Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2022 Jul 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1948237

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Residents of nursing homes experience disproportionate morbidity and mortality related to COVID-19 and were prioritized for vaccine introduction. We evaluated COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infections among nursing home residents. METHODS: We used a retrospective cohort of 4,315 nursing home residents during December 14, 2020 - November 9, 2021. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate hazard ratios comparing residents with a completed vaccination series to unvaccinated among those with and without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (identified using positive SARS-CoV-2 tests and/or diagnosis codes), by vaccine product, and by period (before and during Delta variant predominance). VE was estimated as one minus the hazard ratio times 100%. RESULTS: Overall adjusted VE for the completed vaccination series was 58% (95%CI: 44%, 69%) among residents without a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. During the pre-Delta period, the VE within 150 days of receipt of the second dose of Pfizer-BioNTech (67%, 95%CI: 40%, 82%) and Moderna (75%, 95%CI: 32%, 91%) was similar. During the Delta period, VE measured >150 days after the second dose was 33% (95%CI: -2%, 56%) for Pfizer-BioNTech and 77% (95%CI: 48%, 91%) for Moderna. Rates of infection were 78% lower (95%CI: 67%, 85%) among residents with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and completed vaccination series compared to unvaccinated residents without a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccines were effective in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infections among nursing home residents and history of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection provided additional protection. Maintaining high coverage of recommended doses of COVID-19 vaccines remains a critical tool for preventing infections in nursing homes.

2.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2022 Jul 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1922210

ABSTRACT

We described bacterial/fungal co-infections and antibiotic resistant infections among inpatients diagnosed with COVID-19 and compared findings with inpatients diagnosed with influenza-like-illness. Less than 10% of COVID-19 inpatients had bacterial/fungal co-infection. Longer lengths of stay, critical care stay, and mechanical ventilation contribute to increased incidence of hospital-onset infections among COVID-19 inpatients.

3.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-311600

ABSTRACT

Background: Cruise travel contributed to SARS-CoV-2 transmission when there were relatively few cases in the United States. By March 14, 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued a No Sail Order suspending U.S. cruise operations;the last U.S. passenger ship docked on April 16.Methods: We analysed SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks on cruises in U.S. waters or carrying U.S. citizens and used regression models to compare voyage characteristics. We used compartmental models to simulate the potential impact of four interventions (screening for COVID-19 symptoms;viral testing on two days and isolation of positive persons;reduction of passengers by 40%, crew by 20%, and port visits to one) for 7-day and 14-day voyages.Findings: During January 19–April 16, 2020, 89 voyages on 70 ships had known SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks;16 ships had recurrent outbreaks. There were 1,669 RT-PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections and 29 confirmed deaths. Longer voyages were associated with more cases (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 1·10, 95% CI: 1·03-1·17, p < 0.0001). Mathematical models estimated a 70-78% reduction in transmission for 7-day vs. 14-day voyages. On 7-day voyages, the most effective interventions were reducing the number of individuals onboard (43-49% reduction in total infections) and testing passengers and crew (42-43% reduction in total infections). Results were similar for 14-day voyages. All four interventions reduced transmission by 80%, but no single intervention or combination eliminated transmission.Interpretation: SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks on cruises were common during January-April 2020. Despite all interventions modelled, cruise travel still poses a significant SARS-CoV-2 transmission risk.Funding: CDC.Declaration of Interests: The authors have no interests to declare.Ethics Approval Statement: This activity was reviewed by CDC and was conducted consistent with applicable federal law and CDC policy (See e.g., 45 C.F.R. part 46, 21 C.F.R. part 56;42 U.S.C. §241(d);5 U.S.C. §552a;44 U.S.C. §3501 et seq.). Passenger-level data were deidentified and analysed at the voyage-level.

4.
Clin Infect Dis ; 74(3): 490-497, 2022 02 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1684539

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Cruise travel contributed to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission when there were relatively few cases in the United States. By 14 March 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued a No Sail Order suspending US cruise operations; the last US passenger ship docked on 16 April. METHODS: We analyzed SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks on cruises in US waters or carrying US citizens and used regression models to compare voyage characteristics. We used compartmental models to simulate the potential impact of 4 interventions (screening for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms; viral testing on 2 days and isolation of positive persons; reduction of passengers by 40%, crew by 20%, and reducing port visits to 1) for 7-day and 14-day voyages. RESULTS: During 19 January to 16 April 2020, 89 voyages on 70 ships had known SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks; 16 ships had recurrent outbreaks. There were 1669 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections and 29 confirmed deaths. Longer voyages were associated with more cases (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 1.10, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03-1.17, P < .003). Mathematical models showed that 7-day voyages had about 70% fewer cases than 14-day voyages. On 7-day voyages, the most effective interventions were reducing the number of individuals onboard (43.3% reduction in total infections) and testing passengers and crew (42% reduction in total infections). All four interventions reduced transmission by 80.1%, but no single intervention or combination eliminated transmission. Results were similar for 14-day voyages. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks on cruises were common during January-April 2020. Despite all interventions modeled, cruise travel still poses a significant SARS-CoV-2 transmission risk.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Disease Outbreaks , Humans , Public Health , SARS-CoV-2 , Ships , Travel , United States/epidemiology
5.
BMC Med ; 19(1): 94, 2021 04 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1388761

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Balancing the control of SARS-CoV-2 transmission with the resumption of travel is a global priority. Current recommendations include mitigation measures before, during, and after travel. Pre- and post-travel strategies including symptom monitoring, antigen or nucleic acid amplification testing, and quarantine can be combined in multiple ways considering different trade-offs in feasibility, adherence, effectiveness, cost, and adverse consequences. METHODS: We used a mathematical model to analyze the expected effectiveness of symptom monitoring, testing, and quarantine under different estimates of the infectious period, test-positivity relative to time of infection, and test sensitivity to reduce the risk of transmission from infected travelers during and after travel. RESULTS: If infection occurs 0-7 days prior to travel, immediate isolation following symptom onset prior to or during travel reduces risk of transmission while traveling by 30-35%. Pre-departure testing can further reduce risk, with testing closer to the time of travel being optimal even if test sensitivity is lower than an earlier test. For example, testing on the day of departure can reduce risk while traveling by 44-72%. For transmission risk after travel with infection time up to 7 days prior to arrival at the destination, isolation based on symptom monitoring reduced introduction risk at the destination by 42-56%. A 14-day quarantine after arrival, without symptom monitoring or testing, can reduce post-travel risk by 96-100% on its own. However, a shorter quarantine of 7 days combined with symptom monitoring and a test on day 5-6 after arrival is also effective (97--100%) at reducing introduction risk and is less burdensome, which may improve adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Quarantine is an effective measure to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission risk from travelers and can be enhanced by the addition of symptom monitoring and testing. Optimal test timing depends on the effectiveness of quarantine: with low adherence or no quarantine, optimal test timing is close to the time of arrival; with effective quarantine, testing a few days later optimizes sensitivity to detect those infected immediately before or while traveling. These measures can complement recommendations such as social distancing, using masks, and hand hygiene, to further reduce risk during and after travel.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Quarantine/methods , Travel-Related Illness , COVID-19/diagnosis , Disease Transmission, Infectious/prevention & control , Humans , Models, Statistical , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification
6.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 8(6): ofab236, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1297404

ABSTRACT

We described antibiotic use among inpatients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Most COVID-19 inpatients received antibiotic therapy. We also described hospital-wide antibiotic use during 2020 compared with 2019, stratified by hospital COVID-19 burden. Although total antibiotic use decreased between years, certain antibiotic use increased with higher COVID-19 burden.

7.
Clin Infect Dis ; 74(3): 490-497, 2022 02 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1225625

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Cruise travel contributed to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission when there were relatively few cases in the United States. By 14 March 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued a No Sail Order suspending US cruise operations; the last US passenger ship docked on 16 April. METHODS: We analyzed SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks on cruises in US waters or carrying US citizens and used regression models to compare voyage characteristics. We used compartmental models to simulate the potential impact of 4 interventions (screening for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms; viral testing on 2 days and isolation of positive persons; reduction of passengers by 40%, crew by 20%, and reducing port visits to 1) for 7-day and 14-day voyages. RESULTS: During 19 January to 16 April 2020, 89 voyages on 70 ships had known SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks; 16 ships had recurrent outbreaks. There were 1669 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections and 29 confirmed deaths. Longer voyages were associated with more cases (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 1.10, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03-1.17, P < .003). Mathematical models showed that 7-day voyages had about 70% fewer cases than 14-day voyages. On 7-day voyages, the most effective interventions were reducing the number of individuals onboard (43.3% reduction in total infections) and testing passengers and crew (42% reduction in total infections). All four interventions reduced transmission by 80.1%, but no single intervention or combination eliminated transmission. Results were similar for 14-day voyages. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks on cruises were common during January-April 2020. Despite all interventions modeled, cruise travel still poses a significant SARS-CoV-2 transmission risk.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Disease Outbreaks , Humans , Public Health , SARS-CoV-2 , Ships , Travel , United States/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL