Appropriateness of routine pre-endoscopic SARS-CoV-2 screening with RT-PCR in asymptomatic individuals and its impact on delayed diagnosis.

AIMS: Endoscopy units are considered to be at an increased risk of infection by SARS-CoV-2. Our aim is to assess the correlation between pre-endoscopic screening with reverse-transcription-polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR) in asymptomatic individuals scheduled for elective endoscopy and the epidemiological data published by the local Health Administration. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Observational retrospective study collecting the results of our screening strategy spanning June/2020-June/2021, the effective potential growth (EPG), an index measuring the outbreak risk, and the 7 and 14-day cumulative incidence (CI). Indication, delay and the findings of the endoscopic examinations were registered for RT-PCR positive patients. RESULTS: A total of 5808 tests were performed, yielding 125 positive results (2.15%). All positive tests occurred in weeks of high/very high risk (EPG>100) with the highest monthly rate being 9.36%, recorded in January/2021. A significant correlation (rho=0.796; p<0.001) between weekly positive rates and EPG was observed, and a significantly lower weekly number of positive tests was recorded when EPG<100. Planning the screening strategy one week ahead according to EPG>100 would have avoided up to 826 tests with only one positive result to account for. One hundred and thirteen individuals tested positive and 89 endoscopies were delayed. The most common findings were colon polyps, colorectal cancer and gastric metaplasia. Oncological diagnosis was delayed 50±3 days. CONCLUSIONS: No positive RT-PCR test were registered out of high-risk periods. Epidemiological administrative data in the preceding two weeks showed a significant correlation with screening results and could be useful to plan pre-endoscopic screening and avoid unnecessary tests.

Recommendations of the Spanish Group on Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis on the importance, screening and vaccination in inflammatory bowel disease patients. / Recomendaciones del Grupo Español de Trabajo en Enfermedad de Crohn y Colitis Ulcerosa sobre la importancia, el cribado y la vacunación en pacientes con enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal.

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) may require different immunosuppressive treatments throughout their illness. It is essential to assess the immunization status of patients at diagnosis or, if this is not possible, at least before the beginning of immunosuppressive therapy and, subsequently, administering the appropriate vaccines. Therefore, the aim of this work is to establish clear and concise recommendations on vaccination in patients with IBD in the different settings of our clinical practice including vaccination in children, during pregnancy, breastfeeding or on trips. This consensus document emphasises the differences between inactivated and attenuated vaccines and the different degrees of immunosuppression and correlates them with the administration of both mandatory and optional vaccines recommended to our patients with IBD. Finally, as a summary, 17 recommendations are established based on the available scientific evidence and expert opinion. A multidisciplinary team with extensive experience in IBD and vaccination, made up of specialists in gastroenterology, paediatrics, nursing and pharmacy, has participated in the preparation of these recommendations of the Spanish Working Group on Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in colorectal cancer diagnosis and presentation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with a decrease in the colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence, due to the disruption of screening programmes and a downscaling of endoscopic activity. The endpoint of this study is to evaluate if the pandemic has led to a change in CRC diagnostic rate and presentation in our population. METHODS: Multicenter retrospective study of all public hospitals of the Aragon region, attending a population of 1,329,391 inhabitants. We have analyzed all CRC cases detected and endoscopic units workload the year before the pandemic onset (1 March 2019-14 March 2020) and the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic (15 March 2020-28 February 2021). RESULTS: The diagnosis of CRC cases dropped a 38.9% (888 pre-pandemic vs 542 pandemic cases). Also, there were 30.3% less colonoscopies performed (24,860 vs 17,337). During the pandemic, CRC cases were diagnosed in older patients (72.4±12.2 vs 71.2±12.1 years, p=0.021), and had more frequently severe complications at diagnosis (14.6% vs 10.4%, p=0.019). Moreover, most CRC cases were diagnosed in symptomatic patients (81.4%). No significant difference was found in CRC stage at diagnosis, although stage IV was more frequent (20.1% vs 16.1%). Most hospitals reported a lower workload of endoscopic activity. CONCLUSION: CRC diagnostic rate was lower after the onset of the pandemic. CRC was diagnosed in older patients and was more frequently associated with complications. After the onset of the pandemic, the endoscopic units did not reach the workload performed previously.

Estudio descriptivo del primer mes de situación de pandemia por COVID-19 en una unidad de diálisis hospitalaria

Los pacientes en diálisis constituyen un grupo de riesgo de sufrir infección por SARS-CoV-2 y posiblemente de tener más complicaciones. Los profesionales sanitarios se han enfrentado a una pandemia sin precedentes y de la que había poca información. El objetivo de este estudio ha sido describir la experiencia del primer mes viviendo la pandemia generada por SARS-CoV-2 en una unidad hospitalaria de hemodiálisis de Madrid, tanto en relación a los pacientes como al personal sanitario. Así mismo, se pretende reflejar las actuaciones sanitarias durante dicho mes. El total de pacientes en la unidad fue de 90, realizándose la determinación PCR a todos, 37 (41,1%) dieron positivo a COVID-19, de estos 22 (59,4%) eran sintomáticos y 15 (40,5%) eran asintomáticos. De los pacientes positivos, 16 (43,2%) precisaron ingreso hospitalario y 6 (16,2%) fallecieron. Los pacientes fallecidos eran de mayor edad que los supervivientes. La muestra de profesionales sanitarios fue de 44, de los que 15 (34%) presentaron sintomatología. El servicio de Salud Laboral sólo determinó PCR a este grupo, obteniendo 4 profesionales (9%) PCR positivo, sin embargo tras considerar los criterios clínicos/radiológicos un total de 9 profesionales fueron diagnosticados como COVID-19 positivos, requiriendo 1 de ellos ingreso hospitalario. Conclusiones: se detectó una elevada prevalencia de COVID-19 positivo en los pacientes de la unidad de diálisis, donde destaca el elevado número de pacientes asintomáticos detectados mediante cribado PCR al total de los pacientes. Algunos profesionales presentaron algún tipo de sintomatología correspondiente con clínica COVID-19, pero se detectaron pocos casos con PCR positiva.Alternate : Dialysis patients are at risk group for SARS-CoV-2 infection and possibly have more complications. Healthcare professionals have faced an unprecedented pandemic, for which little information existed. The objective of this study was to describe the experience of a Madrid hospital haemodialysis unit during the first month of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, both in relation to patients and healthcare personnel. Likewise, it is intended to report the health actions. The total number of patients in the unit was 90. In all patients, the PCR test was performed. 37 (41.1%) tested positive for COVID-19, of these 22 (59.4%) were symptomatic and 15 (40.5%) were asymptomatic. Of the positive patients, 16 (43.2%) required hospital admission, 6 of whom died (16.2%). The deceased patients were older than the survivors. Health professionals were 44, of whom 15 (34%) had symptoms. The Occupational Health service only performed PCR on the symptomatic group, having 4 professionals (9%) positive PCR. However, after considering the clinical / radiological criteria, 9 professionals were diagnosed as COVID-19 positive, 1 of them requiring hospital admission. Conclusions: A high prevalence of positive COVID-19 was detected in patients in the dialysis unit, highlighting the high number of asymptomatic patients detected by PCR screening. Some healthcare professionals presented some type of symptoms corresponding to the COVID-19 disease, however, few cases were detected with positive PCR.

Screening for strongyloidiasis in Spain in the context of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: Results of a survey on diagnosis and treatment.

INTRODUCTION: The generalization of treatment with dexamethasone or other immunosuppressants in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection may increase the risk of occurrence of severe forms of strongyloidiasis. A nationwide survey was conducted to better understand the diagnostic and therapeutic situation of strongyloidiasis in SARS-CoV-2 co-infected patients in Spain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey was designed and sent to all SEIMC members during February and March 2021. Responses were exported for computer processing to Microsoft Excel 2017 and statistically processed with the free software PSPP. RESULTS: 189 responses were received, of which 121 (64%) were selected for further processing. Eighty-four centers (69.5%) had no specific strongyloidiasis screening protocol. Forty-two centers (34.7%) had serological techniques available in their laboratories and the rest were sent to a reference laboratory. Only 22 centers (18%) screened for strongyloidiasis in SARS-CoV-2 infected patients. A total of 227 cases of strongyloidiasis were diagnosed in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. In four cases patients developed a massive hyperinfestation syndrome leading to the death of one patient. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 has highlighted the need to unify screening and treatment protocols for imported pathologies such as strongyloidiosis. Efforts to disseminate knowledge are needed to ensure that this potentially fatal disease is adequately treated in patients with the highest risk of complications, such as those with COVID-19.

Low-dose chest CT for preoperative screening for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to evaluate the role of chest computed tomography (CT) in complementing reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in asymptomatic candidates for elective surgery in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We prospectively included 464 asymptomatic patients who underwent a triple screening workup for SARS-CoV-2 infection (health questionnaire, RT-PCR, and low-dose chest CT) during the 48 h prior to undergoing elective surgery. A positive RT-PCR and/or CT findings suggestive of COVID-19 (CO-RADS 4/5) were considered diagnostic criteria for SARS-CoV-2 infection. RESULTS: Most patients (64.7%) underwent otorhinolaryngology surgery. No patients had positive RT-PCR results or symptoms suggestive of SARS-CoV-2 in the health questionnaire. Only 22 (4.7%) had signs compatible with lung infection; in 20 of these, the CT findings were atypical or indeterminate for COVID-19 (CO-RADS 2/3) and in 2 they were compatible with COVID-19 pneumonia in resolution. In the immediate postoperative period, no cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection were confirmed. CONCLUSION: In our series of asymptomatic patients, low-dose CT did not add any value to the results of RT-PCR and a health questionnaire in preoperative screening for SARS-CoV-2.

Validation of a duplex PCR technique using the gen E and RNase P for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2.

INTRODUCTION: Reverse transcriptase - polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is the standard technique for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. The World Health Organization recommends the Charité-Berlin protocol for COVID-19 diagnosis, which requires triple PCR, limiting the process capability of laboratories and delaying the results. In order to reduce these limitations, a duplex PCR is validated for the detection of the E and ribonuclease P genes. METHODS: We compared the limit of detection, sensitivity and specificity of the duplex PCR technique (E gene and Rnasa P) against the monoplex standard (E gene) in RNA samples from a SARS-CoV-2 isolate and 88 clinical specimens with previously known results. The repeatability and reproducibility of the threshold cycle values ​​(Ct) were determined in two independent laboratories of the Faculty of Medicine of the Universidad de Antioquia, using different reagents and real time instruments. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the Ct results between both techniques (P = .84). Using the monoplex PCR of E gene as a reference, the interrater reliability analysis showed similarity between the two techniques, with a kappa coefficient of 0.89, the sensitivity and the specificity of duplex PCR were 90% and 87%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Duplex PCR does not affect the sensitivity and specificity reported by the Charité, Berlin protocol, being a useful tool for SARS-CoV-2 screening in clinical samples.

Analysis of patient outcomes after urological surgery during the second and third waves of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in a high incidence area.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze surgical safety through postoperative COVID-19 incidence and mortality at the urology department of a tertiary hospital located in Madrid (Spain). METHODS: Observational, prospective study including all patients undergoing urological surgery from 1st March 2020 to 28th February 2021. According to the hospital organization and local epidemiological situation we delimitate three epidemic waves. A set of screening and protective measures was applied from 4th May onwards. Demographic, baseline, surgical and perioperative variables, as well as postoperative outcomes, were collected. Telephone follow-up was performed at least 3 weeks after hospital discharge. RESULTS: 940 urological surgeries were performed, 12 of them had to be rescheduled due to active or recent SARS-CoV-2 infection identified by the screening protocol. Thirty-one patients developed COVID-19 (3.3% incidence) and 7 died (22.6% mortality). The average time to onset of symptoms was 62.6 days after discharge, being 25 cases attributable to community transmission. The remaining 6 cases, due to in-hospital transmission, had worse outcomes. Five of them were identified during the first wave, especially when no preoperative PCR was obtained. In contrast, during the second and third waves, fewer and milder cases were diagnosed, with just 1 in-hospital transmission among 857 urological patients. CONCLUSIONS: After implementing complete protective measures, postoperative in-hospital COVID-19 cases almost disappeared, even during the second and third waves. Most of the cases were due to community transmission and thus driven by the general epidemiological situation. While hospitals follow recommendations to avoid COVID-19 infection, urological surgery remains safe and can be maintained.

Hepatitis B and C screening in hospitalised patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection

Aims To evaluate the results of a hepatitis B and C screening program in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Method Transversal prospective study conducted in two Spanish hospitals. Patients admitted from March 1st to December 31st 2020 with a diagnosis of COVID-19 were tested for markers of hepatitis B (HBsAg, anti-HBc) and C (anti-HCV, HCV RNA) infection. Results In this period, 4662 patients with COVID-19 were admitted to our centers: 56.3% were male, median age was 76 (0–104) years. Data regarding HBV infection was available in 2915 (62.5%) patients;253 (8.75%) were anti-HBc + and 11 (0.38%) HBsAg+. From these, 4 patients did not have a previous diagnosis of hepatitis B, 7 received corticosteroids and one received prophylaxis. There was one HBV reactivation. Anti-HCV were available in 2895 (62%) patients;24 (0.83%) were positive. From these, 13 patients had a previous hepatitis C diagnosis: 10 patients had been treated with SVR, one achieved spontaneous cure and 2 did not receive treatment. From the 11 previously unknown anti-VHC + patients, 10 had a negative HCV RNA. Overall, only 3 (0.10%) patients tested RNA HCV + . However, none received HCV treatment (2 older than 90 years with comorbidities, 1 died from COVID-19). Conclusion Screening of hepatitis C infection in hospitalized COVID-19 patients seems less useful than expected. The low prevalence of active infection after antiviral treatments and the high age of our population limit the detection of potential candidates for treatment. HBV screening should be aimed to prevent reactivation under immunosuppressive treatments. Resumen Objetivo Evaluar el resultado del cribado de hepatitis B y C en pacientes ingresados con COVID-19. Pacientes y métodos Estudio transversal, prospectivo, realizado en dos hospitales españoles de tercer nivel. Se estudiaron marcadores de hepatitis B (HBsAg, anti-HBc) y C (anti-VHC, ARN VHC) a todos los pacientes hospitalizados con COVID-19 del 1 de marzo al 31 de diciembre de 2020. Resultados En este periodo ingresaron 4662 pacientes con COVID-19: 56,3% fueron varones, la edad mediana fue 76 (0–104) años. Se realizó serología de hepatitis B a 2915 (62,5%) pacientes;253 (8,75%) presentaban anti-HBc + y 11 (0,38%) HBsAg+. De los 11 pacientes, 4 desconocían el diagnóstico, 7 recibieron esteroides y uno recibió profilaxis. Hubo un caso de reactivación del VHB. Se determinaron anticuerpos anti-VHC a 2895 (62%) pacientes;24 (0,83%) fueron positivos. De ellos, 13 pacientes estaban diagnosticados: 10 habían recibido tratamiento, uno se había curado espontáneamente y dos no habían sido tratados. De los 11 restantes, 10 tenían ARN VHC indetectable. En total, sólo 3 (0,10%) pacientes tenían carga viral detectable. Sin embargo, ninguno recibió tratamiento (2 > 90 años con comorbilidades, 1 falleció por COVID-19). Conclusiones El cribado de hepatitis C en pacientes ingresados por COVID-19 en nuestro medio ha mostrado menor utilidad de la esperada. La baja prevalencia de infección activa tras los tratamientos antivirales y la alta edad mediana de nuestra población limitan la detección de potenciales candidatos a tratamiento. El cribado de hepatitis B debería dirigirse a prevenir la reactivación en pacientes que precisen tratamientos inmunosupresores.

[Abdominal aortic aneurysm ultrasound screening in men with risk factors in Primary Care]. / Cribado mediante ecografía de aneurisma de aorta abdominal en varones con factores de riesgo en Atención Primaria.

OBJECTIVE: to describe the implantation of ultrasound screening for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm (AAA) in our healthcare district in men from 65 to 79 years of age who have had an identifiable risk factor for developing AAA, such as smoking or a history thereof, hypertension, family history of aneurysms, aneurysms in other locations and clinical atherosclerosis, acute myocardial infarction, intermittent claudication, or stroke. Analyse the performance of said screening. SETTING: Primary Care. PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: 656 patients were screened, representing 40% of the target population of 1,658 patients. The remaining part of the target population could not be screened because of the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. 608 ultrasound examinations were performed. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: coverage of the screening programme, prevalence of abdominal aortic aneurysms, prevalence of smoking and other risk factors in patients with/without aneurysms. RESULTS: 19 patients with ectatic aorta (25-29mm) and 11 with abdominal aortic aneurysms (1.81%) were found. 5 were active smokers (45%, compared to 20% in the entire sample) and 6 were former smokers. None of the aneurysm patients were non-smokers. 7 of them were hypertensive. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of aneurysms in our sample was 2.6%, which was lower than expected. The wide use of ultrasound and its progressive generalisation in the Primary Care setting should lead to a decrease in the number of undiagnosed AAA.

Post-polypectomy colonoscopy surveillance: Can we improve the diagnostic yield?

Although adenomas and serrated polyps are the preneoplastic lesions of colorectal cancer, only few of them will eventually progress to cancer. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the present and future of post-polypectomy colonoscopy surveillance. Post-polypectomy surveillance guidelines have recently been updated and all share the aim towards more selective and less frequent surveillance. We have examined these current guidelines and compared the recommendations of each of them. To improve the diagnostic yield of post-polypectomy surveillance it is important to find predictors of metachronous polyps that better identify high-risk individuals of developing advanced neoplasia. For this reason, we have also conducted a literature review of the molecular biomarkers of metachronous advanced colorectal polyps. Finally, we have discussed future directions of post-polypectomy surveillance and identified possible strategies to improve the use of endoscopic resources with the COVID-19 pandemic.

Hepatitis B and C screening in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. / Cribado de infección por virus de la hepatitis B y C en pacientes hospitalizados con infección por SARS-CoV-2.

AIMS: To evaluate the results of a hepatitis B and C screening program in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. METHOD: Transversal prospective study conducted in two Spanish hospitals. Patients admitted from March 1st to December 31st 2020 with a diagnosis of COVID-19 were tested for markers of hepatitis B (HBsAg, anti-HBc) and C (anti-HCV, HCV RNA) infection. RESULTS: In this period, 4662 patients with COVID-19 were admitted to our centers: 56.3% were male, median age was 76 (0-104) years. Data regarding HBV infection was available in 2915 (62.5%) patients; 253 (8.75%) were anti-HBc+ and 11 (0.38%) HBsAg+. From these, 4 patients did not have a previous diagnosis of hepatitis B, 7 received corticosteroids and one received prophylaxis. There was one HBV reactivation. Anti-HCV was available in 2895 (62%) patients; 24 (0.83%) were positive. From these, 13 patients had a previous hepatitis C diagnosis: 10 patients had been treated with SVR, one achieved spontaneous cure and 2 did not receive treatment. From the 11 previously unknown anti-VHC+patients, 10 had a negative HCV RNA. Overall, only 3 (0.10%) patients tested RNA HCV+. However, none received HCV treatment (2 older than 90 years with comorbidities, 1 died from COVID-19). CONCLUSION: Screening of hepatitis C infection in hospitalized COVID-19 patients seems less useful than expected. The low prevalence of active infection after antiviral treatments and the high age of our population limit the detection of potential candidates for treatment. HBV screening should be aimed to prevent reactivation under immunosuppressive treatments.

Validation of a duplex PCR technique using the gen E and RNase P for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2. / Validación de una técnica de PCR dúplex usando el gen E y RNasa P para el diagnóstico de SARS-CoV-2.

INTRODUCTION: Reverse transcriptase - polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is the standard technique for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. The World Health Organization recommends the Charité-Berlin protocol for COVID-19 diagnosis, which requires triple PCR, limiting the process capability of laboratories and delaying the results. In order to reduce these limitations, a duplex PCR is validated for the detection of the E and RNase P genes. METHODS: We compared the limit of detection, sensitivity and specificity of the duplex PCR technique (E gene and RNase P) against the monoplex standard (E gene) in RNA samples from a SARS-CoV-2 isolate and 88 clinical specimens with previously known results. The repeatability and reproducibility of the threshold cycle values (Ct) were determined in two independent laboratories of the Faculty of Medicine of the Universidad de Antioquia, using different reagents and real time instruments. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the Ct results between both techniques (p = 0.84). Using the monoplex PCR of E gene as a reference, the interrater reliability analysis showed similarity between the two techniques, with a kappa coefficient of 0.89, the sensitivity and the specificity of duplex PCR were 90% and 87%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Duplex PCR does not affect the sensitivity and specificity reported by the Charité, Berlin protocol, being a useful tool for SARS-CoV-2 screening in clinical samples.

Urological surgery during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Descriptive analysis of the experience in a Urology Department across the pandemic phases. / Cirugía urológica durante la pandemia por SARS-CoV-2. Análisis descriptivo de la experiencia en un Servicio de Urología durante distintas fases epidemiológicas.

INTRODUCTION: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has changed the urological practice around the world. Our objective is to describe the outcomes presented by patients undergoing surgery in the urology department of a tertiary hospital, across the pandemic phases. METHODS: Observational, cohort study including all patients undergoing surgery from March 1 to May 14. According to the hospital organization, we identified three periods: there were no changes during the first two weeks (1st. period), the following seven weeks, when only urgent interventions were carried out after performance of nasopharyngeal swab test (2nd. period), and finally, elective surgery was resumed on May 4, after the implementation of a multidisciplinary screening protocol (3rd. period). Demographic, baseline, surgical and perioperative variables, as well as postoperative outcomes, were obtained in a retrospective (periods 1 and 2) and prospective (period 3) manner. Telephone follow-up was initiated at least 3 weeks after hospital discharge. RESULTS: 103 urological surgeries were performed, and 11 patients were diagnosed with COVID-19, 8 of them within the 1st. PERIOD: The diagnosis was already known in 1 patient, while the other 10 developed the disease in an average of 25 days after the intervention and 16,6 days after discharge. Of seven transplant patients, four got the infection. Three deaths were recorded due to the disease: a 69-year-old woman transplanted and two men over 80 with comorbidities and high anesthetic risk who underwent drainage of retroperitoneal abscess and retrograde intrarenal surgery, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 infection mainly affected renal transplant recipients or elderly patients with high anesthetic risk, during the first 2 weeks of the pandemic. After implementing preoperative PCR tests and a comprehensive screening protocol, cases were substantially reduced, and safe surgical procedures were achieved.

A moment for reflection. Ethical aspects in the pandemic SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 in our clinical practice. / Un momento para la reflexión. Aspectos éticos en la pandemia SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 en nuestra práctica clínica.

The entire world has suffered the devastating action of the SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 pandemic. This is the ideal moment to stop and ask ourselves what happened and how we acted; to reflect on what we have learned not only for similar situations but for all of our clinical practice. This work is an ethical reflection via the clinical experience of professionals dedicated to the care of critical patients in one of the countries most affected by the SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 pandemic in the world. Some of the moral values and categories involved in decision-making in situations of limited resources are analysed, and the need for bioethics to be a part of daily practice is proposed, along with some strategies for doing so, thus facilitating decision-making by the health professional and fair and appropriate care for the patient in situations of particular vulnerability such as those experienced in this health and social crisis.

[High prevalence of asymptomatic COVID-19 in haemodialysis: learning day by day in the first month of the COVID-19 pandemic]. / Alta prevalencia de COVID-19 asintomático en hemodiálisis. Aprendiendo día a día el primer mes de pandemia de COVID-19.

Dialysis patients are a risk group for SARS-CoV-2 infection and possibly further complications, but we have little information. The aim of this paper is to describe the experience of the first month of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in a hospital haemodialysis (HD) unit serving the district of Madrid with the second highest incidence of COVID-19 (almost 1,000 patients in 100,000h). In the form of a diary, we present the actions undertaken, the incidence of COVID-19 in patients and health staff, some clinical characteristics and the results of screening all the patients in the unit. We started with 90 patients on HD: 37 (41.1%) had COVID-19, of whom 17 (45.9%) were diagnosed through symptoms detected in triage or during the session, and 15 (40.5%) through subsequent screening of those who, until that time, had not undergone SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing. Fever was the most frequent symptom, 50% had lymphopenia and 18.4% <95% O2 saturation. Sixteen (43.2%) patients required hospital admission and 6 (16.2%) died. We found a cluster of infection per shift and also among those using public transport. In terms of staff, of the 44 people involved, 15 (34%) had compatible symptoms, 4 (9%) were confirmed as SARS-CoV-2 PCR cases by occupational health, 9 (20%) required some period of sick leave, temporary disability to work (ILT), and 5 were considered likely cases. CONCLUSIONS: We detected a high prevalence of COVID-19 with a high percentage detected by screening; hence the need for proactive diagnosis to stop the pandemic. Most cases are managed as outpatients, however severe symptoms are also appearing and mortality to date is 16.2%. In terms of staff, 20% have required sick leave in relation to COVID-19.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on health care workers in a tertiary care hospital emergency department. / Impacto de la pandemia de COVID-19 en los trabajadores sanitarios del servicio de urgencias de un hospital terciario.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) prevention and control program for health care workers in a tertiary care hospital emergency department (ED). MATERIAL AND METHODS: We recorded the number of confirmed COVID-19 workers in the ED on March 2, 2020, and April 12, 2020. Workers were screened if they had symptoms or were traced as contacts. Variables recorded were age, sex, staff position, work area, and reason for contact. We used the χ2 test to compare ED workers to workers in other areas of the health care system. RESULTS: Of the 3900 health care workers (279 in the ED), 1744 cases (92 in the ED) were included for analysis. A total of 736 workers (52 in the ED) had symptoms, and 151 had positive test results (9 from the ED). Two of the infections in the ED workers (22.2%) were attributed to patient contact and 7 (77.8%) to nonwork-related contact either in the workplace or in the community. The prevalence of COVID-19 among ED workers was 3.2% (9/279). The prevalence among other health system workers was 3.9% (142/3621). The differences in COVID-19 prevalence between the 2 groups was not significant. Nor was there a significant difference in the reasons for contact with the virus between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Based on the prevalence of COVID-19 among ED workers and other health care workers, the reasons for risk of contact with the virus, and the time frame for gathering the data, we conclude that the prevention and control measures in the ED have been effective.

OBJETIVO: Evaluar la efectividad de un programa de prevención y control de infecciones (PCI) por COVID-19 en los trabajadores sanitarios (TS) del servicio de urgencias de un hospital terciario. METODO: Se recogió el número de casos confirmados de COVID-19 en TS del 2 de marzo al 12 de abril de 2020. Los TS fueron evaluados si presentaban síntomas o en el marco de estudios de contactos. Se recogió: edad, sexo, estamento, área trabajo y motivo contacto. Se comparó si existían diferencias entre los TS del SU y los del resto del Departamento de Salud (DS). RESULTADOS: De los 3.900 TS del DS (279 adscritos al SU), se evaluaron 1.744 TS (92 del SU). Presentaron síntomas 736 (52 del SU); 151 fueron confirmados COVID-19 (9 del SU). Dos casos del SU (22,2%) se atribuyeron a la asistencia sanitaria, y 7 (77,8%) a relaciones sociales en el lugar de trabajo o fuera de este. La prevalencia de TS con COVID-19 en el SU fue de un 3,2% (9/279), y en el resto de TS del 3,9% (142/3621). Entre los TS del SU y del resto del DS no hubo diferencias significativas en la prevalencia de afectados, ni entre los motivos de contacto. CONCLUSIONES: Teniendo en cuenta la prevalencia de TS con COVID-19 del SU respecto al resto del DS, el motivo del contacto de riesgo y su distribución en el tiempo, se puede considerar que el PCI orientado al SU fue efectivo.