Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 29
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
1.
J Infect Dev Ctries ; 15(8): 1059-1065, 2021 08 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1405467

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Information on the clinical characteristics of local patients with confirmed COVID-19 is limited. This study aims to report the clinical characteristics of 147 patients admitted and receiving treatment at a teaching hospital. METHODOLOGY: Patients' socio-demographic and epidemiological data, clinical features, laboratory findings and clinical outcomes were extracted using a data sheet. RESULTS: The median patient age was 25 [interquartile range (IQR)] 20-44) years, and most of patients were male (68.7%) and of Malaysian nationality (88.4%). Almost half of the patients were from a case cluster related to a religious event (48.3%) and 12.9% had a history of overseas travel. A total of 33.3% of patients were not related to any case cluster, i.e. sporadic cases. Radiological investigation showed that 13.6% of the patients had chest X-ray changes and all laboratory parameters were within the normal ranges. Sixty-six patients (44.9%) experienced symptoms. The most common symptoms were rhinitis (66.7%), followed by fever (19.7%) and cough (15.2%). Age, gender, case cluster, comorbidity status, haemoglobin, albumin, total protein, bilirubin total and alkaline phosphatase level were associated with symptomatic status. CONCLUSIONS: In this single-centre study, COVID-19 infection led not only to case clusters, but also to sporadic infections, with patients being either symptomatic or asymptomatic. These sporadic cases and asymptomatic patients may hamper effective contact tracing, leading to rapid human-to-human transmission in our population. Future studies on the prevalence and clinical significance of asymptomatic and presymptomatic COVID-19 patients would pre-emptively address issues on further containment of the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/physiopathology , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Child , Comorbidity , Female , Fever/virology , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Malaysia/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Prevalence , Young Adult
3.
J Hosp Med ; 16(5): 282-289, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1210020

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To describe the seroprevalence and risk for SARS-CoV-2 among healthcare workers (HCWs) by job function and work location following the pandemic's first wave in New York City (NYC). METHODS: A cross-sectional study conducted between May 18 and June 26, 2020, during which HCWs at a large inner-city teaching hospital in NYC received voluntary antibody testing. The main outcome was presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies indicating previous infection. Seroprevalence and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for seropositivity by type and location of work were calculated using logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Of 2,749 HCWs tested, 831 tested positive, yielding a crude seroprevalence of 30.2% (95% CI, 29%-32%). Seroprevalence ranged from 11.1% for pharmacy staff to 44.0% for nonclinical HCWs comprised of patient transporters and housekeeping and security staff, with 37.5% for nurses and 20.9% for administrative staff. Compared to administrative staff, aORs (95% CIs) for seropositivity were 2.54 (1.64-3.94) for nurses; 2.51 (1.42-4.43) for nonclinical HCWs; between 1.70 and 1.83 for allied HCWs such as patient care technicians, social workers, registration clerks and therapists; and 0.80 (0.50-1.29) for physicians. Compared to office locations, aORs for the emergency department and inpatient units were 2.27 (1.53-3.37) and 1.48 (1.14-1.92), respectively. CONCLUSION: One-third of hospital-based HCWs were seropositive for SARS-CoV-2 by the end of the first wave in NYC. Seroprevalence differed by job function and work location, with the highest estimated risk for nurses and the emergency department, respectively. These findings support current nationwide policy prioritizing HCWs for receipt of newly authorized COVID-19 vaccines.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Occupations/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/immunology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Infection Control , Male , Middle Aged , New York City/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Workplace/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult
4.
Int J Occup Med Environ Health ; 34(2): 189-201, 2021 May 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1178584

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to evaluate the clinical presentation and burden of SARS-CoV-2 infections among medical school physicians and residents, mainly young medical doctors. The awareness of COVID­19 clinical manifestations can improve the early detection of mild cases, possibly reducing further transmission to colleagues and patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was carried out in March-May 2020, involving medical school physicians in a teaching hospital in northern Italy, with a working population of 881 medical doctors. Data collection was performed using a structured form investigating clinical and epidemiological information. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-two medical doctors contacted the Occupational Health Service reporting acute respiratory symptoms or close contact exposure to a confirmed COVID­19 case. Among the confirmed COVID­19 cases, most were male doctors during residency, and 85% presented a mild clinical picture. Fever (70.3%) and cough (51.4%) represented the most prevalent symptoms of COVID­19. As revealed by the univariate analysis, the prevalence of real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) positivity increased with age (OR = 1.08, 95% CI: 1.02-1.14, p = 0.012), working in a COVID­19 ward (OR = 3.33, 95% CI: 1.09-10.21, p = 0.031), presenting alteration or loss of smell/taste (OR = 10.00, 95%CI: 2.80-35.69, p < 0.001) and myalgia (OR = 3.20, 95% CI: 1.00-10.26, p = 0.046), while being a resident (OR = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.05-0.80, p = 0.030) was associated with reduced odds of being infected, compared to staff physicians. Age and loss of smell/taste were the only factors independently associated with RT-PCR positivity. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of COVID­19 cases showed a mild clinical syndrome, ranging from absence or paucity of symptoms to common cold or influenza-like symptoms. The findings of the present study increase the accuracy of the clinical diagnosis for the prompt identification and management of suspected COVID­19 cases, being particularly useful during resurges of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2021;34(2):189-201.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Internship and Residency/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , Physicians/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2 , Schools, Medical/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Young Adult
5.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 4263, 2021 02 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1091460

ABSTRACT

Infection by the new corona virus strain SARS-CoV-2 and its related syndrome COVID-19 has been associated with more than two million deaths worldwide. Patients of higher age and with preexisting chronic health conditions are at an increased risk of fatal disease outcome. However, detailed information on causes of death and the contribution of pre-existing health conditions to death yet is missing, which can be reliably established by autopsy only. We performed full body autopsies on 26 patients that had died after SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 at the Charité University Hospital Berlin, Germany, or at associated teaching hospitals. We systematically evaluated causes of death and pre-existing health conditions. Additionally, clinical records and death certificates were evaluated. We report findings on causes of death and comorbidities of 26 decedents that had clinically presented with severe COVID-19. We found that septic shock and multi organ failure was the most common immediate cause of death, often due to suppurative pulmonary infection. Respiratory failure due to diffuse alveolar damage presented as immediate cause of death in fewer cases. Several comorbidities, such as hypertension, ischemic heart disease, and obesity were present in the vast majority of patients. Our findings reveal that causes of death were directly related to COVID-19 in the majority of decedents, while they appear not to be an immediate result of preexisting health conditions and comorbidities. We therefore suggest that the majority of patients had died of COVID-19 with only contributory implications of preexisting health conditions to the mechanism of death.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , Cause of Death , Hospital Mortality , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Autopsy , Berlin/epidemiology , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19/virology , Comorbidity , Female , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Hypertension/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Multiple Organ Failure/mortality , Multiple Organ Failure/virology , Myocardial Ischemia/epidemiology , Obesity/epidemiology , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Shock, Septic/mortality , Shock, Septic/virology
6.
J Hosp Infect ; 110: 178-183, 2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1074814

ABSTRACT

AIM: To investigate the sources of infection among healthcare workers (HCWs) and patients in a teaching hospital in the Netherlands during the early stages of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic using epidemiological and whole-genome sequencing data. METHODS: From 3rd April to 11th May 2020, 88 HCWs and 215 patients were diagnosed with COVID-19. Whole-genome sequences were obtained for 30 HCWs and 20 patients. RESULTS: Seven and 11 sequence types were identified in HCWs and patients, respectively. Cluster A was the most common sequence type, detected in 23 (77%) HCWs; of these, 14 (61%) had direct patient contact and nine (39%) had indirect patient contact. In addition, seven patients who were not hospitalized in the COVID-19 cohort isolation ward who became positive during their admission were infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) cluster A. Following universal masking of all HCWs and emphasis on physical distancing during meals and breaks, no further evidence was found for patient-to-HCW or HCW-to-HCW transmission or vice versa. CONCLUSION: The finding that patients and HCWs were infected with SARS-CoV-2 cluster A suggests both HCW-to-HCW and HCW-to-patient transmission.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/transmission , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/statistics & numerical data , Inpatients/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Netherlands/epidemiology , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data
7.
Transfus Clin Biol ; 28(1): 68-72, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1065636

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Ensuring steady stream of safe blood is the ultimate goal of blood transfusion practice. The current COVID-19 pandemic has affected almost every part of life and economy. Consequently, this study sets off to assess the effect of the pandemic on blood supply and blood transfusion in the University of Calabar Teaching Hospital. METHODS: Data from the Donor Clinic and Blood Group Serology Unit of the University of Calabar Teaching Hospital were retrospectively extracted to evaluate supply and use of blood before and during COVID-19 pandemic. RESULT: A total of 1638 donors were recorded within the study period. Age range 15-29 and 30-44 years constituted majority of the subjects (58.9% and 33.4%, respectively). The donor pool were male-dominated. Commercial donors (61.7%) and family replacement donors (30.6%) constituted majority of the donor pool. Most of the donor pool were students (37.1%), public servants (22.8%) and artisans (18.6%). A concomitant decrease of 26.1% and 18.9% were recorded in blood donation and request during the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: Blood supply was not significantly affected in our study center as both requests and donations decreased. Consideration for improving family replacement donation was advised.


Subject(s)
Blood Donors/statistics & numerical data , Blood Transfusion/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Adolescent , Adult , Blood Donors/psychology , Blood Donors/supply & distribution , Blood Transfusion/economics , Blood Transfusion/psychology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Family , Female , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, Urban/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Motivation , Nigeria , Occupations , Procedures and Techniques Utilization , Remuneration , Retrospective Studies , Young Adult
8.
Int J Gynaecol Obstet ; 153(2): 315-321, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1055912

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the consequences of COVID-19 pandemic restrictions on the postpartum course. METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional study compared women who gave birth between March and April 2020 (first wave), between July to September 2020 (second wave), and a matched historical cohort throughout 2017-2019 (groups A, B, and C, respectively). Primary outcomes were postpartum length of stay (LOS), presentations to the emergency department (ED), and readmissions 30 days or longer after discharge. Following Bonferroni correction, p < 0.016 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: In total, 3377 women were included: 640, 914, and 1823 in groups A, B, and C, respectively. LOS after birth (both vaginal and cesarean) was shorter in groups A and B compared to the control group (2.28 ± 1.01 and 2.25 ± 0.93 vs 2.55 ± 1.10 days, p < 0.001). Rates of ED presentations 30 days after discharge were higher in groups C and B compared to group A (6.63% and 6.45% vs 3.12%, p = 0.006). Rates of readmissions 30 days after discharge were 0.78%, 1.42%, and 1.09% (groups A, B, and C, respectively), demonstrating no statistical difference (p = 0.408). CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a reduction or no change in rates of ED presentations and readmissions, despite the shortened LOS after delivery. A shift in policy regarding the postpartum LOS could be considered.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Patient Readmission/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Israel/epidemiology , Postpartum Period , Pregnancy , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Neuroradiol J ; 34(3): 238-244, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1040013

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic led to a widespread socioeconomic shutdown, including medical facilities in many parts of the world. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact on neuroimaging utilisation at an academic medical centre in the United States caused by this shutdown. METHODS: Exam volumes from 1 February 2020 to 11 August 2020 were calculated based on patient location, including outpatient, inpatient and emergency, as well as modality type, including computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. 13 March 2020 was designated as the beginning of the shutdown period for the radiology department and 1 May 2020 was designated as the reopening date. The scan volumes during the pre-shutdown, shutdown and post-shutdown periods were compared using t-tests. RESULTS: Overall, neuroimaging scan volumes declined significantly by 41% during the shutdown period and returned to 98% of the pre-shutdown period levels after the shutdown, with an estimated 3231 missed scans. Outpatient scan volumes were more greatly affected than inpatient scan volumes, while emergency scan volumes declined the least during the shutdown. In addition, the magnetic resonance imaging scan volumes declined to a greater degree than the computed tomography scan volumes during the shutdown. CONCLUSION: The shutdown from the COVID-19 pandemic had a substantial but transient impact on neuroimaging utilisation overall, with variable magnitude depending on patient location and modality type.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Neuroimaging/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , Chicago , Emergencies , Emergency Medical Services/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Inpatients , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Outpatients , Radionuclide Imaging , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
10.
PLoS One ; 16(1): e0245001, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1028628

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a huge challenge to healthcare systems and their personnel worldwide. The study of the impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers (HCW), through prevalence studies, will let us know viral expansion, individuals at most risk and the most exposed areas in healthcare organizations. The aim of this study is to gauge the impact of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in our hospital workforce and identify groups and areas at increased risk. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This is a cross-sectional and incidence study carried out on healthcare workers based on molecular and serological diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Of the 3013 HCW invited to participate, 2439 (80.9%) were recruited, including 674 (22.4%) who had previously consulted at the Occupational Health Service (OHS) for confirmed exposure and/or presenting symptoms suggestive of COVID-19. A total of 411 (16.9%) and 264 (10.8%) healthcare workers were SARS-CoV-2 IgG and rRT-PCR positive, respectively. The cumulative prevalence considering all studies (IgG positive HCW and/or rRT-PCR positive detection) was 485 (19.9%). SARS-CoV-2 IgG-positive patients in whom the virus was not detected were 221 (9.1%); up to 151 of them (68.3%) did not report any compatible symptoms nor consult at the OHS for this reason. Men became more infected than women (25% vs 18.5%, p = 0.0009), including when data were also classified by age. COVID-19 cumulative prevalence among the HCW assigned to medical departments was higher (25.2%) than others, as well as among medical staff (25.4%) compared with other professional categories (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on HCW of our centre has been 19.9%. Doctors and medical services personnel have had the highest prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, but many of them have not presented compatible symptoms. This emphasizes the performance of continuous surveillance methods of the most exposed health personnel and not only based on the appearance of symptoms.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Health Personnel/psychology , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Spain/epidemiology
11.
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg ; 47(3): 693-702, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1008156

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To assess how the COVID-19 outbreak has affected emergency general surgery (EGS) care during the pandemic, indications for surgery, types of procedures, perioperative course, and final outcomes. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of EGS patients during the pandemic period. The main outcome was 30-day morbidity and mortality according to severity and COVID-19 infection status. Secondary outcomes were changes in overall management. A logistic regression analysis was done to assess factors predictive of mortality. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-three patients were included. Half of the patients with an abdominal ultrasound and/or CT scan had signs of severity at diagnosis, four times higher than the previous year. Non-COVID patients underwent surgery more often than the COVID group. Over 1/3 of 100 operated patients had postoperative morbidity, versus only 15% the previous year. The most common complications were septic shock, pneumonia, and ARDS. ICU care was required in 17% of patients, and was most often required in the SARS-CoV-2-infected group, which also had a higher morbidity and mortality. The 30-day mortality in the surgical series was of 7%, with no differences with the previous year. The strongest independent predictors of overall mortality were age > 70 years, ASA III-IV, ESS > 9, and SARS-CoV-2 infection. CONCLUSIONS: Non-operative management (NOM) was undertaken in a third of patients, and only 14% of operated patients had a perioperative confirmation of -CoV-2 infection. The severity and morbidity of COVID-19-infected patients was much higher. Late presentations for medical care may have added to the high morbidity of the series.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergencies/epidemiology , Infection Control , Postoperative Complications , Surgical Procedures, Operative , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Conservative Treatment/methods , Conservative Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Female , General Surgery/trends , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Incidence , Infection Control/methods , Infection Control/organization & administration , Male , Middle Aged , Mortality , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Postoperative Complications/diagnosis , Postoperative Complications/mortality , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain/epidemiology , Surgical Procedures, Operative/adverse effects , Surgical Procedures, Operative/methods , Surgical Procedures, Operative/statistics & numerical data
12.
Eur J Hosp Pharm ; 28(5): 242-247, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-947837

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to describe prescribing practices of lopinavir/ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin during the COVID-19 epidemic crisis (primary endpoint), then to characterise pharmaceutical interventions (PIs) targeted to these medications and evaluate the impact of these PIs on prescribers' practices (secondary end-points). METHODS: This retrospective observational study was carried out at the University Hospital of Strasbourg (France) from March to April 2020. The analysed population excluded patients from intensive care units but included all other adult patients with COVID-19 who received at least one dose of lopinavir/ritonavir combination, hydroxychloroquine or azithromycin, while inpatients. Analyses were performed by using data extracted from electronic medical records. RESULT: During the study period, 278 patients were included. A rapid decrease in lopinavir/ritonavir prescriptions was observed. This was accompanied by an increase in hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin prescriptions until the end of March, followed by a decrease leading to the disappearance of these two medications in April. The pharmaceutical analysis of the prescriptions resulted in 59 PIs of which 21 were associated with lopinavir/ritonavir, 32 with hydroxychloroquine and 6 with azithromycin. Regarding the medication-related problems, the most frequent ones were incorrect treatment durations (n=32 (54.2%)), drug interactions with potential torsadogenic reactions (n=14 (23.7%)) and incorrect dosing (n=6 (10.2%)). From the 59 PIs, 48 (81.4%) were accepted and physicians adjusted the medication regimens in a timely manner. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated the value-even more meaningful in a crisis situation-of a strong synergy between physicians and pharmacists for patient-safety focused practices.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Drug Prescriptions/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Lopinavir/therapeutic use , Pandemics , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Azithromycin/adverse effects , Drug Combinations , Female , France , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Lopinavir/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Safety , Pharmacists , Physicians , Retrospective Studies , Ritonavir/adverse effects
13.
Pan Afr Med J ; 35(Suppl 2): 136, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-946286

ABSTRACT

Introduction: SARS-CoV-2 is an emerging health threat outbreak. It may cause severe viral pneumonia with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome requiring critical care. Aim: to describe clinical features and outcomes of critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: it was a retrospective study carried out in the medical ICU of Farhat Hached teaching hospital between March 11 and May 7, 2020. All consecutive patients with RT-PCR confirmed COVID-19 were included. Clinical characteristics and outcomes were collected by reviewing medical records. Results: during the study period, 10 critically ill patients with COVID-19 were enrolled. Mean age, 51.8±6.3 years; 8(80%), male. The most common comorbidities were; diabetes mellitus, 6(60%), obesity 2(20%), chronic kidney disease 2(20%) and hypertension 1(10%). Mean SAPS II, 23.2±1.8. The mean arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen ratio at admission was 136.2±79.7. Noninvasive mechanical ventilation was used in 4(40%) patients and 7(70%) received invasive mechanical ventilation. Tidal volume and PEEP were set respectively within the median [IQR] of, 5.7[5.6-6.3]ml/Kg and 10.7[6.5-11.7]cm H2O. Plateau pressure was monitored in the median [IQR] of 27.9 [25.9-28.5] cm H2O. Four patients received hydroxychloroquine alone and five hydroxychloroquine associated with an antiviral. Five patients developed respectively hyperactive (n=2), hypoactive (n=2) and mixed delirium (n=1). Mortality rate was at 70%. Conclusion: this study demonstrated a particular profile of COVID-19 in the critically ill as a severe presentation in aged males with comorbidities presenting with an ARDS-like and neurological impairment with poor prognosis. The only survivals seem to have benefited from noninvasive ventilatory support.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19 , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Comorbidity , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Delirium/etiology , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Female , Hospital Mortality , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Male , Middle Aged , Obesity/epidemiology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Prognosis , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/epidemiology , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Simplified Acute Physiology Score , Tunisia/epidemiology
14.
Epidemiol Infect ; 148: e280, 2020 11 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-922243

ABSTRACT

This study used hospital records from two time periods to understand the implication of COVID-19 on hospital-based deaths in Burundi. The place of COVID-19 symptoms was sought among deaths that occurred from January to May 2020 (during the pandemic) vs. January to May 2019 (before the pandemic). First, death proportions were tested to seize differences between mortality rates for each month in 2020 vs. 2019. In the second time, we compared mean time-to-death between the two periods using the Kaplan-Meier survival curve. Finally, a logistic regression was fitted to assess the likelihood of dying from COVID-19 symptoms between the two periods. We found statistical evidence of a higher death rate in May 2020 as compared to May 2019. Moreover, death occurred faster in 2020 (mean = 6.7 days, s.d. = 8.9) than in 2019 (mean = 7.8 days, s.d. = 10.9). Unlike in 2019, being a male was significantly associated with a much lower likelihood of dying with one or more COVID-19 symptom(s) in 2020 (odds ratio 0.35, 95% confidence interval 0.14-0.87). This study yielded some evidence for a possible COVID-19-related hospital-based mortality trend for May 2020. However, considering the time-constraint of the study, further similar studies over a longer period of time need to be conducted to trace a clearer picture on COVID-19 implication on hospital-based deaths in Burundi.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , Hospital Mortality , Survival Analysis , Burundi/epidemiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
15.
PLoS One ; 15(10): e0240960, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-895065

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) populations are emerging as a vulnerable group in the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus disease (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. We investigated the relationship between ethnicity and health outcomes in SARS-CoV-2. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a retrospective, observational analysis of SARS-CoV-2 patients across two London teaching hospitals during March 1 -April 30, 2020. Routinely collected clinical data were extracted and analysed for 645 patients who met the study inclusion criteria. Within this hospitalised cohort, the BAME population were younger relative to the white population (61.70 years, 95% CI 59.70-63.73 versus 69.3 years, 95% CI 67.17-71.43, p<0.001). When adjusted for age, sex and comorbidity, ethnicity was not a predictor for ICU admission. The mean age at death was lower in the BAME population compared to the white population (71.44 years, 95% CI 69.90-72.90 versus, 77.40 years, 95% CI 76.1-78.70 respectively, p<0.001). When adjusted for age, sex and comorbidities, Asian patients had higher odds of death (OR 1.99: 95% CI 1.22-3.25, p<0.006). CONCLUSIONS: BAME patients were more likely to be admitted younger, and to die at a younger age with SARS-CoV-2. Within the BAME cohort, Asian patients were more likely to die but despite this, there was no difference in rates of admission to ICU. The reasons for these disparities are not fully understood and need to be addressed. Investigating ethnicity as a clinical risk factor remains a high public health priority. Studies that consider ethnicity as part of the wider socio-cultural determinant of health are urgently needed.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/ethnology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/ethnology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , /statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 , Child , Child, Preschool , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Female , Hospital Mortality , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , London/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Minority Groups/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Secondary Care/ethnology , Secondary Care/statistics & numerical data , Socioeconomic Factors , Survival Analysis , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
16.
J Hosp Infect ; 106(4): 713-720, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-779260

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at high risk of acquiring COVID-19 and could play a role in nosocomial transmission. Since 4th February 2020, Belgian Health authorities reported more than 90,568 cases, of which 8.3% were HCWs. Data on clinical characteristics, sources of infection and humoral immune response of HCWs with COVID-19 remain scarce. AIM: To analyse the clinical characteristics, humoral immune response, sources of contamination, and outcomes among HCWs with COVID-19. METHODS: This retrospective study included 176 HCWs with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 in a teaching hospital in Belgium. Between 1st March and 31st May 2020, all HCWs with symptoms suspected of COVID-19 were tested by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction on a nasopharyngeal swab. Serological testing was performed between 55 and 137 days after the onset of symptoms. FINDINGS: Median age was 40.8 years and 75% were female. Median delay between onset of symptoms and diagnosis was 4.39 days. Most frequent symptoms were cough and headache (both 75%). Fever accounted for 68.7%. Most represented professions were nurses (42%). HCWs were mainly infected by patient contact (32.9%); 7.6% required hospitalization and 1.7% were admitted to the intensive care unit. Unfortunately, one HCW died (0.5%). Total antibodies were positive in 109/126 (86.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical presentation of COVID-19 in HCWs does not differ from the general population. However, outcomes were more favourable with a mortality rate lower than that reported in Belgian COVID-19 patients in general (16%). The main source of infection was the hospital setting. Our positive antibodies rate was high but lower than previously reported.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/immunology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Immunity, Humoral/physiology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adult , Antibodies/blood , Antibody Formation/immunology , Belgium/epidemiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Disease Transmission, Infectious/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Nurses/statistics & numerical data , Occupational Exposure/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/genetics
17.
Acta Biomed ; 91(3): e2020016, 2020 09 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-761261

ABSTRACT

The paper wants to present the data of infection of the Health Care Workers of a research and teaching hospital in Milan, Italy. The majority (2554, 55.9%) of 4572 HCWs were tested for SARS-CoV-2 and 8.8% were found positive. Most of the tested workers were women, but we found higher relative frequency of positivity for men, even after adjustment for age, working area, and occupation. The higher frequency of positive tests in the medicine area is probably explained by the higher concentration in that area of COVID-19 patients. Conversely, the low frequency of positive HCWs in intensive care units is  probably explained by the diffuse and continuous use of PPD. Our results show that HCWs in a research and teaching hospital in the most hit Region in Italy had a similar pattern of infection as all other HCWs all over the world. The problem of SARS-CoV-2 infections among the hospital personnel HCWs should remind us  the concerns about hospital acquired infections both for patients and HCWs.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/analysis , Betacoronavirus/immunology , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
19.
Elife ; 92020 08 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-727516

ABSTRACT

We conducted voluntary Covid-19 testing programmes for symptomatic and asymptomatic staff at a UK teaching hospital using naso-/oro-pharyngeal PCR testing and immunoassays for IgG antibodies. 1128/10,034 (11.2%) staff had evidence of Covid-19 at some time. Using questionnaire data provided on potential risk-factors, staff with a confirmed household contact were at greatest risk (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.82 [95%CI 3.45-6.72]). Higher rates of Covid-19 were seen in staff working in Covid-19-facing areas (22.6% vs. 8.6% elsewhere) (aOR 2.47 [1.99-3.08]). Controlling for Covid-19-facing status, risks were heterogenous across the hospital, with higher rates in acute medicine (1.52 [1.07-2.16]) and sporadic outbreaks in areas with few or no Covid-19 patients. Covid-19 intensive care unit staff were relatively protected (0.44 [0.28-0.69]), likely by a bundle of PPE-related measures. Positive results were more likely in Black (1.66 [1.25-2.21]) and Asian (1.51 [1.28-1.77]) staff, independent of role or working location, and in porters and cleaners (2.06 [1.34-3.15]).


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Adolescent , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Asymptomatic Infections/epidemiology , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Female , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Incidence , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/statistics & numerical data , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Risk , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Young Adult
20.
J Hosp Infect ; 106(2): 325-329, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-676907

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Healthcare worker (HCW)-associated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is of global concern due to the potential for nosocomial spread and depletion of staff numbers. However, the literature on transmission routes and risk factors for COVID-19 in HCWs is limited. AIM: To examine the characteristics and transmission dynamics of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in HCWs in a university teaching hospital in London, UK. METHODS: Staff records and virology testing results were combined to identify staff sickness and COVID-19 rates from March to April 2020. Comparisons were made with staff professional groups, department of work, and ethnicity. FINDINGS: COVID-19 rates in our HCWs largely rose and declined in parallel with the number of community cases. White and non-White ethnic groups among our HCWs had similar rates of infection. Clinical staff had a higher rate of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 than non-clinical staff, but total sickness rates were similar. Doctors had the highest rate of infection, but took the fewest sickness days. Critical care had lower rates than the emergency department (ED), but rates in the ED declined when all staff were advised to use personal protective equipment (PPE). CONCLUSION: Sustained transmission of SARS-CoV-2 among our hospital staff did not occur, beyond the community outbreak, even in the absence of strict infection control measures in non-clinical areas. Current PPE appears to be effective when used appropriately. Our findings emphasize the importance of testing both clinical and non-clinical staff groups during a pandemic.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Guidelines as Topic , Infection Control/standards , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Personal Protective Equipment/standards , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Adult , COVID-19 , Disease Outbreaks/statistics & numerical data , Female , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Infection Control/statistics & numerical data , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/statistics & numerical data , London/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Occupational Exposure/statistics & numerical data , Personal Protective Equipment/statistics & numerical data
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...