Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
1.
J Med Virol ; 95(2): e28442, 2023 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2248007

RESUMEN

Wastewater-based SARS-CoV-2 surveillance enables unbiased and comprehensive monitoring of defined sewersheds. We performed real-time monitoring of hospital wastewater that differentiated Delta and Omicron variants within total SARS-CoV-2-RNA, enabling correlation to COVID-19 cases from three tertiary-care facilities with >2100 inpatient beds in Calgary, Canada. RNA was extracted from hospital wastewater between August/2021 and January/2022, and SARS-CoV-2 quantified using RT-qPCR. Assays targeting R203M and R203K/G204R established the proportional abundance of Delta and Omicron, respectively. Total and variant-specific SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater was compared to data for variant specific COVID-19 hospitalizations, hospital-acquired infections, and outbreaks. Ninety-six percent (188/196) of wastewater samples were SARS-CoV-2 positive. Total SARS-CoV-2 RNA levels in wastewater increased in tandem with total prevalent cases (Delta plus Omicron). Variant-specific assessments showed this increase to be mainly driven by Omicron. Hospital-acquired cases of COVID-19 were associated with large spikes in wastewater SARS-CoV-2 and levels were significantly increased during outbreaks relative to nonoutbreak periods for total SARS-CoV2, Delta and Omicron. SARS-CoV-2 in hospital wastewater was significantly higher during the Omicron-wave irrespective of outbreaks. Wastewater-based monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 and its variants represents a novel tool for passive COVID-19 infection surveillance, case identification, containment, and potentially to mitigate viral spread in hospitals.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , ARN Viral , Aguas Residuales , Centros de Atención Terciaria , Brotes de Enfermedades
2.
Ann Intern Med ; 2022 Nov 29.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2203118

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: It is uncertain if medical masks offer similar protection against COVID-19 compared with N95 respirators. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether medical masks are noninferior to N95 respirators to prevent COVID-19 in health care workers providing routine care. DESIGN: Multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04296643). SETTING: 29 health care facilities in Canada, Israel, Pakistan, and Egypt from 4 May 2020 to 29 March 2022. PARTICIPANTS: 1009 health care workers who provided direct care to patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19. INTERVENTION: Use of medical masks versus fit-tested N95 respirators for 10 weeks, plus universal masking, which was the policy implemented at each site. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was confirmed COVID-19 on reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat analysis, RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 occurred in 52 of 497 (10.46%) participants in the medical mask group versus 47 of 507 (9.27%) in the N95 respirator group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.14 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.69]). An unplanned subgroup analysis by country found that in the medical mask group versus the N95 respirator group RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 occurred in 8 of 131 (6.11%) versus 3 of 135 (2.22%) in Canada (HR, 2.83 [CI, 0.75 to 10.72]), 6 of 17 (35.29%) versus 4 of 17 (23.53%) in Israel (HR, 1.54 [CI, 0.43 to 5.49]), 3 of 92 (3.26%) versus 2 of 94 (2.13%) in Pakistan (HR, 1.50 [CI, 0.25 to 8.98]), and 35 of 257 (13.62%) versus 38 of 261 (14.56%) in Egypt (HR, 0.95 [CI, 0.60 to 1.50]). There were 47 (10.8%) adverse events related to the intervention reported in the medical mask group and 59 (13.6%) in the N95 respirator group. LIMITATION: Potential acquisition of SARS-CoV-2 through household and community exposure, heterogeneity between countries, uncertainty in the estimates of effect, differences in self-reported adherence, differences in baseline antibodies, and between-country differences in circulating variants and vaccination. CONCLUSION: Among health care workers who provided routine care to patients with COVID-19, the overall estimates rule out a doubling in hazard of RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 for medical masks when compared with HRs of RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 for N95 respirators. The subgroup results varied by country, and the overall estimates may not be applicable to individual countries because of treatment effect heterogeneity. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, World Health Organization, and Juravinski Research Institute.

3.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control ; 11(1): 102, 2022 08 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1993387

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In many jurisdictions healthcare workers (HCWs) are using respirators for aerosol-generating medical procedures (AGMPs) performed on adult and pediatric populations with all suspect/confirmed viral respiratory infections (VRIs). This systematic review assessed the risk of VRIs to HCWs in the presence of AGMPs, the role respirators versus medical/surgical masks have on reducing that risk, and if the risk to HCWs during AGMPs differed when caring for adult or pediatric patient populations. MAIN TEXT: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, Cochrane SR, CINAHL, COVID-19 specific resources, and MedRxiv for English and French articles from database inception to September 9, 2021. Independent reviewers screened abstracts using pre-defined criteria, reviewed full-text articles, selected relevant studies, abstracted data, and conducted quality assessments of all studies using the ROBINS-I risk of bias tool. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. Thirty-eight studies were included; 23 studies on COVID-19, 10 on SARS, and 5 on MERS/ influenza/other respiratory viruses. Two of the 16 studies which assessed associations found that HCWs were 1.7 to 2.5 times more likely to contract COVID-19 after exposure to AGMPs vs. not exposed to AGMPs. Eight studies reported statistically significant associations for nine specific AGMPs and transmission of SARS to HCWS. Intubation was consistently associated with an increased risk of SARS. HCWs were more likely (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.2-3.4) to contract human coronaviruses when exposed to an AGMP in one study. There were no reported associations between AGMP exposure and transmission of influenza or in a single study on MERS. There was limited evidence supporting the use of a respirator over a medical/surgical mask during an AGMP to reduce the risk of viral transmission. One study described outcomes of HCWs exposed to a pediatric patient during intubation. CONCLUSION: Exposure to an AGMP may increase the risk of transmission of COVID-19, SARS, and human coronaviruses to HCWs, however the evidence base is heterogenous and prone to confounding, particularly related to COVID-19. There continues to be a significant research gap in the epidemiology of the risk of VRIs among HCWs during AGMPs, particularly for pediatric patients. Further evidence is needed regarding what constitutes an AGMP.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Gripe Humana , Niño , Humanos , Pandemias , Aerosoles y Gotitas Respiratorias , SARS-CoV-2
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA