Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 163
Filter
Add filters

Year range
1.
J Pediatric Infect Dis Soc ; 9(3): 362-365, 2020 Jul 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-684002

ABSTRACT

In a family experiencing coronavirus disease 2019, the parents and 2 children aged 2 and 5 years became infected but the youngest child was not infected. Both children initially shed infectious virus, but cleared the virus after 5 to 6 days in the nasopharynx. However, viral RNA was continuously detected in the children's stool for more than 4 weeks.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/pathology , Family , Pneumonia, Viral/pathology , Adult , Child, Preschool , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Female , Germany/epidemiology , Humans , Infant , Infectious Disease Incubation Period , Male , Nasopharynx/virology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Viral Load , Virus Shedding
3.
Ann Ital Chir ; 91: 273-276, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-739593

ABSTRACT

CASE REPORT: A 64-year-old woman presented to our emergency department during the outbreak of the covid-19 emergency in Italy with syncope, anosmia, mild dyspnoea and atypical chest and dorsal pain. A chest CT scan showed an acute type B aortic dissection (ATBAD) and bilateral lung involvement with ground-glass opacity, compatible with interstitial pneumonia. Nasopharyngeal swabs resulted positive for SARS-CoV-2. For the persistence of chest pain, despite the analgesic therapy, we decided to treat her with a TEVAR. Patient's chest and back pain resolved during the first few days after the procedure. No surgical or respiratory complications occurred and the patient was discharged 14 days after surgery. DISCUSSION: By performing the operation under local anesthesia, it was possible to limit both the staff inside the operatory room and droplet/aerosol release. Since we had to perform the operation in a hemodynamics room, thanks to the limited extension of the endoprosthesis and the good caliber of the right vertebral artery we were able to reduce the risk of spinal cord ischemia despite the lack of a revascularization of the left subclavian artery. CONCLUSIONS: A minimally invasive total endovascular approach allows, through local anesthesia and percutaneous access, to avoid surgical cut down and orotracheal intubation. This, combined with a defined management protocol for infected patients, seems to be a reasonable way to perform endovascular aortic procedures in urgent setting, even in a SARSCoV- 2 positive patient. KEY WORDS: COVID-19, Dissection, TEVAR.


Subject(s)
Aneurysm, Dissecting/surgery , Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic/surgery , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/methods , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Endovascular Procedures/methods , Infection Control/methods , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Anesthesia, Local , Aneurysm, Dissecting/complications , Antibiotic Prophylaxis , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic/complications , Contraindications, Procedure , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Darunavir/therapeutic use , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/complications , Drug Therapy, Combination , Enoxaparin/therapeutic use , Female , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Intraoperative Complications/prevention & control , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects , Middle Aged , Nasopharynx/virology , Operating Rooms , Patient Isolation , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , Spinal Cord Ischemia/prevention & control , Vertebral Artery/surgery
4.
Ann Ital Chir ; 91: 235-238, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-739563

ABSTRACT

The present pandemic caused by the SARS COV-2 coronavirus is still ongoing, although it is registered a slowdown in the spread for new cases. The main environmental route of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is through droplets and fomites or surfaces, but there is a potential risk of virus spread also in smaller aerosols during various medical procedures causing airborne transmission. To date, no information is available on the risk of contagion from the peritoneal fluid with which surgeons can come into contact during the abdominal surgery on COVID-19 patients. We have investigated the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in the peritoneal cavity of patients affected by COVID-19, intraoperatively and postoperatively. KEY WORDS: Covid-19, Laparotomy, Surgery.


Subject(s)
Ascitic Fluid/virology , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Intestinal Perforation/surgery , Laparotomy , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Sigmoid Diseases/surgery , Viremia/transmission , Aerosols , Aged, 80 and over , Coronavirus Infections/blood , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Diverticulum/complications , Fatal Outcome , Female , Humans , Intestinal Perforation/blood , Intestinal Perforation/complications , Intestinal Perforation/virology , Intraoperative Period , Nasopharynx/virology , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Postoperative Period , Prospective Studies , RNA, Viral/isolation & purification , Risk , Serum/virology , Sigmoid Diseases/blood , Sigmoid Diseases/complications , Sigmoid Diseases/virology , Viremia/virology
5.
PLoS One ; 15(8): e0238417, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-732990

ABSTRACT

The rapid global spread of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has inflicted significant health and socioeconomic burden on affected countries. As positive cases continued to rise in Malaysia, public health laboratories experienced an overwhelming demand for COVID-19 screening. The confirmation of positive cases of COVID-19 has solely been based on the detection of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR). In efforts to increase the cost-effectiveness and efficiency of COVID-19 screening, we evaluated the feasibility of pooling clinical Nasopharyngeal/Oropharyngeal (NP/OP) swab specimens during nucleic acid extraction without a reduction in sensitivity of qRT-PCR. Pools of 10 specimens were extracted and subsequently tested by qRT-PCR according to the WHO-Charité protocol. We demonstrated that the sample pooling method showed no loss of sensitivity. The effectiveness of the pooled testing strategy was evaluated on both retrospective and prospective samples, and the results showed a similar detection sensitivity compared to testing individual sample alone. This study demonstrates the feasibility of using a pooled testing strategy to increase testing capacity and conserve resources, especially when there is a high demand for disease testing.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Mass Screening/methods , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction , Specimen Handling/methods , Betacoronavirus , Humans , Malaysia , Nasopharynx/virology , Oropharynx/virology , Pandemics , Sensitivity and Specificity
8.
J Clin Microbiol ; 58(8)2020 Jul 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-711698

ABSTRACT

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has emerged as the cause of a worldwide pandemic. Many commercial SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) assays have received Emergency Use Authorization from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. However, there are limited data describing their performance, in particular the performance of high-throughput SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR systems. We analyzed the diagnostic performance of two high-throughput systems: cobas 6800 and Panther Fusion, and their associated RT-PCR assays, with a collection of 389 nasopharyngeal specimens. The overall agreement between the platforms was 96.4% (375/389). Cohen's kappa analysis rated the strength of agreement between the two platforms as "almost perfect" (κ = 0.922; standard error, 0.051). Furthermore, there was no significant difference between corresponding cycle threshold values generated on the two systems (P value = 0.88; Student's t test). Taken together, these data imply that the two platforms can be considered comparable in terms of their clinical performance. We believe that this information will be useful for those who have already adopted these platforms or are seeking to implement high-throughput RT-PCR testing to stem the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , High-Throughput Screening Assays , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , Betacoronavirus/genetics , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Humans , Nasopharynx/virology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , United States
9.
J Clin Microbiol ; 58(8)2020 Jul 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-709926

ABSTRACT

The recent emergence of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has posed formidable challenges for clinical laboratories seeking reliable laboratory diagnostic confirmation. The swift advance of the crisis in the United States has led to Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) facilitating the availability of molecular diagnostic assays without the more rigorous examination to which tests are normally subjected prior to FDA approval. Our laboratory currently uses two real-time reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) platforms, the Roche Cobas SARS-CoV2 and the Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2. The two platforms demonstrate comparable performances; however, the run times for each assay are 3.5 h and 45 min, respectively. In search for a platform with a shorter turnaround time, we sought to evaluate the recently released Abbott ID Now COVID-19 assay, which is capable of producing positive results in as little as 5 min. We present here the results of comparisons between Abbott ID Now COVID-19 and Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 using nasopharyngeal swabs transported in viral transport media and comparisons between Abbott ID Now COVID-19 and Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 using nasopharyngeal swabs transported in viral transport media for Cepheid and dry nasal swabs for Abbott ID Now. Regardless of method of collection and sample type, Abbott ID Now COVID-19 had negative results in a third of the samples that tested positive by Cepheid Xpert Xpress when using nasopharyngeal swabs in viral transport media and 45% when using dry nasal swabs.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Molecular Diagnostic Techniques/methods , Nasal Mucosa/virology , Nasopharynx/virology , Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques/methods , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Animals , Betacoronavirus/genetics , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , New York City , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Sensitivity and Specificity , Specimen Handling/methods , Time Factors
10.
Urol Int ; 104(9-10): 678-683, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-709600

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The presence of new coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) in semen and the possibility of sexual transmission have become new subjects of curiosity. There is a discrepancy regarding this issue in the literature. The presence of SARS-CoV-2 in semen has been investigated in a limited number of studies, and mostly in recovering patients. We aimed to investigate the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in semen of patients with a positive nasopharyngeal swab test for SARS-CoV-2 in the acute stage. METHODS: We enrolled adult male patients who were hospitalized with confirmed SARS-COV-2 infection in the study. In addition to routine laboratory and radiological tests, semen sample was obtained from volunteers and transferred to the Turkish Public Health Institution, National Virology Laboratory. The samples were processed for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA on the day of collection. RESULTS: Sixteen patients were included in the study. The median age was 33.5 years (18-54). All but one had respiratory symptoms. None of the patients had a history or symptoms of urogenital disease. All semen samples were obtained during hospitalization and in the acute stage of the infection. The median time to obtain a semen sample after positive nasopharyngeal test was 1 day (0-7). All semen samples were detected as negative for SARS-CoV-2 PCR. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Although all semen samples were obtained in acute stage of the infection when the nasopharyngeal swab test was positive, we did not detect SARS-CoV-2 in semen. The results of our study support the thought that sexual transmission via semen does not have an important role in the person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2. We think that our study will provide new information to fill the gap in the literature.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , RNA, Viral/isolation & purification , Semen/virology , Adolescent , Adult , Betacoronavirus/genetics , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Nasopharynx/virology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Prospective Studies , RNA, Viral/genetics , Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction , Time Factors , Young Adult
11.
J Korean Med Sci ; 35(31): e287, 2020 Aug 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-705844

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: This study was performed to compare the viral load and kinetics of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in saliva with those in standard nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal (NP/OP) swabs. METHODS: Fifteen patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection from four hospitals were prospectively enrolled and matched samples of nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swabs and saliva were collected at Day 1 of admission and every other day till consequently negative for two times. Real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) was performed to detect the envelope (E) and RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) genes. RESULTS: The cycle threshold values of saliva were comparable to those of NP/OP swabs overall (P = 0.720, Mann-Whitney U test). However, the overall sensitivity of rRT-PCR using saliva was 64% (34/53), which is lower than the 77% (41/53) using NP/OP swabs. The sensitivity of rRT-PCR using saliva was especially lower in early stage of symptom onset (1-5 days; 8/15; 53%) and in patients who did not have sputum (12/22; 55%). CONCLUSION: Saliva sample itself is not appropriate for initial diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) to replace NP/OP swabs, especially for the person who does not produce sputum. COVID-19 cannot be excluded when the test using saliva is negative, and it is necessary to retest using NP/OP swabs.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/genetics , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Saliva/virology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Nasopharynx/virology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Prospective Studies , RNA, Viral/metabolism , Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction , Republic of Korea , Viral Load , Young Adult
12.
PLoS One ; 15(8): e0237127, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-695633

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The global pandemic of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Related Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) has resulted in unprecedented challenges for healthcare systems. One barrier to widespread testing has been a paucity of traditional respiratory viral swab collection kits relative to the demand. Whether other sample collection kits, such as widely available MRSA nasal swabs can be used to detect SARS-CoV-2 is unknown. METHODS: We compared simultaneous nasal MRSA swabs (COPAN ESwabs ® 480C flocked nasal swab in 1mL of liquid Amies medium) and virals wabs (BD H192(07) flexible mini-tip flocked nasopharyngeal swabs in 3mL Universal Transport Medium) for SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing using Simplexa COVID-19 Direct assay on patients over a 4-day period. When the results were discordant, the viral swab sample was run again on the Cepheid Xpert Xpress ® SARS-CoV-2 assay. RESULTS: Of the 81 included samples, there were 19 positives and 62 negatives in viral media and 18 positives and 63 negative in the MRSA swabs. Amongst all included samples, there was concordance between the COPAN ESwabs ® 480C and the viral swabs in 78 (96.3%). CONCLUSION: We found a high rate of concordance in test results between COPAN ESwabs ® 480C in Amies solution and BD H192(07) nasopharyngeal swabs in in 3 mL of Universal Viral Transport medium viral media. Clinicians and laboratories should feel better informed and assured using COPAN ESwabs ® 480C to help in the diagnosis of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/genetics , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus/genetics , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Specimen Handling/methods , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Humans , Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus/isolation & purification , Nasopharynx/microbiology , Nasopharynx/virology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , RNA Stability , RNA, Bacterial/analysis , RNA, Bacterial/metabolism , RNA, Viral/analysis , RNA, Viral/metabolism , Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction
13.
Braz J Microbiol ; 51(3): 1117-1123, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-695574

ABSTRACT

In March 2020, WHO declared a pandemic state due to SARS-CoV-2 having spread. TaqMan-based real-time RT-qPCR is currently the gold standard for COVID-19 diagnosis. However, it is a high-cost assay, inaccessible for the majority of laboratories around the world, making it difficult to diagnose on a large scale. The objective of this study was to standardize lower cost molecular methods for SARS-CoV-2 identification. E gene primers previously determined for TaqMan assays by Colman et al. (2020) were adapted in SYBR Green assay and RT-PCR conventional. The cross-reactivity test was performed with 17 positive samples for other respiratory viruses, and the sensibility test was performed with 8 dilutions (10 based) of SARS-CoV-2 isolated and 63 SARS-CoV-2-positive samples. The SYBR Green assays and conventional RT-PCR have not shown amplification of the 17 respiratory samples positives for other viruses. The SYBR Green-based assay was able to detect all 8 dilutions of the isolate. The conventional PCR detected until 107 dilution, both assays detected the majority of the 63 samples, 98.42% of positivity in SYBR Green, and 93% in conventional PCR. The average Ct variation between SYBR Green and TaqMan was 1.92 and the highest Ct detected by conventional PCR was 35.98. Both of the proposed assays are less sensitive than the current gold standard; however, our data shows a low sensibility variation, suggesting that these methods could be used by laboratories as a lower cost molecular method for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Fluorescent Dyes/economics , Organic Chemicals/economics , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction/economics , Adolescent , Adult , Animals , Betacoronavirus/genetics , Child , Chlorocebus aethiops , Coronavirus Infections/economics , Cross Reactions , Humans , Middle Aged , Nasopharynx/virology , Oropharynx/virology , Pandemics/economics , Pneumonia, Viral/economics , RNA, Viral/isolation & purification , Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , Sensitivity and Specificity , Vero Cells , Young Adult
14.
Int J Mol Sci ; 21(15)2020 Jul 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-693630

ABSTRACT

To control the COVID-19 pandemic and prevent its resurgence in areas preparing for a return of economic activities, a method for a rapid, simple, and inexpensive point-of-care diagnosis and mass screening is urgently needed. We developed and evaluated a one-step colorimetric reverse-transcriptional loop-mediated isothermal amplification assay (COVID-19-LAMP) for detection of SARS-CoV-2, using SARS-CoV-2 isolate and respiratory samples from patients with COVID-19 (n = 223) and other respiratory virus infections (n = 143). The assay involves simple equipment and techniques and low cost, without the need for expensive qPCR machines, and the result, indicated by color change, is easily interpreted by naked eyes. COVID-19-LAMP can detect SARS-CoV-2 RNA with detection limit of 42 copies/reaction. Of 223 respiratory samples positive for SARS-CoV-2 by qRT-PCR, 212 and 219 were positive by COVID-19-LAMP at 60 and 90 min (sensitivities of 95.07% and 98.21%) respectively, with the highest sensitivities among nasopharyngeal swabs (96.88% and 98.96%), compared to sputum/deep throat saliva samples (94.03% and 97.02%), and throat swab samples (93.33% and 98.33%). None of the 143 samples with other respiratory viruses were positive by COVID-19-LAMP, showing 100% specificity. Samples with higher viral load showed shorter detection time, some as early as 30 min. This inexpensive, highly sensitive and specific COVID-19-LAMP assay can be useful for rapid deployment as mobile diagnostic units to resource-limiting areas for point-of-care diagnosis, and for unlimited high-throughput mass screening at borders to reduce cross-regional transmission.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/genetics , Colorimetry/methods , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Mass Screening/economics , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , RNA, Viral/analysis , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Colorimetry/economics , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Humans , Limit of Detection , Nasopharynx/virology , Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques/methods , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Point-of-Care Systems , RNA, Viral/metabolism , Viral Load
16.
J Clin Microbiol ; 58(8)2020 07 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-684521

ABSTRACT

We compared the ability of 2 commercial molecular amplification assays (RealTime SARS-CoV-2 on the m2000 [abbreviated ACOV; Abbott] and ID Now COVID-19 [abbreviated IDNOW; Abbott]) and a laboratory-developed test (modified CDC 2019-nCoV reverse transcriptase PCR [RT-PCR] assay with RNA extraction by eMag [bioMérieux] and amplification on QuantStudio 6 or ABI 7500 real-time PCR system [abbreviated CDC COV]) to detect severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA in upper respiratory tract specimens. Discrepant results were adjudicated by medical record review. A total of 200 nasopharyngeal swab specimens in viral transport medium (VTM) were collected from symptomatic patients between 27 March and 9 April 2020. Results were concordant for 167 specimens (83.5% overall agreement), including 94 positive and 73 negative specimens. The ACOV assay yielded 33 additional positive results, 25 of which were also positive by the CDC COV assay but not by the IDNOW assay. In a follow-up evaluation, 97 patients for whom a dry nasal swab specimen yielded negative results by IDNOW had a paired nasopharyngeal swab specimen collected in VTM and tested by the ACOV assay; SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in 13 (13.4%) of these specimens. Medical record review deemed all discrepant results to be true positives. The IDNOW test was the easiest to perform and provided a result in the shortest time but detected fewer cases of COVID-19. The ACOV assay detected more cases of COVID-19 than the CDC COV or IDNOW assays.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Adult , Aged , Betacoronavirus/genetics , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Nasopharynx/virology , Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques/methods , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Sensitivity and Specificity , Specimen Handling/methods , Time Factors , United States
19.
West J Emerg Med ; 21(4): 813-816, 2020 Jun 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-682096

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Expanded testing for SARS-CoV-2 is critical to characterizing the extent of community spread of COVID-19 and to identifying infectious cohorts. Unfortunately, current facility-based testing compounds shortcomings in testing availability, neglecting those who are frail or physically unable to travel to a testing facility. METHODS: We developed an emergency medical service (EMS)-based home testing and evaluation program, leveraging existing community EMS resources. This program has kept vulnerable populations out of the emergency department, reduced cost, and improved access to care. RESULTS: Our EMS-based testing program can test approximately 15 homebound patients per day. Through April 2020 our program had performed 477 home-based tests. Additionally, we have recently undertaken several mass testing operations, testing up to 900 patients per testing site. CONCLUSION: Facility-based SARS-CoV-2 testing requires that a patient physically present to a facility for a nasopharyngeal swap to be collected. Unfortunately, access may be limited for patients that are homebound, chronically ill, or without a means of private transportation. By leveraging existing EMS infrastructure in new ways, our community has been able to keep almost 500 vulnerable patients in their home. Using EMS, we can strengthen the healthcare system's response to the evolving COVID-19 pandemic and support at-risk populations, including those that are underserved, homebound, and frail.


Subject(s)
Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Emergency Medical Services , Home Care Services/organization & administration , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Vulnerable Populations , Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Humans , Massachusetts/epidemiology , Nasopharynx/virology , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Specimen Handling
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL