Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 14 de 14
Filter
1.
EuropePMC; 2022.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-337209

ABSTRACT

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic demands reliable prognostic models for estimating the risk of long COVID. We developed and validated a prediction model to estimate the probability of known common long COVID symptoms at least 60 days after acute COVID-19. Methods: The prognostic model was built based on data from a multicentre prospective Swiss cohort study. Included were adult patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between February and December 2020 and treated as outpatients, at ward or intensive/intermediate care unit. Perceived long-term health impairments, including reduced exercise tolerance/reduced resilience, shortness of breath and/or tiredness (REST), were assessed after a follow-up time between 60 and 425 days. Predictors were selected out of twelve candidate predictors based on three reliable methods, namely the augmented backward elimination (ABE) method, the adaptive best-subset selection (ABESS) method and model-based recursive partitioning (MBRP) approach. Model performance was assessed with the scaled Brier score, concordance c statistic and calibration plot. The final prognostic model was determined based on best model performance. Results: In total 2799 patients were included in the analysis, of which 1588 patients were in the derivation cohort and 1211 patients in the validation cohort. The REST prevalence was similar between the cohorts with 21.6% (n = 343) in the derivation cohort and 22.1% (n = 268) in the validation data. The same predictors were selected with the ABE and ABESS variable selection method. The final prognostic model was based on the ABE and ABESS selected predictors. The corresponding model discrimination in the validation cohort was 0.78 (95% CI: 0.75 to 0.81), calibration slope was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.78 to 1.06) and calibration intercept was -0.06 (95% CI: -0.22 to 0.09). A patient’s probability of developing REST symptoms \hat{y} = exp(S) / (1 + exp(S)) can be calculated with S = −4.947 + 0.349 × number of acute COVID-19 symptoms + 0.339 × severity of acute COVID-19 ward + 1.737 × severity of acute COVID-19 intensive or intermediate care + 0.128 × feeling of stress at home + 0.013 × age at presentation + 0.352 × female sex + 0.346 × presence of at least one cardiovascular risk factor − 0.097 × responsible for childcare/family member + 0.022 × body mass index, with feeling of stress at home ranges from 1 (no stress) to 10 (maximum stress) and responsibility for childcare/family member ranges from 1 (no responsibility/not applicable) to 6 (full responsibility). Conclusion: The proposed model is reliable to identify COVID-19 infected patients at risk for REST symptoms. Before implementing the prognostic model in daily clinical practice, the conduct of an impact study is recommended.

2.
In Vivo ; 36(3): 1316-1324, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1818958

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/AIM: To assess the diagnostic performance of reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), low-dose chest computed tomography (CT), and serological testing, alone and in combinations, as well as routine inflammatory markers in patients evaluated for COVID-19 during the first wave in early 2020. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data of all patients who were admitted to the emergency department due to fever and/or respiratory symptoms. CT scans were rated using the COVID-19 Reporting and Data System (CO-RADS) suspicion score. True disease status (COVID-19 - positive vs. negative) was adjudicated by two independent clinicians. Receiver-operating characteristic curves and areas under the curves were calculated for inflammatory markers. Sensitivities and specificities were calculated for RT-PCR, CT, and serology alone, as well as the combinations of RT-PCR+CT, RT-PCR+serology, CT+serology, and all three modalities. RESULTS: Of 221 patients with a median age of 72 years, 113 were classified as COVID-19 positive. Among 180 patients from which data on CT and RT-PCR were available, RT-PCR had the highest sensitivity to detect COVID-19 (0.87; 95%CI=0.78-0.93). Notably, the addition of CT in the analysis increased sensitivity to 0.89 (95%CI=0.8-0.94), but lowered specificity from 1 (95%CI=0.96-1) to 0.9 (95%CI=0.83-0.95). The combination of RT-PCR, CT and serology (n=60 patients with complete dataset) yielded a sensitivity of 0.83 (95%CI=0.61-0.94) and specificity of 0.86 (95%CI=0.72-0.93). CONCLUSION: RT-PCR was the best single test in patients evaluated for COVID-19. Conversely, the routine performance of chest CT adds little sensitivity and decreases specificity.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Aged , COVID-19/diagnosis , Hospitalization , Hospitals , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Sensitivity and Specificity
3.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2022 Jan 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1816031

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The burden of long-term symptoms (i.e. long-COVID) in patients after mild COVID-19 is debated. Within a cohort of healthcare workers (HCW), frequency and risk factors for symptoms compatible with long-COVID are assessed. METHODS: Participants answered baseline (August/September 2020) and weekly questionnaires on SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) results and acute disease symptoms. In January 2021, SARS-CoV-2 serology was performed; in March, symptoms compatible with long-COVID (including psychometric scores) were asked and compared between HCW with positive NPS, seropositive HCW without positive NPS (presumable a-/pauci-symptomatic infections), and negative controls. Also, the effect of time since diagnosis and quantitative anti-S was evaluated. Poisson regression was used to identify risk factors for symptom occurrence. RESULTS: Of 3'334 HCW (median 41 years; 80% female), 556 (17%) had a positive NPS and 228 (7%) were only seropositive. HCW with positive NPS more frequently reported ≥1 symptom compared to controls (73%vs.52%, p<0.001); seropositive HCW without positive NPS did not score higher than controls (58%vs.52%, p=0.13), although impaired taste/olfaction (16%vs.6%, p<0.001) and hair loss (17%vs.10%, p=0.004) were more common. Exhaustion/burnout was reported by 24% of negative controls. Many symptoms remained elevated in those diagnosed >6 months ago; anti-S titers correlated with high symptom scores. Acute viral symptoms in weekly questionnaires best predicted long-COVID symptoms. Physical activity at baseline was negatively associated with neurocognitive impairment and fatigue scores. CONCLUSIONS: Seropositive HCW without positive NPS are only mildly affected by long-COVID. Exhaustion/burnout is common, even in non-infected HCW. Physical activity might be protective against neurocognitive impairment/fatigue symptoms after COVID-19.

4.
Journal of the American College of Cardiology (JACC) ; 79(9):2070-2070, 2022.
Article in English | Academic Search Complete | ID: covidwho-1751301
5.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control ; 11(1): 27, 2022 02 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1673927

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is insufficient evidence regarding the role of respirators in the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We analysed the impact of filtering facepiece class 2 (FFP2) versus surgical masks on the risk of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition among Swiss healthcare workers (HCW). METHODS: Our prospective multicentre cohort enrolled HCW from June to August 2020. Participants were asked about COVID-19 risk exposures/behaviours, including preferentially worn mask type when caring for COVID-19 patients outside of aerosol-generating procedures. The impact of FFP2 on (1) self-reported SARS-CoV-2-positive nasopharyngeal PCR/rapid antigen tests captured during weekly surveys, and (2) SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion between baseline and January/February 2021 was assessed. RESULTS: We enrolled 3259 participants from nine healthcare institutions, whereof 716 (22%) preferentially used FFP2. Among these, 81/716 (11%) reported a SARS-CoV-2-positive swab, compared to 352/2543 (14%) surgical mask users; seroconversion was documented in 85/656 (13%) FFP2 and 426/2255 (19%) surgical mask users. Adjusted for baseline characteristics, COVID-19 exposure, and risk behaviour, FFP2 use was non-significantly associated with decreased risk for SARS-CoV-2-positive swab (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.8, 95% CI 0.6-1.0) and seroconversion (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.7, 95% CI 0.5-1.0); household exposure was the strongest risk factor (aHR 10.1, 95% CI 7.5-13.5; aOR 5.0, 95% CI 3.9-6.5). In subgroup analysis, FFP2 use was clearly protective among those with frequent (> 20 patients) COVID-19 exposure (aHR 0.7 for positive swab, 95% CI 0.5-0.8; aOR 0.6 for seroconversion, 95% CI 0.4-1.0). CONCLUSIONS: Respirators compared to surgical masks may convey additional protection from SARS-CoV-2 for HCW with frequent exposure to COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Personnel , Masks , Respiratory Protective Devices , Adolescent , Adult , Aerosols , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Seroconversion , Switzerland , Young Adult
6.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-296078

ABSTRACT

Background The burden of long-term symptoms (i.e. long-COVID) in patients after mild COVID-19 is debated. Within a cohort of healthcare workers (HCW), frequency and risk factors for symptoms compatible with long-COVID are assessed. Methods Participants answered baseline (August/September 2020) and weekly questionnaires on SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) results and acute disease symptoms. In January 2021, SARS-CoV-2 serology was performed;in March, symptoms compatible with long-COVID (including psychometric scores) were asked and compared between HCW with positive NPS, seropositive HCW without positive NPS (presumable a-/pauci-symptomatic infections), and negative controls. Also, the effect of time since diagnosis and quantitative anti-S was evaluated. Poisson regression was used to identify risk factors for symptom occurrence. Results Of 3’334 HCW (median 41 years;80% female), 556 (17%) had a positive NPS and 228 (7%) were only seropositive. HCW with positive NPS more frequently reported ≥1 symptom compared to controls (73% vs .52%, p<0.001);seropositive HCW without positive NPS did not score higher than controls (58%vs.52%, p=0.13), although impaired taste/olfaction (16% vs .6%, p<0.001) and hair loss (17% vs .10%, p=0.004) were more common. Exhaustion/burnout was reported by 24% of negative controls. Many symptoms remained elevated in those diagnosed >6 months ago;anti-S titers correlated with high symptom scores. Acute viral symptoms in weekly questionnaires best predicted long-COVID symptoms. Physical activity at baseline was negatively associated with neurocognitive impairment and fatigue scores. Conclusions Seropositive HCW without positive NPS are only mildly affected by long-COVID. Exhaustion/burnout is common, even in non-infected HCW. Physical activity might be protective against neurocognitive impairment/fatigue symptoms after COVID-19. summary In this prospective healthcare worker cohort, participants with SARS-CoV-2-positive nasopharyngeal swab were most likely to report long-COVID symptoms, whereas seropositive participants without positive swab were only mildly affected. Physical activity at baseline was negatively associated with neurocognitive impairment and fatigue.

7.
2021.
Preprint in English | Other preprints | ID: ppcovidwho-295180

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT Objectives In a prospective healthcare worker (HCW) cohort, we assessed the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection according to baseline serostatus. Methods Baseline serologies were performed among HCW from 23 Swiss healthcare institutions between June and September 2020, before the second COVID-19 wave. Participants answered weekly electronic questionnaires covering information about nasopharyngeal swabs (PCR/rapid antigen tests) and symptoms compatible with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Screening of symptomatic staff by nasopharyngeal swabs was routinely performed in participating facilities. We compared numbers of positive nasopharyngeal tests and occurrence of COVID-19 symptoms between HCW with and without anti-nucleocapsid antibodies. Results A total of 4’818 HCW participated, whereof 144 (3%) were seropositive at baseline. We analysed 107’820 questionnaires with a median follow-up of 7.9 months. Median number of answered questionnaires was similar (24 vs . 23 per person, P=0.83) between those with and without positive baseline serology. Among 2’713 HCW with ≥1 SARS-CoV-2 test during follow-up, 3/67 (4.5%) seropositive individuals reported a positive result (one of whom asymptomatic), compared to 547/2646 (20.7%) seronegative participants, 12 of whom asymptomatic (risk ratio [RR] 0.22;95% confidence interval [CI] 0.07 to 0.66). Seropositive HCWs less frequently reported impaired olfaction/taste (6/144, 4.2% vs. 588/4674, 12.6%, RR 0.33, 95%-CI: 0.15-0.73), chills (19/144, 13.2% vs. 1040/4674, 22.3%, RR 0.59, 95%-CI: 0.39-0.90), and limb/muscle pain (28/144, 19.4% vs. 1335/4674, 28.6%, RR 0.68 95%-CI: 0.49-0.95). Impaired olfaction/taste and limb/muscle pain also discriminated best between positive and negative SARS-CoV-2 results. Conclusions Having SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleocapsid antibodies provides almost 80% protection against SARS-CoV-2 re-infection for a period of at least eight months.

8.
2021.
Preprint in English | Other preprints | ID: ppcovidwho-294881

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT Background There is insufficient evidence regarding the role of respirators in the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We analysed the impact of filtering facepiece class 2 (FFP2) vs . surgical masks on the risk of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition among Swiss healthcare workers (HCW). Methods Our prospective multicentre cohort enrolled patient-facing HCWs from June to August 2020. Participants were asked about COVID-19 risk exposures/behaviours, including preferred mask type when caring for COVID-19 patients outside of aerosol-generating procedures (AGP). For those performing AGPs, we asked whether they used FFP2 irrespective of the patient’s COVID-19 status (i.e. universal use). The impact of FFP2 on i) self-reported SARS-CoV-2-positive nasopharyngeal PCR/rapid antigen tests captured during weekly surveys, and ii) SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion between baseline and January/February 2021 was assessed. Results We enrolled 3’259 participants from nine healthcare institutions, whereof 716 (22%) preferentially used FFP2 respirators. Among these, 81/716 (11%) reported a SARS-CoV-2-positive swab, compared to 352/2543 (14%) surgical mask users (median follow-up 242 days);seroconversion was documented in 85/656 (13%) FFP2 and 426/2255 (19%) surgical mask users. Adjusted for baseline characteristics, COVID-19 exposure, and risk behaviour, FFP2 use was non-significantly associated with a decreased risk for SARS-CoV-2-positive swab (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0·8, 95% CI 0·6-1·0, p=0·052) and seroconversion (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0·7, 95% CI 0·5-1·0, p=0·053);household exposure was the strongest risk factor (aHR for positive swab 10·1, p<0·001;aOR for seroconversion 5·0, p<0·001). In subgroup analysis, FFP2 use was clearly protective among those with frequent (>20 patients) COVID-19 exposure (aHR 0·7, p<0·001;aOR 0·6, p=0·035). Universal FFP2 use during AGPs showed no protective effect (aHR 1·1, p=0·7;aOR 0·9, p=0·53). Conclusion Respirators compared to surgical masks may convey additional protection from SARS-CoV-2 for HCW with frequent exposure to COVID-19 patients. Funding Swiss National Sciences Foundation, Federal Office of Public Health, Cantonal Health Department St.Gallen

9.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 100(41): e27478, 2021 Oct 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1501203

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged institutions' diagnostic processes worldwide. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of an artificial intelligence (AI)-based software tool that automatically evaluates chest computed tomography for findings of suspected COVID-19.Two groups were retrospectively evaluated for COVID-19-associated ground glass opacities of the lungs (group A: real-time polymerase chain reaction positive COVID patients, n = 108; group B: asymptomatic pre-operative group, n = 88). The performance of an AI-based software assessment tool for detection of COVID-associated abnormalities was compared with human evaluation based on COVID-19 reporting and data system (CO-RADS) scores performed by 3 readers.All evaluated variables of the AI-based assessment showed significant differences between the 2 groups (P < .01). The inter-reader reliability of CO-RADS scoring was 0.87. The CO-RADS scores were substantially higher in group A (mean 4.28) than group B (mean 1.50). The difference between CO-RADS scoring and AI assessment was statistically significant for all variables but showed good correlation with the clinical context of the CO-RADS score. AI allowed to predict COVID positive cases with an accuracy of 0.94.The evaluated AI-based algorithm detects COVID-19-associated findings with high sensitivity and may support radiologic workflows during the pandemic.


Subject(s)
Artificial Intelligence/standards , COVID-19/diagnosis , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/standards , Feasibility Studies , Female , Humans , Lung/pathology , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
10.
BMC Med ; 19(1): 270, 2021 10 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1496171

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In a prospective healthcare worker (HCW) cohort, we assessed the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection according to baseline serostatus. METHODS: Baseline serologies were performed among HCW from 23 Swiss healthcare institutions between June and September 2020, before the second COVID-19 wave. Participants answered weekly electronic questionnaires covering information about nasopharyngeal swabs (PCR/rapid antigen tests) and symptoms compatible with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Screening of symptomatic staff by nasopharyngeal swabs was routinely performed in participating facilities. We compared numbers of positive nasopharyngeal tests and occurrence of COVID-19 symptoms between HCW with and without anti-nucleocapsid antibodies. RESULTS: A total of 4812 HCW participated, wherein 144 (3%) were seropositive at baseline. We analyzed 107,807 questionnaires with a median follow-up of 7.9 months. Median number of answered questionnaires was similar (24 vs. 23 per person, P = 0.83) between those with and without positive baseline serology. Among 2712 HCW with ≥ 1 SARS-CoV-2 test during follow-up, 3/67 (4.5%) seropositive individuals reported a positive result (one of whom asymptomatic), compared to 547/2645 (20.7%) seronegative participants, 12 of whom asymptomatic (risk ratio [RR] 0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.07 to 0.66). Seropositive HCWs less frequently reported impaired olfaction/taste (6/144, 4.2% vs. 588/4674, 12.6%, RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.15-0.73), chills (19/144, 13.2% vs. 1040/4674, 22.3%, RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.39-0.90), and limb/muscle pain (28/144, 19.4% vs. 1335/4674, 28.6%, RR 0.68 95% CI 0.49-0.95). Impaired olfaction/taste and limb/muscle pain also discriminated best between positive and negative SARS-CoV-2 results. CONCLUSIONS: Having SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleocapsid antibodies provides almost 80% protection against SARS-CoV-2 re-infection for a period of at least 8 months.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Cohort Studies , Health Personnel , Humans , Prospective Studies , Sentinel Surveillance
11.
EClinicalMedicine ; 40: 101099, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1385454

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Since the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there has been increasing urgency to identify pathophysiological characteristics leading to severe clinical course in patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Human leukocyte antigen alleles (HLA) have been suggested as potential genetic host factors that affect individual immune response to SARS-CoV-2. We sought to evaluate this hypothesis by conducting a multicenter study using HLA sequencing. METHODS: We analyzed the association between COVID-19 severity and HLAs in 435 individuals from Germany (n = 135), Spain (n = 133), Switzerland (n = 20) and the United States (n = 147), who had been enrolled from March 2020 to August 2020. This study included patients older than 18 years, diagnosed with COVID-19 and representing the full spectrum of the disease. Finally, we tested our results by meta-analysing data from prior genome-wide association studies (GWAS). FINDINGS: We describe a potential association of HLA-C*04:01 with severe clinical course of COVID-19. Carriers of HLA-C*04:01 had twice the risk of intubation when infected with SARS-CoV-2 (risk ratio 1.5 [95% CI 1.1-2.1], odds ratio 3.5 [95% CI 1.9-6.6], adjusted p-value = 0.0074). These findings are based on data from four countries and corroborated by independent results from GWAS. Our findings are biologically plausible, as HLA-C*04:01 has fewer predicted bindings sites for relevant SARS-CoV-2 peptides compared to other HLA alleles. INTERPRETATION: HLA-C*04:01 carrier state is associated with severe clinical course in SARS-CoV-2. Our findings suggest that HLA class I alleles have a relevant role in immune defense against SARS-CoV-2. FUNDING: Funded by Roche Sequencing Solutions, Inc.

12.
J Perioper Pract ; : 17504589211024405, 2021 Aug 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1341440

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic challenges the recommendations for patients' preoperative assessment for preventing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 transmission and COVID-19-associated postoperative complications and morbidities. PURPOSE: To evaluate the contribution of chest computed tomography for preoperatively assessing patients who are not suspected of being infected with COVID-19 at the time of referral. METHODS: Candidates for emergency surgery screened via chest computed tomography from 8 to 27 April 2020 were retrospectively evaluated. Computed tomography images were analysed for the presence of COVID-19-associated intrapulmonary changes. When applicable, laboratory and recorded clinical symptoms were extracted. RESULTS: Eighty-eight patients underwent preoperative chest computed tomography; 24% were rated as moderately suspicious and 11% as highly suspicious on computed tomography. Subsequent reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) was performed for seven patients, all of whom tested negative for COVID-19. Seven patients showed COVID-19-associated clinical symptoms, and most were classified as being mildly to moderately severe as per the clinical classification grading system. Only one case was severe. Four cases underwent RT-PCR with negative results. CONCLUSION: In a cohort without clinical suspicion of COVID-19 infection upon referral, preoperative computed tomography during the COVID-19 pandemic can yield a high suspicion of infection, even if the patient lacks clinical symptoms and is RT-PCR-negative. No recommendations can be made based on our results but contribute to the debate.

13.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 27(9): 1336-1344, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1233398

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Protecting healthcare workers (HCWs) from coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) is critical to preserve the functioning of healthcare systems. We therefore assessed seroprevalence and identified risk factors for severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) seropositivity in this population. METHODS: Between 22 June 22 and 15 August 2020, HCWs from institutions in northern/eastern Switzerland were screened for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. We recorded baseline characteristics, non-occupational and occupational risk factors. We used pairwise tests of associations and multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with seropositivity. RESULTS: Among 4664 HCWs from 23 healthcare facilities, 139 (3%) were seropositive. Non-occupational exposures independently associated with seropositivity were contact with a COVID-19-positive household (adjusted OR 59, 95% CI 33-106), stay in a COVID-19 hotspot (aOR 2.3, 95% CI 1.2-4.2) and male sex (aOR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1-3.1). Blood group 0 vs. non-0 (aOR 0.5, 95% CI 0.3-0.8), active smoking (aOR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.7), living with children <12 years (aOR 0.3, 95% CI 0.2-0.6) and being a physician (aOR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1-0.5) were associated with decreased risk. Other occupational risk factors were close contact to COVID-19 patients (aOR 2.7, 95% CI 1.4-5.4), exposure to COVID-19-positive co-workers (aOR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1-2.9), poor knowledge of standard hygiene precautions (aOR 1.9, 95% CI 1.2-2.9) and frequent visits to the hospital canteen (aOR 2.3, 95% CI 1.4-3.8). DISCUSSION: Living with COVID-19-positive households showed the strongest association with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity. We identified several potentially modifiable work-related risk factors, which might allow mitigation of the COVID-19 risk among HCWs. The lower risk among those living with children, even after correction for multiple confounders, is remarkable and merits further study.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/metabolism , COVID-19/epidemiology , Occupational Diseases/virology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/immunology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Personnel , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Occupational Diseases/epidemiology , Occupational Diseases/immunology , Risk Factors , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Sex Characteristics , Socioeconomic Factors , Switzerland/epidemiology , Young Adult
14.
Korean J Radiol ; 22(6): 994-1004, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1123770

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To extract pulmonary and cardiovascular metrics from chest CTs of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) using a fully automated deep learning-based approach and assess their potential to predict patient management. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All initial chest CTs of patients who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 at our emergency department between March 25 and April 25, 2020, were identified (n = 120). Three patient management groups were defined: group 1 (outpatient), group 2 (general ward), and group 3 (intensive care unit [ICU]). Multiple pulmonary and cardiovascular metrics were extracted from the chest CT images using deep learning. Additionally, six laboratory findings indicating inflammation and cellular damage were considered. Differences in CT metrics, laboratory findings, and demographics between the patient management groups were assessed. The potential of these parameters to predict patients' needs for intensive care (yes/no) was analyzed using logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic curves. Internal and external validity were assessed using 109 independent chest CT scans. RESULTS: While demographic parameters alone (sex and age) were not sufficient to predict ICU management status, both CT metrics alone (including both pulmonary and cardiovascular metrics; area under the curve [AUC] = 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.79-0.97) and laboratory findings alone (C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase, white blood cell count, and albumin; AUC = 0.86; 95% CI = 0.77-0.94) were good classifiers. Excellent performance was achieved by a combination of demographic parameters, CT metrics, and laboratory findings (AUC = 0.91; 95% CI = 0.85-0.98). Application of a model that combined both pulmonary CT metrics and demographic parameters on a dataset from another hospital indicated its external validity (AUC = 0.77; 95% CI = 0.66-0.88). CONCLUSION: Chest CT of patients with COVID-19 contains valuable information that can be accessed using automated image analysis. These metrics are useful for the prediction of patient management.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Deep Learning , Thorax/diagnostic imaging , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Area Under Curve , Automation , COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , COVID-19/virology , Female , Humans , Logistic Models , Lung/physiopathology , Male , Middle Aged , ROC Curve , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL