Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
1.
JMIR Res Protoc ; 10(12): e31574, 2021 Dec 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1555360

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Workers critical to emergency response and continuity of essential services during the COVID-19 pandemic are at a disproportionally high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Prospective cohort studies are needed for enhancing the understanding of the incidence of symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections, identifying risk factors, assessing clinical outcomes, and determining the effectiveness of vaccination. OBJECTIVE: The Research on the Epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 in Essential Response Personnel (RECOVER) prospective cohort study was designed to estimate the incidence of symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections, examine the risk factors for infection and clinical spectrum of illness, and assess the effectiveness of vaccination among essential workers. METHODS: The RECOVER multisite network was initiated in August 2020 and aims to enroll 3000 health care personnel (HCP), first responders, and other essential and frontline workers (EFWs) at 6 US locations. Data on participant demographics, medical history, and vaccination history are collected at baseline and throughout the study. Active surveillance for the symptoms of COVID-19-like illness (CLI), access of medical care, and symptom duration is performed by text messages, emails, and direct participant or medical record reports. Participants self-collect a mid-turbinate nasal swab weekly, regardless of symptoms, and 2 additional respiratory specimens at the onset of CLI. Blood is collected upon enrollment, every 3 months, approximately 28 days after a reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, and 14 to 28 days after a dose of any COVID-19 vaccine. From February 2021, household members of RT-PCR-confirmed participants are self-collecting mid-turbinate nasal swabs daily for 10 days. RESULTS: The study observation period began in August 2020 and is expected to continue through spring 2022. There are 2623 actively enrolled RECOVER participants, including 280 participants who have been found to be positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. Enrollment is ongoing at 3 of the 6 study sites. CONCLUSIONS: Data collected through the cohort are expected to provide important public health information for essential workers at high risk for occupational exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and allow early evaluation of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/31574.

2.
JMIR Res Protoc ; 10(12): e31574, 2021 Dec 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1480500

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Workers critical to emergency response and continuity of essential services during the COVID-19 pandemic are at a disproportionally high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Prospective cohort studies are needed for enhancing the understanding of the incidence of symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections, identifying risk factors, assessing clinical outcomes, and determining the effectiveness of vaccination. OBJECTIVE: The Research on the Epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 in Essential Response Personnel (RECOVER) prospective cohort study was designed to estimate the incidence of symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections, examine the risk factors for infection and clinical spectrum of illness, and assess the effectiveness of vaccination among essential workers. METHODS: The RECOVER multisite network was initiated in August 2020 and aims to enroll 3000 health care personnel (HCP), first responders, and other essential and frontline workers (EFWs) at 6 US locations. Data on participant demographics, medical history, and vaccination history are collected at baseline and throughout the study. Active surveillance for the symptoms of COVID-19-like illness (CLI), access of medical care, and symptom duration is performed by text messages, emails, and direct participant or medical record reports. Participants self-collect a mid-turbinate nasal swab weekly, regardless of symptoms, and 2 additional respiratory specimens at the onset of CLI. Blood is collected upon enrollment, every 3 months, approximately 28 days after a reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, and 14 to 28 days after a dose of any COVID-19 vaccine. From February 2021, household members of RT-PCR-confirmed participants are self-collecting mid-turbinate nasal swabs daily for 10 days. RESULTS: The study observation period began in August 2020 and is expected to continue through spring 2022. There are 2623 actively enrolled RECOVER participants, including 280 participants who have been found to be positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. Enrollment is ongoing at 3 of the 6 study sites. CONCLUSIONS: Data collected through the cohort are expected to provide important public health information for essential workers at high risk for occupational exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and allow early evaluation of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/31574.

3.
J Am Med Dir Assoc ; 22(10): 2016-2020.e2, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1440150

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: In December 2020, CDC launched the Pharmacy Partnership for Long-Term Care Program to facilitate COVID-19 vaccination of residents and staff in long-term care facilities (LTCFs), including assisted living (AL) and other residential care (RC) communities. We aimed to assess vaccine uptake in these communities and identify characteristics that might impact uptake. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: AL/RC communities in the Pharmacy Partnership for Long-Term Care Program that had ≥1 on-site vaccination clinic during December 18, 2020-April 21, 2021. METHODS: We estimated uptake using the cumulative number of doses of COVID-19 vaccine administered and normalizing by the number of AL/RC community beds. We estimated the percentage of residents vaccinated in 3 states using AL census counts. We linked community vaccine administration data with county-level social vulnerability index (SVI) measures to calculate median vaccine uptake by SVI tertile. RESULTS: In AL communities, a median of 67 residents [interquartile range (IQR): 48-90] and 32 staff members (IQR: 15-60) per 100 beds received a first dose of COVID-19 vaccine at the first on-site clinic; in RC, a median of 8 residents (IQR: 5-10) and 5 staff members (IQR: 2-12) per 10 beds received a first dose. Among 3 states with available AL resident census data, median resident first-dose uptake at the first clinic was 93% (IQR: 85-108) in Connecticut, 85% in Georgia (IQR: 70-102), and 78% (IQR: 56-91) in Tennessee. Among both residents and staff, cumulative first-dose vaccine uptake increased with increasing social vulnerability related to housing type and transportation. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: COVID-19 vaccination of residents and staff in LTCFs is a public health priority. On-site clinics may help to increase vaccine uptake, particularly when transportation may be a barrier. Ensuring steady access to COVID-19 vaccine in LTCFs following the conclusion of the Pharmacy Partnership is critical to maintaining high vaccination coverage among residents and staff.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pharmacy , COVID-19 Vaccines , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Long-Term Care , SARS-CoV-2
4.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(3): e792-e798, 2021 08 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1338690

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Identifying asymptomatic individuals early through serial testing is recommended to control coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in nursing homes, both in response to an outbreak ("outbreak testing" of residents and healthcare personnel) and in facilities without outbreaks ("nonoutbreak testing" of healthcare personnel). The effectiveness of outbreak testing and isolation with or without nonoutbreak testing was evaluated. METHODS: Using published SARS-CoV-2 transmission parameters, the fraction of SARS-CoV-2 transmissions prevented through serial testing (weekly, every 3 days, or daily) and isolation of asymptomatic persons compared with symptom-based testing and isolation was evaluated through mathematical modeling using a Reed-Frost model to estimate the percentage of cases prevented (ie, "effectiveness") through either outbreak testing alone or outbreak plus nonoutbreak testing. The potential effect of simultaneous decreases (by 10%) in the effectiveness of isolating infected individuals when instituting testing strategies was also evaluated. RESULTS: Modeling suggests that outbreak testing could prevent 54% (weekly testing with 48-hour test turnaround) to 92% (daily testing with immediate results and 50% relative sensitivity) of SARS-CoV-2 infections. Adding nonoutbreak testing could prevent up to an additional 8% of SARS-CoV-2 infections (depending on test frequency and turnaround time). However, added benefits of nonoutbreak testing were mostly negated if accompanied by decreases in infection control practice. CONCLUSIONS: When combined with high-quality infection control practices, outbreak testing could be an effective approach to preventing COVID-19 in nursing homes, particularly if optimized through increased test frequency and use of tests with rapid turnaround.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Health Personnel , Humans , Nursing Homes , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
5.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(3): e792-e798, 2021 08 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1075481

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Identifying asymptomatic individuals early through serial testing is recommended to control coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in nursing homes, both in response to an outbreak ("outbreak testing" of residents and healthcare personnel) and in facilities without outbreaks ("nonoutbreak testing" of healthcare personnel). The effectiveness of outbreak testing and isolation with or without nonoutbreak testing was evaluated. METHODS: Using published SARS-CoV-2 transmission parameters, the fraction of SARS-CoV-2 transmissions prevented through serial testing (weekly, every 3 days, or daily) and isolation of asymptomatic persons compared with symptom-based testing and isolation was evaluated through mathematical modeling using a Reed-Frost model to estimate the percentage of cases prevented (ie, "effectiveness") through either outbreak testing alone or outbreak plus nonoutbreak testing. The potential effect of simultaneous decreases (by 10%) in the effectiveness of isolating infected individuals when instituting testing strategies was also evaluated. RESULTS: Modeling suggests that outbreak testing could prevent 54% (weekly testing with 48-hour test turnaround) to 92% (daily testing with immediate results and 50% relative sensitivity) of SARS-CoV-2 infections. Adding nonoutbreak testing could prevent up to an additional 8% of SARS-CoV-2 infections (depending on test frequency and turnaround time). However, added benefits of nonoutbreak testing were mostly negated if accompanied by decreases in infection control practice. CONCLUSIONS: When combined with high-quality infection control practices, outbreak testing could be an effective approach to preventing COVID-19 in nursing homes, particularly if optimized through increased test frequency and use of tests with rapid turnaround.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Health Personnel , Humans , Nursing Homes , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
6.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 69(46): 1730-1735, 2020 Nov 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-937753

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has highlighted the vulnerability of residents and staff members in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) (1). Although skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) certified by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) have federal COVID-19 reporting requirements, national surveillance data are less readily available for other types of LTCFs, such as assisted living facilities (ALFs) and those providing similar residential care. However, many state and territorial health departments publicly report COVID-19 surveillance data across various types of LTCFs. These data were systematically retrieved from health department websites to characterize COVID-19 cases and deaths in ALF residents and staff members. Limited ALF COVID-19 data were available for 39 states, although reporting varied. By October 15, 2020, among 28,623 ALFs, 6,440 (22%) had at least one COVID-19 case among residents or staff members. Among the states with available data, the proportion of COVID-19 cases that were fatal was 21.2% for ALF residents, 0.3% for ALF staff members, and 2.5% overall for the general population of these states. To prevent the introduction and spread of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, in their facilities, ALFs should 1) identify a point of contact at the local health department; 2) educate residents, families, and staff members about COVID-19; 3) have a plan for visitor and staff member restrictions; 4) encourage social (physical) distancing and the use of masks, as appropriate; 5) implement recommended infection prevention and control practices and provide access to supplies; 6) rapidly identify and properly respond to suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases in residents and staff members; and 7) conduct surveillance of COVID-19 cases and deaths, facility staffing, and supply information (2).


Subject(s)
Assisted Living Facilities , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Assisted Living Facilities/organization & administration , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Female , Humans , Infection Control/organization & administration , Male , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , United States/epidemiology
7.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 69(38): 1364-1368, 2020 Sep 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-792334

ABSTRACT

As of September 21, 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had resulted in 6,786,352 cases and 199,024 deaths in the United States.* Health care personnel (HCP) are essential workers at risk for exposure to patients or infectious materials (1). The impact of COVID-19 on U.S. HCP was first described using national case surveillance data in April 2020 (2). Since then, the number of reported HCP with COVID-19 has increased tenfold. This update describes demographic characteristics, underlying medical conditions, hospitalizations, and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, stratified by vital status, among 100,570 HCP with COVID-19 reported to CDC during February 12-July 16, 2020. HCP occupation type and job setting are newly reported. HCP status was available for 571,708 (22%) of 2,633,585 cases reported to CDC. Most HCP with COVID-19 were female (79%), aged 16-44 years (57%), not hospitalized (92%), and lacked all 10 underlying medical conditions specified on the case report form† (56%). Of HCP with COVID-19, 641 died. Compared with nonfatal COVID-19 HCP cases, a higher percentage of fatal cases occurred in males (38% versus 22%), persons aged ≥65 years (44% versus 4%), non-Hispanic Asians (Asians) (20% versus 9%), non-Hispanic Blacks (Blacks) (32% versus 25%), and persons with any of the 10 underlying medical conditions specified on the case report form (92% versus 41%). From a subset of jurisdictions reporting occupation type or job setting for HCP with COVID-19, nurses were the most frequently identified single occupation type (30%), and nursing and residential care facilities were the most common job setting (67%). Ensuring access to personal protective equipment (PPE) and training, and practices such as universal use of face masks at work, wearing masks in the community, and observing social distancing remain critical strategies to protect HCP and those they serve.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Occupational Diseases/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Population Surveillance , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Occupational Diseases/mortality , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Risk Factors , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
8.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 69(15): 472-476, 2020 Apr 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-52245

ABSTRACT

On February 26, 2020, the first U.S. case of community-acquired coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was confirmed in a patient hospitalized in Solano County, California (1). The patient was initially evaluated at hospital A on February 15; at that time, COVID-19 was not suspected, as the patient denied travel or contact with symptomatic persons. During a 4-day hospitalization, the patient was managed with standard precautions and underwent multiple aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs), including nebulizer treatments, bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP) ventilation, endotracheal intubation, and bronchoscopy. Several days after the patient's transfer to hospital B, a real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (real-time RT-PCR) test for SARS-CoV-2 returned positive. Among 121 hospital A health care personnel (HCP) who were exposed to the patient, 43 (35.5%) developed symptoms during the 14 days after exposure and were tested for SARS-CoV-2; three had positive test results and were among the first known cases of probable occupational transmission of SARS-CoV-2 to HCP in the United States. Little is known about specific risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 transmission in health care settings. To better characterize and compare exposures among HCP who did and did not develop COVID-19, standardized interviews were conducted with 37 hospital A HCP who were tested for SARS-CoV-2, including the three who had positive test results. Performing physical examinations and exposure to the patient during nebulizer treatments were more common among HCP with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 than among those without COVID-19; HCP with COVID-19 also had exposures of longer duration to the patient. Because transmission-based precautions were not in use, no HCP wore personal protective equipment (PPE) recommended for COVID-19 patient care during contact with the index patient. Health care facilities should emphasize early recognition and isolation of patients with possible COVID-19 and use of recommended PPE to minimize unprotected, high-risk HCP exposures and protect the health care workforce.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional , Personnel, Hospital , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Adult , COVID-19 , California/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Occupational Exposure , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment/statistics & numerical data , Personnel, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL