to the healthcare system, and reduce healthcare costs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , Homes for the Aged/organization & administration , Nursing Homes/organization & administration , Public-Private Sector Partnerships/organization & administration , Academic Medical Centers , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Michigan/epidemiology , Public Health Administration , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
11.
Med. lab ; 24(3), 2020.
Article in Spanish | LILACS (Americas) | ID: covidwho-863791

ABSTRACT

El brote de la enfermedad por coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19), causado por el virus del síndrome respiratorio agudo severo tipo-2 (SARS-CoV-2), fue decla-rado como una pandemia en marzo de 2020. Las tasas de letalidad se estiman entre 1% y 3%, afectando principalmente a los adultos mayores y a aquellos con comorbi-lidades, como hipertensión, diabetes, enfermedad cardiovascular y cáncer. El perio-do de incubación promedio es de 5 días, pero puede ser hasta de 14 días. Muchos pacientes infectados son asintomáticos;sin embargo, debido a que liberan grandes cantidades de virus, son un desafío permanente para contener la propagación de la infección, causando el colapso de los sistemas de salud en las áreas más afec-tadas. La vigilancia intensa es vital para controlar la mayor propagación del virus, y el aislamiento sigue siendo el medio más efectivo para bloquear la transmisión. Este artículo tiene como objetivo revisar el virus causante de esta nueva pandemia COVID-19 que afecta al mundo, mayor aún que la de influenza A H1N1 en 2009, la cual significó la muerte de cientos de miles de personas en todo el mundo. Se abordan temas como el patógeno, la epidemiología, las manifestaciones clínicas, el diagnóstico y el tratamiento.(AU) The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID 19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was declared a pandemic in March 2020. Fatality rates are estimated to be between 1% and 3%, affecting primarily the aging population and those with comorbidities, such as hy-pertension, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and cancer. The average incubation period is 5 days but can be as long as 14 days. The majority of infected patients are asymptomatic;however, they release large amounts of viral particles that con-tribute to the challenges for containing the spread of the infection, and threatening to overwhelm health systems. Intense surveillance is vital for controlling the further spread of the virus, and isolation remains the most effective means of blocking the spread of the disease. This article aims to review the virus and the disease involved in a new pandemic since the appearance of H1N1 flu in 2009, which killed hundreds of thousands worldwide. Topics such as the pathogen, epidemiology, clinical featu-res, diagnosis and treatment will be covered.(AU)

12.
Med. lab ; 24(3):183-205, 2020.
Article | WHO COVID | ID: covidwho-324945

ABSTRACT

El brote de la enfermedad por coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19), causado por el virus del síndrome respiratorio agudo severo tipo-2 (SARS-CoV-2), fue declarado como una pandemia en marzo de 2020. Las tasas de letalidad se estiman entre 1% y 3%, afectando principalmente a los adultos mayores y a aquellos con comorbilidades, como hipertensión, diabetes, enfermedad cardiovascular y cáncer. El periodo de incubación promedio es de 5 días, pero puede ser hasta de 14 días. Muchos pacientes infectados son asintomáticos;sin embargo, debido a que liberan grandes cantidades de virus, son un desafío permanente para contener la propagación de la infección, causando el colapso de los sistemas de salud en las áreas más afectadas. La vigilancia intensa es vital para controlar la mayor propagación del virus, y el aislamiento sigue siendo el medio más efectivo para bloquear la transmisión. Este artículo tiene como objetivo revisar el virus causante de esta nueva pandemia COVID-19 que afecta al mundo, mayor aún que la de influenza A H1N1 en 2009, la cual significó la muerte de cientos de miles de personas en todo el mundo. Se abordan temas como el patógeno, la epidemiología, las manifestaciones clínicas, el diagnóstico y el tratamiento.The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID 19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was declared a pandemic in March 2020. Fatality rates are estimated to be between 1% and 3%, affecting primarily the aging population and those with comorbidities, such as hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and cancer. The average incubation period is 5 days but can be as long as 14 days. The majority of infected patients are asymptomatic;however, they release large amounts of viral particles that contribute to the challenges for containing the spread of the infection, and threatening to overwhelm health systems. Intense surveillance is vital for controlling the further spread of the virus, and isolation remains the most effective means of blocking the spread of the disease. This article aims to review the virus and the disease involved in a new pandemic since the appearance of H1N1 flu in 2009, which killed hundreds of thousands worldwide. Topics such as the pathogen, epidemiology, clinical features, diagnosis and treatment will be covered.

13.
Med. lab ; 24(3):181-182, 2020.
Article | WHO COVID | ID: covidwho-324944

ABSTRACT

El 31 de diciembre de 2019, la Comisión Municipal de Salud y Sanidad en la pro-vincia de Hubei, China, anunció la aparición de 27 casos de neumonía de causa desconocida, en personas que habían visitado un mercado de mariscos y anima-les vivos en la ciudad de Wuhan. Pocos días después se estaba identificando al agente etiológico como un nuevo virus de la familia de los coronavirus, denomi-nado SARS-CoV-2. El virus causante de COVID-19 es un virus "nuevo"para la humanidad, y por lo tanto, no hay inmunidad hacia el mismo. Mientras se dispone de una vacuna efec-tiva y segura contra el SARS-CoV-2, solo se vislumbra en el futuro inmediato que la población vaya siendo inmunizada de forma natural, idealmente de manera re-gulada. Los aislamientos, las cuarentenas y el cierre de fronteras han sido y siguen siendo utilizadas como primera línea de defensa ante enfermedades infecciosas nuevas. Sin embargo, estas medidas tienen un rol principalmente en la etapa de contención y luego en la fase de mitigación, como estrategia para ralentizar la dispersión del virus en la comunidad. Una vez se alcanza la fase de mitigación, como ocurre actualmente en Colombia, se deben balancear estas soluciones de aislamiento, con estrategias de distanciamiento más regulado que permitan la reactivación de las actividades sociales y comerciales, y así minimizar los efectos contraproducentes por las implicaciones sociales y económicas [3]. La alta transmisibilidad del virus solo podrá combatirse cuando un porcentaje sig-nificativo de la población esté inmune. Lo que se conoce como inmunidad colecti-va o de rebaño se puede lograr de dos formas;la primera con vacunación masiva, y la segunda con la exposición natural al agente infeccioso, en miras a que el sistema inmune desarrolle una respuesta que proteja al individuo, y evite además que sea una fuente de infección para otros. Para que se logre un nivel adecuado de inmunidad colectiva, se requiere que alrededor del 70% de la población sea inmune, dependiendo del agente infeccioso. Algunos ejemplos de inmunidad co-lectiva conseguida a través de la vacunación, son las obtenidas con las campañas contra sarampión, varicela, paperas y polio, las cuales son enfermedades poco frecuentes en la actualidad en los países con esquemas de vacunación masivos.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL