Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 16 de 16
Filter
2.
PLoS One ; 16(7): e0253664, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1311283

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound worldwide impact. Vietnam, a lower middle-income country with limited resources, has successfully slowed this pandemic. The objectives of this report are to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the research activities of an ongoing hypertension trial using a storytelling intervention in Vietnam. METHODS: Data were collected in a mixed-methods study among 86 patients and 10 health care workers participating in a clinical trial designed to improve hypertension control. Several questions related to the impact of COVID-19 on patient's daily activities and adherence to the study interventions were included in the follow-up visits. A focus group discussion was conducted among health care workers to discuss the impact of COVID-19 on research related activities. RESULTS: Fewer patients in the intervention group reported that they faced difficulties in adhering to prescribed study interventions, wanted to receive a call from a dedicated hotline, or have a visit from a community health worker as compared with those in the comparison group. Most study patients are willing to participate in future health research studies. When asked about the potential use of mobile phones in health research studies, fewer patients in the intervention group felt comfortable using a mobile phone for the delivery of intervention and interviews compared with those in the comparison condition. Community health workers shared that they visited patient's homes more often than previously due to the pandemic and health care workers had to perform more virus containment activities without a corresponding increase in ancillary staff. CONCLUSIONS: Both patients and health care workers in Vietnam faced difficulties in adhering to recommended trial interventions and procedures. Multiple approaches for intervention delivery and data collection are needed to overcome these difficulties during future health crises and enhance the implementation of future research studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov. Registration number: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03590691 (registration date July 17, 2018).


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Clinical Laboratory Services/standards , Clinical Trials as Topic , Medical Laboratory Personnel/psychology , Patients/psychology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Clinical Laboratory Services/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Hypertension/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Compliance , Vietnam
3.
J Cancer Res Ther ; 17(2): 551-555, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1268377

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID 19) is a zoonotic viral infection that originated in Wuhan, China, in December 2019. It was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization shortly thereafter. This pandemic is going to have a lasting impact on the functioning of pathology laboratories due to the frequent handling of potentially infectious samples by the laboratory personnel. To deal with this unprecedented situation, various national and international guidelines have been put forward outlining the precautions to be taken during sample processing from a potentially infectious patient. PURPOSE: Most of these guidelines are centered around laboratories that are a part of designated COVID 19 hospitals. However, proper protocols need to be in place in all laboratories, irrespective of whether they are a part of COVID 19 hospital or not as this would greatly reduce the risk of exposure of laboratory/hospital personnel. As part of a laboratory associated with a rural cancer hospital which is not a dedicated COVID 19 hospital, we aim to present our institute's experience in handling pathology specimens during the COVID 19 era. CONCLUSION: We hope this will address the concerns of small to medium sized laboratories and help them build an effective strategy required for protecting the laboratory personnel from risk of exposure and also ensure smooth and optimum functioning of the laboratory services.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Clinical Laboratory Services/organization & administration , Infection Control/organization & administration , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Tertiary Care Centers/organization & administration , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19/virology , Cancer Care Facilities/organization & administration , Cancer Care Facilities/standards , Clinical Laboratory Services/standards , Decontamination/methods , Decontamination/standards , Developing Countries , Disinfection/methods , Disinfection/organization & administration , Disinfection/standards , Hospitals, Rural/organization & administration , Hospitals, Rural/standards , Humans , India/epidemiology , Infection Control/standards , Medical Laboratory Personnel/organization & administration , Medical Laboratory Personnel/standards , Pandemics/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Specimen Handling/standards , Tertiary Care Centers/standards , Workforce/organization & administration , Workforce/standards
4.
J Clin Lab Anal ; 35(6): e23804, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1241506

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Before public health emergencies became a major challenge worldwide, the scope of laboratory management was only related to developing, maintaining, improving, and sustaining the quality of accurate laboratory results for improved clinical outcomes. Indeed, quality management is an especially important aspect and has achieved great milestones during the development of clinical laboratories. CURRENT STATUS: However, since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to be a threat worldwide, previous management mode inside the separate laboratory could not cater to the demand of the COVID-19 public health emergency. Among emerging new issues, the prominent challenges during the period of COVID-19 pandemic are rapid-launched laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) for urgent clinical application, rapid expansion of testing capabilities, laboratory medicine resources, and personnel shortages. These related issues are now impacting on clinical laboratory and need to be effectively addressed. CONCLUSION: Different from traditional views of laboratory medicine management that focus on separate laboratories, present clinical laboratory management must be multidimensional mode which should consider consolidation of the efficient network of regional clinical laboratories and reasonable planning of laboratories resources from the view of overall strategy. Based on relevant research and our experience, in this review, we retrospect the history trajectory of laboratory medicine management, and also, we provide existing and other feasible recommended management strategies for laboratory medicine in future.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing , COVID-19/diagnosis , Clinical Laboratory Services , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/standards , Laboratories , Clinical Laboratory Services/organization & administration , Clinical Laboratory Services/standards , Humans , Laboratories/organization & administration , Laboratories/standards , Point-of-Care Testing , Public Health , Quality Assurance, Health Care
6.
Am J Clin Pathol ; 155(1): 55-63, 2021 Jan 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1024082

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Millions of biospecimens will be collected during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. As learned from severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), proper biospecimen handling is necessary to prevent laboratory-related infections. METHODS: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and World Health Organization severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) interim biosafety guidelines continue to be updated. Presented here are additional considerations intended to complement the interim guidance. These considerations draw on prior SARS recommendations and recent COVID-19 reports. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA has been detected in various biospecimen types; however, studies are needed to determine whether viral load indicates viable virus. Throughout the pandemic, biospecimens will be collected for various purposes from COVID-19 known and suspected cases, as well as presymptomatic and asymptomatic individuals. Current data suggest the pandemic start may be as early as October 2019; thus, all biospecimens collected since could be considered potentially infectious. CONCLUSIONS: All entities handling these biospecimens should do risk assessments in accordance with institutional policies and adhere to any guidance provided. The scientific community has a responsibility to safely handle and maintain all biospecimens collected during the COVID-19 pandemic. Soon, it will be imperative to convene expert working groups to address the current and long-term storage and use of these biospecimens. Ideally, worldwide guidelines will be established to protect the personnel handling these biospecimens and communities at large.


Subject(s)
Biological Specimen Banks , COVID-19/prevention & control , Clinical Laboratory Services , Infection Control/methods , Occupational Diseases/prevention & control , Specimen Handling/methods , Biological Specimen Banks/standards , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Clinical Laboratory Services/standards , Global Health , Humans , Infection Control/standards , Pandemics , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Specimen Handling/standards , Viral Load
7.
Ann Biol Clin (Paris) ; 78(6): 609-616, 2020 Dec 01.
Article in French | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-999891

ABSTRACT

Confronted with the COVID-19 crisis, healthcare professionals have had to tackle an epidemic crisis of a huge magnitude for which they were not prepared. Medical laboratories have been on the front line, from collecting samples to performing the analysis required to diagnose this new pathology. Responding to the needs and to the urgency of the situation, the authorities relied on the network of private laboratories. In France, private laboratory medicine represents 70% of overall activity, and with a network of more than 4,000 local laboratories, private laboratory medicine has been the cornerstone of the « screen-trace-isolate ¼ strategy. This article gives feedback from private laboratory medicine professionals, directly involved in the reorganization carried out at the pre-analytical, analytical and post-analytical stages, during the crisis from March to October 2020.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Clinical Laboratory Services/organization & administration , Pandemics , Private Sector/organization & administration , Specimen Handling/standards , COVID-19/diagnosis , Clinical Laboratory Services/standards , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/instrumentation , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/standards , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Equipment Safety/methods , Equipment Safety/standards , France/epidemiology , Hospital Units/organization & administration , Humans , Intersectoral Collaboration , Medical Staff/organization & administration , Medical Staff/standards , Patient Safety/standards , Pre-Analytical Phase/methods , Pre-Analytical Phase/standards , Private Sector/standards , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Specimen Handling/methods
9.
J Clin Microbiol ; 58(11)2020 10 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-889842

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has placed the clinical laboratory and testing for SARS-CoV-2 front and center in the worldwide discussion of how to end the outbreak. Clinical laboratories have responded by developing, validating, and implementing a variety of molecular and serologic assays to test for SARS-CoV-2 infection. This has played an essential role in identifying cases, informing isolation decisions, and helping to curb the spread of disease. However, as the demand for COVID-19 testing has increased, laboratory professionals have faced a growing list of challenges, uncertainties, and, in some situations, controversy, as they have attempted to balance the need for increasing test capacity with maintaining a high-quality laboratory operation. The emergence of this new viral pathogen has raised unique diagnostic questions for which there have not always been straightforward answers. In this commentary, the author addresses several areas of current debate, including (i) the role of molecular assays in defining the duration of isolation/quarantine, (ii) whether the PCR cycle threshold value should be included on patient reports, (iii) if specimen pooling and testing by research staff represent acceptable solutions to expand screening, and (iv) whether testing a large percentage of the population is feasible and represents a viable strategy to end the pandemic.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Betacoronavirus/genetics , Betacoronavirus/immunology , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Services/standards , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Humans , Mass Screening , Medical Laboratory Personnel/standards , Molecular Diagnostic Techniques/standards , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Polymerase Chain Reaction/standards , Quarantine/standards , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity , Specimen Handling
10.
Ann Biol Clin (Paris) ; 78(4): 363-382, 2020 08 01.
Article in French | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-709296

ABSTRACT

The point-of-care tests (POCT) are subject to accreditation. A national inventory survey provides a synthesis of knowledge. The survey distributed 31 questions in 2019. 147 responses were received (75% biologists, 49% CHU, 42% CHG). Only 20.41% are accredited ISO22870, the majority for <50% of the medical departments; 70% say they are going there at the end of 2019 or in 2020. The maps are unknown for 32% (EBMD) and 82% (TROD). Visibility is poor with: medical establishment committee (40%), IT department (31%). Connection is necessary for 87-95% depending on the criterion (QC, authorizations, etc.) and 66% of answers highlight that less than 50% of connexion is effective. The major advantage is the delay of the result (62.5%), then the relationship with the health teams (33.3%). The disadvantages: difficulty of the quality approach (45%), cost of tests (34.3%). Human resource requirements are identified for technicians (82%) and biologists (76%). The multiplicity of sites, devices and operators means that it is difficult to set up and maintain. Biology outside the laboratories, under biological responsibility, must meet a rigorous imperative quality approach.


Subject(s)
Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Global Health , Laboratories/statistics & numerical data , Laboratories/standards , Point-of-Care Testing , Accreditation , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Services/standards , Clinical Laboratory Services/statistics & numerical data , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/standards , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/statistics & numerical data , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , France/epidemiology , Global Health/standards , Global Health/statistics & numerical data , History, 21st Century , Humans , Internationality , Laboratory Proficiency Testing/standards , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Point-of-Care Systems/standards , Point-of-Care Systems/statistics & numerical data , Point-of-Care Testing/organization & administration , Point-of-Care Testing/standards , Point-of-Care Testing/statistics & numerical data , Quality Assurance, Health Care/organization & administration , Surveys and Questionnaires
11.
Am J Clin Pathol ; 154(4): 475-478, 2020 09 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-705105

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: At the onset of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic in the United States, testing was limited to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-developed reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction assay. The urgent and massive demand for testing prompted swift development of assays to detect SARS-CoV-2. The objective of this study was to assess the accuracy of these newly developed tests. METHODS: The American Proficiency Institute sent 2 test samples to 346 clinical laboratories in order to assess the accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 assays. The positive sample, containing 5,175 viral copies/mL, was fully extractable with SARS-CoV-2 viral capsid protein and RNA. The negative sample, with 3,951 viral copies/mL, contained recombinant virus particles with sequences for targeting human RNAase P gene sequences. RESULTS: Of the laboratories submitting results, 97.4% (302/310) correctly detected the virus when present and 98.3% (296/301) correctly indicated when the virus was not present. Among incorrect results reported in this proficiency challenge, 76.9% (10/13) were likely related to clerical error. This accounts for 1.6% (10/611) of all reported results. CONCLUSIONS: Overall performance in this SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection challenge was excellent, providing confidence in the results of these new molecular tests and assurance for the clinical and public health decisions based on these test results.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Clinical Laboratory Services/standards , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/standards , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Laboratory Proficiency Testing , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Betacoronavirus/genetics , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Humans , Pandemics , RNA, Viral/analysis , RNA, Viral/isolation & purification , SARS-CoV-2 , United States
13.
Arch Pathol Lab Med ; 144(11): 1321-1324, 2020 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-639712

ABSTRACT

CONTEXT.­: Declining reimbursement shifts hospital laboratories from system assets to cost centers. This has resulted in increased outsourcing of laboratory services, which can jeopardize a hospital systems' ability to respond to a health care crisis. OBJECTIVES.­: To demonstrate that investment in a core laboratory serving an academic medical center equipped a regional health system to respond to the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. DESIGN.­: COVID-19 diagnostic testing data were analyzed. Volumes were evaluated by result date (March 16, 2020-May 6, 2020), and the average of received-to-verified turnaround time was calculated and compared for in-house and send-out testing, and different in-house testing methodologies. RESULTS.­: Daily viral diagnostic testing capacity increased by greater than 3000% (from 21 tests per day to 658 tests per day). Total viral diagnostic testing reported by the core laboratory increased by 128 times during 22 days of test method validation and 826 times during the analysis period, while average turnaround time per day for send-out testing increased from 3.7 days to 21 days. Decreased overall average turnaround time was observed at the core laboratory (0.45 days) versus send-out testing (7.63 days) (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS.­: Investment in a core laboratory provided the health system with the necessary expertise and resources to mount a robust response to the pandemic. Local access to testing allowed rapid triage of patients and conservation of scarce personal protective equipment (PPE). In addition, the core laboratory was able to support regional health departments and several hospitals outside of the system.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Laboratories, Hospital , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Academic Medical Centers/standards , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Betacoronavirus/physiology , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Services/standards , Clinical Laboratory Services/statistics & numerical data , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Delivery of Health Care/standards , Delivery of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Reproducibility of Results , SARS-CoV-2
15.
Ann Biol Clin (Paris) ; 78(3): 269-277, 2020 06 01.
Article in French | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-608309

ABSTRACT

The SARS-CoV-2 virus is responsible for an epidemic disease called COVID-19, which was initially evidenced in Wuhan, China, and spread very rapidly in China and around the world. In France, the first isolated case seems now to be reported in December 2019, stage 3 of the COVID-19 epidemic was triggered on March 14th, the start of the planned containment exit from May 11th. Healthcare services have faced a large influx of patients who may be beyond their capacity to receive and care, particularly in the Large-East and Ile-de-France regions. Some patients show an evolution of the disease never observed before with other coronaviruses and develop in a few days a very important inflammatory reaction, which can lead to death of patients. A working group of the French Society of Clinical Biology (SFBC) was set up with the objective of providing updated information on the current status of the biological prescriptions (focusing on biochemistry ones) and their evolution during the epidemic, and of analyzing the biological parameters associated with comorbidities and patient evolution in order to link biological results with medical events. The expanded working group covers all sectors of medical biology in France and extends to the French-speaking world: hospital sectors (CHU and CH, Army Training Hospitals) and the private sector opening a field of view on the biological situation in establishments for dependent elderly, social establishments and clinical medical institutions. The purpose of this article is the presentation of this working group and its immediate and future actions.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Biochemistry/organization & administration , Biomarkers/analysis , Clinical Laboratory Services/organization & administration , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Societies, Scientific/organization & administration , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , Biochemistry/standards , Biomarkers/blood , COVID-19 , Clinical Laboratory Services/standards , Community Networks/organization & administration , Community Networks/standards , Community Networks/trends , Coronavirus Infections/blood , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , France/epidemiology , History, 21st Century , Humans , Intersectoral Collaboration , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Professional Practice/organization & administration , Professional Practice/standards , Professional Practice/trends , SARS-CoV-2 , Societies, Scientific/standards , Videoconferencing/organization & administration , Videoconferencing/standards
16.
J Am Soc Cytopathol ; 9(3): 202-211, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-15970

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The infection has predominantly respiratory transmission and is transmitted through large droplets or aerosols, and less commonly by contact with infected surfaces or fomites. The alarming spread of the infection and the severe clinical disease that it may cause have led to the widespread institution of social distancing measures. Because of repeated exposure to potentially infectious patients and specimens, health care and laboratory personnel are particularly susceptible to contract COVID-19. This review paper provides an assessment of the current state of knowledge about the disease and its pathology, and the potential presence of the virus in cytology specimens. It also discusses the measures that cytology laboratories can take to function during the pandemic, and minimize the risk to their personnel, trainees, and pathologists. In addition, it explores potential means to continue to educate trainees during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Cell Biology/trends , Clinical Laboratory Services/standards , Coronavirus Infections/pathology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/pathology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Specimen Handling/standards , Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , COVID-19 , Clinical Laboratory Services/trends , Containment of Biohazards/standards , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Humans , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Safety , Specimen Handling/trends
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL