Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
J Int AIDS Soc ; 24 Suppl 6: e25809, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1487488

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Providing more convenient and patient-centred options for service delivery is a priority within global HIV programmes. These efforts improve patient satisfaction and retention and free up time for providers to focus on new HIV diagnoses or severe illness. Recently, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic precipitated expanded eligibility criteria for these differentiated service delivery (DSD) models to decongest clinics and protect patients and healthcare workers. This has resulted in dramatic scale-up of DSD for antiretroviral therapy, cotrimoxazole and tuberculosis (TB) preventive treatment. While TB treatment among people living with HIV (PLHIV) has traditionally involved frequent, facility-based management, TB treatment can also be adapted within DSD models. Such adaptations could include electronic tools to ensure appropriate clinical management, treatment support, adherence counselling and adverse event (AE) monitoring. In this commentary, we outline considerations for DSD of TB treatment among PLHIV, building on best practices from global DSD model implementation for HIV service delivery. DISCUSSION: In operationalizing TB treatment in DSD models, we consider the following: what activity is being done, when or how often it takes place, where it takes place, by whom and for whom. We discuss considerations for various programme elements including TB screening and diagnosis; medication dispensing; patient education, counselling and support; clinical management and monitoring; and reporting and recording. General approaches include multi-month dispensing for TB medications during intensive and continuation phases of treatment and standardized virtual adherence and AE monitoring. Lastly, we provide operational examples of TB treatment delivery through DSD models, including a conceptual model and an early implementation experience from Zambia. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 has catalysed the rapid expansion of differentiated patient-centred service delivery for PLHIV. Expanding DSD models to include TB treatment can capitalize on existing platforms, while providing high-quality, routine treatment, follow-up and patient education and empowerment.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , HIV Infections , Tuberculosis , HIV Infections/diagnosis , HIV Infections/drug therapy , Health Personnel , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Tuberculosis/diagnosis , Tuberculosis/drug therapy
2.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 27(12): 2999-3008, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1485010

ABSTRACT

Outcomes and costs of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) contact tracing are limited. During March-May 2020, we constructed transmission chains from 184 index cases and 1,499 contacts in Salt Lake County, Utah, USA, to assess outcomes and estimate staff time and salaries. We estimated 1,102 staff hours and $29,234 spent investigating index cases and contacts. Among contacts, 374 (25%) had COVID-19; secondary case detection rate was ≈31% among first-generation contacts, ≈16% among second- and third-generation contacts, and ≈12% among fourth-, fifth-, and sixth-generation contacts. At initial interview, 51% (187/370) of contacts were COVID-19-positive; 35% (98/277) became positive during 14-day quarantine. Median time from symptom onset to investigation was 7 days for index cases and 4 days for first-generation contacts. Contact tracing reduced the number of cases between contact generations and time between symptom onset and investigation but required substantial resources. Our findings can help jurisdictions allocate resources for contact tracing.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Contact Tracing , Humans , Quarantine , SARS-CoV-2 , Utah/epidemiology
3.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(7): 1805-1813, 2021 10 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1455252

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The evidence base for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is nascent. We sought to characterize SARS-CoV-2 transmission within US households and estimate the household secondary infection rate (SIR) to inform strategies to reduce transmission. METHODS: We recruited patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and their household contacts in Utah and Wisconsin during 22 March 2020-25 April 2020. We interviewed patients and all household contacts to obtain demographics and medical histories. At the initial household visit, 14 days later, and when a household contact became newly symptomatic, we collected respiratory swabs from patients and household contacts for testing by SARS-CoV-2 real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) and sera for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies testing by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). We estimated SIR and odds ratios (ORs) to assess risk factors for secondary infection, defined by a positive rRT-PCR or ELISA test. RESULTS: Thirty-two (55%) of 58 households secondary infection among household contacts. The SIR was 29% (n = 55/188; 95% confidence interval [CI], 23%-36%) overall, 42% among children (aged <18 years) of the COVID-19 patient and 33% among spouses/partners. Household contacts to COVID-19 patients with immunocompromised conditions and household contacts who themselves had diabetes mellitus had increased odds of infection with ORs 15.9 (95% CI, 2.4-106.9) and 7.1 (95% CI: 1.2-42.5), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We found substantial evidence of secondary infections among household contacts. People with COVID-19, particularly those with immunocompromising conditions or those with household contacts with diabetes, should take care to promptly self-isolate to prevent household transmission.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Child , Contact Tracing , Family Characteristics , Humans , United States/epidemiology , Wisconsin
4.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(7): e1841-e1849, 2021 10 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1455251

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Improved understanding of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spectrum of disease is essential for clinical and public health interventions. There are limited data on mild or asymptomatic infections, but recognition of these individuals is key as they contribute to viral transmission. We describe the symptom profiles from individuals with mild or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: From 22 March to 22 April 2020 in Wisconsin and Utah, we enrolled and prospectively observed 198 household contacts exposed to SARS-CoV-2. We collected and tested nasopharyngeal specimens by real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) 2 or more times during a 14-day period. Contacts completed daily symptom diaries. We characterized symptom profiles on the date of first positive rRT-PCR test and described progression of symptoms over time. RESULTS: We identified 47 contacts, median age 24 (3-75) years, with detectable SARS-CoV-2 by rRT-PCR. The most commonly reported symptoms on the day of first positive rRT-PCR test were upper respiratory (n = 32 [68%]) and neurologic (n = 30 [64%]); fever was not commonly reported (n = 9 [19%]). Eight (17%) individuals were asymptomatic at the date of first positive rRT-PCR collection; 2 (4%) had preceding symptoms that resolved and 6 (13%) subsequently developed symptoms. Children less frequently reported lower respiratory symptoms (21%, 60%, and 69% for <18, 18-49, and ≥50 years of age, respectively; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Household contacts with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection reported mild symptoms. When assessed at a single timepoint, several contacts appeared to have asymptomatic infection; however, over time all developed symptoms. These findings are important to inform infection control, contact tracing, and community mitigation strategies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Child , Contact Tracing , Fever , Humans , Prospective Studies , Young Adult
5.
Ann Epidemiol ; 59: 50-55, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1198609

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Contact tracing is intended to reduce the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but it is difficult to conduct among people who live in congregate settings, including people experiencing homelessness (PEH). This analysis compares person-based contact tracing among two populations in Salt Lake County, Utah, from March-May 2020. METHODS: All laboratory-confirmed positive cases among PEH (n = 169) and documented in Utah's surveillance system were included in this analysis. The general population comparison group (n = 163) were systematically selected from all laboratory-confirmed cases identified during the same period. RESULTS: Ninety-three PEH cases (55%) were interviewed compared to 163 (100%) cases among the general population (P < .0001). PEH were more likely to be lost to follow-up at end of isolation (14.2%) versus the general population (0%; P-value < .0001) and provided fewer contacts per case (0.3) than the general population (4.7) (P-value < .0001). Contacts of PEH were more often unreachable (13.0% vs. 7.1%; P-value < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that contact tracing among PEH should include a location-based approach, along with a person-based approach when resources allow, due to challenges in identifying, locating, and reaching cases among PEH and their contacts through person-based contact tracing efforts alone.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Homeless Persons , Contact Tracing , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Utah/epidemiology
6.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 69(37): 1319-1323, 2020 Sep 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-782536

ABSTRACT

Reports suggest that children aged ≥10 years can efficiently transmit SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (1,2). However, limited data are available on SARS-CoV-2 transmission from young children, particularly in child care settings (3). To better understand transmission from young children, contact tracing data collected from three COVID-19 outbreaks in child care facilities in Salt Lake County, Utah, during April 1-July 10, 2020, were retrospectively reviewed to explore attack rates and transmission patterns. A total of 184 persons, including 110 (60%) children had a known epidemiologic link to one of these three facilities. Among these persons, 31 confirmed COVID-19 cases occurred; 13 (42%) in children. Among pediatric patients with facility-associated confirmed COVID-19, all had mild or no symptoms. Twelve children acquired COVID-19 in child care facilities. Transmission was documented from these children to at least 12 (26%) of 46 nonfacility contacts (confirmed or probable cases). One parent was hospitalized. Transmission was observed from two of three children with confirmed, asymptomatic COVID-19. Detailed contact tracing data show that children can play a role in transmission from child care settings to household contacts. Having SARS-CoV-2 testing available, timely results, and testing of contacts of persons with COVID-19 in child care settings regardless of symptoms can help prevent transmission. CDC guidance for child care programs recommends the use of face masks, particularly among staff members, especially when children are too young to wear masks, along with hand hygiene, frequent cleaning and disinfecting of high-touch surfaces, and staying home when ill to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission (4).


Subject(s)
Child Day Care Centers , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Disease Outbreaks , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Child , Child, Preschool , Cities/epidemiology , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Contact Tracing , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Female , Humans , Infant , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Utah/epidemiology , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL