Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 715
Filter
1.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 42(4): 392-398, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2096426

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The seroprevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) IgG antibody was evaluated among employees of a Veterans Affairs healthcare system to assess potential risk factors for transmission and infection. METHODS: All employees were invited to participate in a questionnaire and serological survey to detect antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 as part of a facility-wide quality improvement and infection prevention initiative regardless of clinical or nonclinical duties. The initiative was conducted from June 8 to July 8, 2020. RESULTS: Of the 2,900 employees, 51% participated in the study, revealing a positive SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence of 4.9% (72 of 1,476; 95% CI, 3.8%-6.1%). There were no statistically significant differences in the presence of antibody based on gender, age, frontline worker status, job title, performance of aerosol-generating procedures, or exposure to known patients with coronavirus infectious disease 2019 (COVID-19) within the hospital. Employees who reported exposure to a known COVID-19 case outside work had a significantly higher seroprevalence at 14.8% (23 of 155) compared to those who did not 3.7% (48 of 1,296; OR, 4.53; 95% CI, 2.67-7.68; P < .0001). Notably, 29% of seropositive employees reported no history of symptoms for SARS-CoV-2 infection. CONCLUSIONS: The seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 among employees was not significantly different among those who provided direct patient care and those who did not, suggesting that facility-wide infection control measures were effective. Employees who reported direct personal contact with COVID-19-positive persons outside work were more likely to have SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Employee exposure to SARS-CoV-2 outside work may introduce infection into hospitals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2 , Seroepidemiologic Studies , United States Department of Veterans Affairs/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/etiology , Female , Humans , Male , Michigan/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Occupational Exposure/statistics & numerical data , Risk Factors , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
2.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 42(4): 388-391, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2096421

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Presenteeism is an expensive and challenging problem in the healthcare industry. In anticipation of the staffing challenges expected with the COVID-19 pandemic, we examined a decade of payroll data for a healthcare workforce. We aimed to determine the effect of seasonal influenza-like illness (ILI) on absences to support COVID-19 staffing plans. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Large academic medical center in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Employees of the academic medical center who were on payroll between the years of 2009 and 2019. METHODS: Biweekly institutional payroll data was evaluated for unscheduled absences as a marker for acute illness-related work absences. Linear regression models, stratified by payroll status (salaried vs hourly employees) were developed for unscheduled absences as a function of local ILI. RESULTS: Both hours worked and unscheduled absences were significantly related to the community prevalence of influenza-like illness in our cohort. These effects were stronger in hourly employees. CONCLUSIONS: Organizations should target their messaging at encouraging salaried staff to stay home when ill.


Subject(s)
Absenteeism , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Presenteeism/statistics & numerical data , Workforce , Academic Medical Centers/organization & administration , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Epidemics , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Minnesota/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies
7.
JAMA ; 328(16): 1639-1641, 2022 10 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2094108

ABSTRACT

This study examines changes in unemployment among US health care workers from January 2015 to April 2022, before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Personnel , Health Workforce , Unemployment , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2 , Unemployment/statistics & numerical data , Health Workforce/statistics & numerical data
8.
JCO Glob Oncol ; 7: 464-473, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2054022

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To evaluate stress levels among the health care workers (HCWs) of the radiation oncology community in Asian countries. METHODS: HCWs of the radiation oncology departments from 29 tertiary cancer care centers of Bangladesh, India, Indonesia and Nepal were studied from May 2020 to July 2020. A total of 758 eligible HCWs were identified. The 7-Item Generalized Anxiety Disorder, 9-Item Patient Health Questionnaire, and 22-Item Impact of Events Scale-Revised were used for assessing anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder. Univariate and multivariate analysis was done to identify the causative factors affecting mental health. RESULTS: A total of 758 participants from 794 HCWs were analyzed. The median age was 31 years (IQR, 27-28). The incidence of moderate to severe levels of anxiety, depression, and stress was 34.8%, 31.2%, and 18.2%, respectively. Severe personal concerns were noticed by 60.9% of the staff. On multivariate analysis, the presence of commonly reported symptoms of COVID-19 during the previous 2 weeks, contact history (harzard ratio [HR], 2.04; CI, 1.15 to 3.63), and compliance with precautionary measures (HR, 1.69; CI, 1.19 to 2.45) for COVID-19 significantly predicted for increasing anxiety (HR, 2.67; CI, 1.93 to 3.70), depression (HR, 3.38; CI 2.36 to 4.84), and stress (HR, 2.89; CI, 1.88 to 4.43) (P < .001). A significant regional variation was also noticed for anxiety, stress, and personal concerns. CONCLUSION: This survey conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic revealed that a significant proportion of HCWs in the radiation oncology community experiences moderate to severe levels of anxiety, depression, and stress. This trend is alarming and it is important to identify and intervene at the right time to improve the mental health of HCWs to avoid any long-term impacts.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Radiation Oncology/statistics & numerical data , Stress, Psychological/prevention & control , Surveys and Questionnaires , Adult , Anxiety Disorders/epidemiology , Anxiety Disorders/prevention & control , Anxiety Disorders/psychology , Bangladesh/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/epidemiology , Depression/prevention & control , Depression/psychology , Female , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , India/epidemiology , Indonesia/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Nepal/epidemiology , Pandemics , Radiation Oncology/methods , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/epidemiology , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/prevention & control , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/psychology , Stress, Psychological/epidemiology , Stress, Psychological/psychology
9.
Front Public Health ; 10: 963673, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2022989

ABSTRACT

Background: As unprecedented and prolonged crisis, healthcare workers (HCWs) are at high risk of developing psychological disorders. We investigated the psychological impact of COVID-19 pandemic on HCWs. Methods: This cross-sectional study randomly recruited 439 HCWs in Hunan Cancer Hospital via a web-based sampling method from June 1st 2021 to March 31st 2022. Anxiety and depression levels were measured using Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). The Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) was used to assess the presence and severity of PTSD. Fear was measured by modified scale of SARS. Data were collected based on these questionnaires. Differences in fear, anxiety, depression and PTSD among HCWs with different clinical characteristics were analyzed using a multivariate analysis of variance. The Cronbach's alpha scores in our samples were calculated to evaluate the internal consistency of HADS, fear scale and PCL-5. Results: The prevalence of anxiety, depression, and PTSD in HCWs was 15.7, 9.6, and 12.8%, respectively. Females and nurses were with higher fear level (P < 0.05) and higher PTSD levels (P < 0.05). Further analysis of female HCWs revealed that PTSD levels in the 35-59 years-old age group were higher than that in other groups; while married female HCWs were with increased fear than single HCWs. The internal consistency was good, with Cronbach's α = 0.88, 0.80 and 0.84 for HADS, fear scale, and PCL, respectively. Conclusion: Gender, marital status, and age are related to different level of psychological disorders in HCWs. Clinical supportive care should be implemented for specific group of HCWs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Personnel , Pandemics , Adult , Anxiety/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Personnel/psychology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged
10.
West J Emerg Med ; 23(4): 570-578, 2022 Jul 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1975260

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Unvaccinated emergency medical services (EMS) personnel are at increased risk of contracting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and potentially transmitting the virus to their families, coworkers, and patients. Effective vaccines for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 virus exist; however, vaccination rates among EMS professionals remain largely unknown. Consequently, we sought to document vaccination rates of EMS professionals and identify predictors of vaccination uptake. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of North Carolina EMS professionals after the COVID-19 vaccines were widely available. The survey assessed vaccination status as well as beliefs regarding COVID-19 illness and vaccine effectiveness. Prediction of vaccine uptake was modeled using logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 860 EMS professionals completed the survey, of whom 74.7% reported receiving the COVID-19 vaccination. Most respondents believed that COVID-19 is a serious threat to the population, that they are personally at higher risk of infection, that vaccine side effects are outweighed by illness prevention, and the vaccine is safe and effective. Despite this, only 18.7% supported mandatory vaccination for EMS professionals. Statistically significant differences were observed between the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups regarding vaccine safety and effectiveness, recall of employer vaccine recommendation, perceived risk of infection, degree of threat to the population, and trust in government to take actions to limit the spread of disease. Unvaccinated respondents cited reasons such as belief in personal health and natural immunity as protectors against infection, concerns about vaccine safety and effectiveness, inadequate vaccine knowledge, and lack of an employer mandate for declining the vaccine. Predictors of vaccination included belief in vaccine safety (odds ratio [OR] 5.5, P=<0.001) and effectiveness (OR 4.6, P=<0.001); importance of vaccination to protect patients (OR 15.5, P=<0.001); perceived personal risk of infection (OR 1.8, P=0.04); previous receipt of influenza vaccine (OR 2.5, P=0.003); and sufficient knowledge to make an informed decision about vaccination (OR 2.4, P=0.024). CONCLUSION: In this survey of EMS professionals, over a quarter remained unvaccinated for COVID-19. Given the identified predictors of vaccine acceptance, EMS systems should focus on countering misinformation through employee educational campaigns as well as on developing policies regarding workforce immunization requirements.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Emergency Medical Services , Health Personnel , Vaccination , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , COVID-19 Vaccines/supply & distribution , Cross-Sectional Studies , Decision Making , Health Personnel/psychology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Health Surveys , Humans , Influenza Vaccines/administration & dosage , North Carolina , Occupational Health , Patient Safety , Vaccination/legislation & jurisprudence , Vaccination/psychology , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data
11.
ANS Adv Nurs Sci ; 44(3): 183-194, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1961172

ABSTRACT

In this article, we apply Agamben's theory of biopower and other related concepts to the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. We explore the similarities between the COVID-19 pandemic and the pandemic of racism. Concepts such as bios, zoe, homo sacer, and states of exception can be applied to understand inequities among marginalized communities in the COVID-19 pandemic. We recommend that nurses and health care workers use critical conscientization and structural competency to increase awareness and develop interventions to undo the injustices related to biopower faced by many in the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Attitude to Health , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Health Status Disparities , Racism/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/psychology , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Public Health , Racism/psychology , Social Environment , United States
12.
Psychosom Med ; 83(4): 387-396, 2021 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1931976

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to quantify the prevalence of the adverse mental health outcomes in medical staff working in the hospital settings during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and explore the relative distribution of anxiety and depressive symptoms. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, WANFANG DATA, and VIP Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals were searched for articles published from January 1, 2019, to April 19, 2020. The prevalence estimates of adverse mental health symptoms in medical staff were pooled using the random-effects model. RESULTS: A total of 35 articles and data of 25,343 medical staff were used in the final analysis. The pooled prevalence estimates in medical staff during the COVID-19 pandemic were as follows (ordered from high to low): fear-related symptoms, 67% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 61%-73%); high levels of perceived stress, 56% (95% CI = 32%-79%), anxiety symptoms, 41% (95% CI = 35%-47%); insomnia, 41% (95% CI = 33%-50%); posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms, 38% (95% CI = 34%-43%); depressive symptoms, 27% (95% CI = 20%-34%); and somatic symptoms, 16% (95% CI = 3%-36%). The subgroup analysis revealed that the prevalence estimates of fear-related symptoms were consistently high. CONCLUSIONS: Medical staff during the COVID-19 epidemic have a high prevalence of adverse mental health symptoms. Data-based strategies are needed to optimize mental health of medical staff and other health care professionals during times of high demand such as the COVID-19 and other epidemics.PROSPERO Registration: CRD42020182433.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Health Personnel/psychology , Mental Disorders/etiology , Mental Health/statistics & numerical data , Occupational Diseases/etiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Occupational Diseases/epidemiology , Pandemics
13.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ; 21(1): 670, 2021 Oct 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1923522

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus currently cause a lot of pressure on the health system. Accordingly, many changes occurred in the way of providing health care, including pregnancy and childbirth care. To our knowledge, no studies on experiences of maternity care Providers during the COVID-19 Pandemic have been published in Iran. We aimed to discover their experiences on pregnancy and childbirth care during the current COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This study was a qualitative research performed with a descriptive phenomenological approach. The used sampling method was purposive sampling by taking the maximum variation possible into account, which continued until data saturation. Accordingly, in-depth and semi-structured interviews were conducted by including 12 participants, as 4 gynecologists, 6 midwives working in the hospitals and private offices, and 2 midwives working in the health centers. Data were analyzed using Colaizzi's seven stage method with MAXQDA10 software. RESULTS: Data analysis led to the extraction of 3 themes, 9 categories, and 25 subcategories. The themes were as follows: "Fear of Disease", "Burnout", and "Lessons Learned from the COVID-19 Pandemic", respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Maternal health care providers experience emotional and psychological stress and work challenges during the current COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, comprehensive support should be provided for the protection of their physical and mental health statuses. By working as a team, utilizing the capacity of telemedicine to care and follow up mothers, and providing maternity care at home, some emerged challenges to maternal care services can be overcome.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Health Personnel/psychology , Maternal Health Services/statistics & numerical data , Perinatal Care/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Burnout, Psychological/psychology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Emotions/physiology , Female , Gynecology/statistics & numerical data , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Interviews as Topic , Iran/epidemiology , Maternal Health Services/trends , Middle Aged , Midwifery/statistics & numerical data , Perinatal Care/organization & administration , Phobic Disorders/psychology , Pregnancy , Qualitative Research , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Stress, Psychological/psychology , Telemedicine/methods
14.
PLoS One ; 17(2): e0263078, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1883624

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 posed the healthcare professionals at enormous risk during this pandemic era while vaccination was recommended as one of the effective preventive approaches. It was visualized that almost all health workforces would be under vaccination on a priority basis as they are the frontline fighters during this pandemic. This study was designed to explore the reality regarding infection and vaccination status of COVID-19 among healthcare professionals of Bangladesh. It was a web-based cross-sectional survey and conducted among 300 healthcare professionals available in the academic platform of Bangladesh. A multivariate logistic regression model was used for the analytical exploration. Adjusted and Unadjusted Odds Ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated for the specified setting indicators. A Chi-square test was used to observe the association. Ethical issues were maintained according to the guidance of the declaration of Helsinki. Study revealed that 41% of all respondents identified as COVID-19 positive whereas a significant number (18.3%) found as non-vaccinated due to registration issues as 52.70%, misconception regarding vaccination as 29.10%, and health-related issues as 18.20%. Respondents of more than 50 years of age found more significant on having positive infection rather than the younger age groups. Predictors for the non-vaccination guided that male respondents (COR/p = 3.49/0.01), allied health professionals, and respondents from the public organizations (p = 0.01) who were ≤29 (AOR/p = 4.45/0.01) years of age significantly identified as non-vaccinated. As the older female groups were found more infected and a significant number of health care professionals found as non-vaccinated, implementation of specific strategies and policies are needed to ensure the safety precautions and vaccination among such COVID-19 frontiers.


Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Bangladesh/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/psychology , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Infectious Disease Transmission, Professional-to-Patient/prevention & control , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , Surveys and Questionnaires/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/psychology , /statistics & numerical data
15.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 24443, 2021 12 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1852476

ABSTRACT

We investigate, through a data-driven contact tracing model, the transmission of COVID-19 inside buses during distinct phases of the pandemic in a large Brazilian city. From this microscopic approach, we recover the networks of close contacts within consecutive time windows. A longitudinal comparison is then performed by upscaling the traced contacts with the transmission computed from a mean-field compartmental model for the entire city. Our results show that the effective reproduction numbers inside the buses, [Formula: see text], and in the city, [Formula: see text], followed a compatible behavior during the first wave of the local outbreak. Moreover, by distinguishing the close contacts of healthcare workers in the buses, we discovered that their transmission, [Formula: see text], during the same period, was systematically higher than [Formula: see text]. This result reinforces the need for special public transportation policies for highly exposed groups of people.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/transmission , Contact Tracing/methods , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Disease Outbreaks , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Models, Theoretical , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Transportation
16.
JAMA ; 327(4): 341-349, 2022 01 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1838085

ABSTRACT

Importance: Administration of a BNT162b2 booster dose (Pfizer-BioNTech) to fully vaccinated individuals aged 60 years and older was significantly associated with lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe illness. Data are lacking on the effectiveness of booster doses for younger individuals and health care workers. Objective: To estimate the association of a BNT162b2 booster dose with SARS-CoV-2 infections among health care workers who were previously vaccinated with a 2-dose series of BNT162b2. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a prospective cohort study conducted at a tertiary medical center in Tel Aviv, Israel. The study cohort included 1928 immunocompetent health care workers who were previously vaccinated with a 2-dose series of BNT162b2, and had enrolled between August 8 and 19, 2021, with final follow-up reported through September 20, 2021. Screening for SARS-CoV-2 infection was performed every 14 days. Anti-spike protein receptor binding domain IgG titers were determined at baseline and 1 month after enrollment. Cox regression with time-dependent analysis was used to estimate hazard ratios of SARS-CoV-2 infection between booster-immunized status and 2-dose vaccinated (booster-nonimmunized) status. Exposures: Vaccination with a booster dose of BNT162b2 vaccine. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was SARS-CoV-2 infection, as confirmed by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction. Results: Among 1928 participants, the median age was 44 years (IQR, 36-52 years) and 1381 were women (71.6%). Participants completed the 2-dose vaccination series a median of 210 days (IQR, 205-213 days) before study enrollment. A total of 1650 participants (85.6%) received the booster dose. During a median follow-up of 39 days (IQR, 35-41 days), SARS-CoV-2 infection occurred in 44 participants (incidence rate, 60.2 per 100 000 person-days); 31 (70.5%) were symptomatic. Five SARS-CoV-2 infections occurred in booster-immunized participants and 39 in booster-nonimmunized participants (incidence rate, 12.8 vs 116 per 100 000 person-days, respectively). In a time-dependent Cox regression analysis, the adjusted hazard ratio of SARS-CoV-2 infection for booster-immunized vs booster-nonimmunized participants was 0.07 (95% CI, 0.02-0.20). Conclusions and Relevance: Among health care workers at a single center in Israel who were previously vaccinated with a 2-dose series of BNT162b2, administration of a booster dose compared with not receiving one was associated with a significantly lower rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection over a median of 39 days of follow-up. Ongoing surveillance is required to assess durability of the findings.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , BNT162 Vaccine/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Vaccine Efficacy , Adult , Aged , BNT162 Vaccine/immunology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , Female , Humans , Immunization, Secondary , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Incidence , Israel/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Proportional Hazards Models , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology
17.
Front Immunol ; 13: 827306, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1789384

ABSTRACT

Background: Effective vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are available worldwide; however, the longevity of vaccine effectiveness is not known. Objective: We performed a prospective observational study to assess the antibody response of healthcare workers against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) after BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. Methods: SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody (nAb) and spike (S) protein-IgG (S-IgG) antibody titers were examined in participants who received two doses of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in a single center between March 1, 2021, and October 11, 2021. Antibody levels were analyzed at four times: before vaccination (visit 1), 4 weeks after the first vaccination (visit 2), 3 months after the second vaccination (visit 3), and 6 months after the second vaccination (visit 4). Results: A total of 249 healthcare workers at Jeju National University Hospital were enrolled in this study, and 982 blood samples were analyzed. The mean age was 38.1 ± 9.5 years, and 145 (58.2%) participants were females. Positive nAbs (inhibition rates ≥ 20%) were measured in 166/249 (66.7%) subjects at visit 2, 237/243 (97.5%) subjects at visit 3, and 150/237 (63.3%) subjects at visit 4. A S-IgG (≥50 AU/mL) positivity was detected in 246/249 (98.8%) subjects at visit 1, and all participants had positive S-IgG antibody levels at visits 3 and 4 after being fully vaccinated. Further analysis of S-IgG levels revealed a median quantitative antibody level of 1275.1 AU/mL (interquartile range [IQR] 755.5-2119.0) at visit 2, 2765.9 AU/mL (IQR 1809.8-4138.4) at visit 3, and 970.1 AU/mL (IQR 606.0-1495.9) at visit 4. Patient characteristics, such as age, body mass index, and comorbidity, had no relationship with nAb or S-IgG levels at any of the visits. Considering the change in antibody levels over time, both nAb and S-IgG levels at visit 4 decreased compared with the corresponding levels at visit 3. No evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was found among any of the participants throughout the study. Conclusions: The BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine was effective in protecting healthcare personnel working in COVID-19-related departments. While the level of S-IgG antibodies was maintained for 6 months after the second vaccination, nAb levels waned over this 6-month period, indicating the need for a booster vaccination in some healthcare workers 6 months after full vaccination. Herein, we suggest that further studies are needed to evaluate the need for an interval of booster vaccination after full vaccination.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , Antibodies, Viral/blood , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , /statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Antibody Formation/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Female , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Immunization, Secondary , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Immunologic Tests , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Republic of Korea , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Young Adult
19.
PLoS One ; 17(3): e0260574, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1753182

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 Community Research Partnership is a population-based longitudinal syndromic and sero-surveillance study. The study includes over 17,000 participants from six healthcare systems in North Carolina who submitted over 49,000 serology results. The purpose of this study is to use these serology data to estimate the cumulative proportion of the North Carolina population that has either been infected with SARS-CoV-2 or developed a measurable humoral response to vaccination. METHODS: Adult community residents were invited to participate in the study between April 2020 and February 2021. Demographic information was collected and daily symptom screen was completed using a secure, HIPAA-compliant, online portal. A portion of participants were mailed kits containing a lateral flow assay to be used in-home to test for presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM or IgG antibodies. The cumulative proportion of participants who tested positive at least once during the study was estimated. A standard Cox proportional hazards model was constructed to illustrate the probability of seroconversion over time up to December 20, 2020 (before vaccines available). A separate analysis was performed to describe the influence of vaccines through February 15, 2021. RESULTS: 17,688 participants contributed at least one serology result. 68.7% of the population were female, and 72.2% were between 18 and 59 years of age. The average number of serology results submitted per participant was 3.0 (±1.9). By December 20, 2020, the overall probability of seropositivity in the CCRP population was 32.6%. By February 15, 2021 the probability among healthcare workers and non-healthcare workers was 83% and 49%, respectively. An inflection upward in the probability of seropositivity was demonstrated around the end of December, suggesting an influence of vaccinations, especially for healthcare workers. Among healthcare workers, those in the oldest age category (60+ years) were 38% less likely to have seroconverted by February 15, 2021. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this study suggest more North Carolina residents may have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 than the number of documented cases as determined by positive RNA or antigen tests. The influence of vaccinations on seropositivity among North Carolina residents is also demonstrated. Additional research is needed to fully characterize the impact of seropositivity on immunity and the ultimate course of the pandemic.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/analysis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adult , Age Factors , Community Participation , Female , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , North Carolina/epidemiology , Seroconversion , Young Adult
20.
PLoS One ; 17(3): e0265016, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1745313

ABSTRACT

Serological databases represent an important source of information to perceive COVID-19 impact on health professionals involved in combating the disease. This paper describes SerumCovid, a COVID-19 serological database focused on the diagnosis of health professionals, providing a preliminary analysis to contribute to the understanding of the antibody response to the SARS-CoV-2. The study population comprises 321 samples from 236 healthcare and frontline workers fighting COVID-19 in Vitória de Santo Antão, Brazil. Samples were collected from at least six days of symptoms to more than 100 days. The used immunoenzymatic assays were Euroimmun Anti-SARS-CoV-2 ELISA IgG and IgA. The most common gender in SerumCovid is female, while the most common age group is between 30 and 39 years old. However, no statistical differences were observed in either genders or age categories. The most reported symptoms were fatigue, headaches, and myalgia. Still, some subjects presented positive results for IgA after 130 days. Based on a temporal analysis, we have not identified general patterns as subjects presented high and low values of IgA and IgG with different evolution trends. Unexpectedly, for subjects with both serological tests, the outcome of IgA and IgG tests were the same (either positive or negative) for more than 80% of the samples. Therefore, SerumCovid helps better understand how COVID-19 affected healthcare and frontline workers, which increases knowledge about the infection and enables direct prevention actions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Serological Testing , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19 Serological Testing/statistics & numerical data , Databases as Topic , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay , Female , Humans , Immunoglobulin A/immunology , Immunoglobulin G/immunology , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL