Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 17 de 17
Filtrar
1.
Influenza Other Respir Viruses ; 17(5): e13150, 2023 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20236565

RESUMEN

There are concerns that sotrovimab has reduced efficacy at reducing hospitalisation risk against the BA.2 sub-lineage of the Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variant. We performed a retrospective cohort (n = 8850) study of individuals treated with sotrovimab in the community, with the objective of assessing whether there were any differences in risk of hospitalisation of BA.2 cases compared with BA.1. We estimated that the hazard ratio of hospital admission with a length of stay of 2 days or more was 1.17 for BA.2 compared with BA.1 (95%CI 0.74-1.86). These results suggest that the risk of hospital admission was similar between the two sub-lineages.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Inglaterra/epidemiología
3.
N Engl J Med ; 385(7): 585-594, 2021 08 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2251957

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The B.1.617.2 (delta) variant of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), has contributed to a surge in cases in India and has now been detected across the globe, including a notable increase in cases in the United Kingdom. The effectiveness of the BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccines against this variant has been unclear. METHODS: We used a test-negative case-control design to estimate the effectiveness of vaccination against symptomatic disease caused by the delta variant or the predominant strain (B.1.1.7, or alpha variant) over the period that the delta variant began circulating. Variants were identified with the use of sequencing and on the basis of the spike (S) gene status. Data on all symptomatic sequenced cases of Covid-19 in England were used to estimate the proportion of cases with either variant according to the patients' vaccination status. RESULTS: Effectiveness after one dose of vaccine (BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) was notably lower among persons with the delta variant (30.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 25.2 to 35.7) than among those with the alpha variant (48.7%; 95% CI, 45.5 to 51.7); the results were similar for both vaccines. With the BNT162b2 vaccine, the effectiveness of two doses was 93.7% (95% CI, 91.6 to 95.3) among persons with the alpha variant and 88.0% (95% CI, 85.3 to 90.1) among those with the delta variant. With the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine, the effectiveness of two doses was 74.5% (95% CI, 68.4 to 79.4) among persons with the alpha variant and 67.0% (95% CI, 61.3 to 71.8) among those with the delta variant. CONCLUSIONS: Only modest differences in vaccine effectiveness were noted with the delta variant as compared with the alpha variant after the receipt of two vaccine doses. Absolute differences in vaccine effectiveness were more marked after the receipt of the first dose. This finding would support efforts to maximize vaccine uptake with two doses among vulnerable populations. (Funded by Public Health England.).


Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19/inmunología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Inmunogenicidad Vacunal , SARS-CoV-2 , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/virología , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Resultado del Tratamiento , Reino Unido/epidemiología , Potencia de la Vacuna , Adulto Joven
4.
Epidemiol Infect ; 151: e58, 2023 03 20.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2249126

RESUMEN

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) rapidly replaced Delta (B.1.617.2) to become dominant in England. Our study assessed differences in transmission between Omicron and Delta using two independent data sources and methods. Omicron and Delta cases were identified through genomic sequencing, genotyping and S-gene target failure in England from 5-11 December 2021. Secondary attack rates for named contacts were calculated in household and non-household settings using contact tracing data, while household clustering was identified using national surveillance data. Logistic regression models were applied to control for factors associated with transmission for both methods. For contact tracing data, higher secondary attack rates for Omicron vs. Delta were identified in households (15.0% vs. 10.8%) and non-households (8.2% vs. 3.7%). For both variants, in household settings, onward transmission was reduced from cases and named contacts who had three doses of vaccine compared to two, but this effect was less pronounced for Omicron (adjusted risk ratio, aRR 0.78 and 0.88) than Delta (aRR 0.62 and 0.68). In non-household settings, a similar reduction was observed only in contacts who had three doses vs. two doses for both Delta (aRR 0.51) and Omicron (aRR 0.76). For national surveillance data, the risk of household clustering, was increased 3.5-fold for Omicron compared to Delta (aRR 3.54 (3.29-3.81)). Our study identified increased risk of onward transmission of Omicron, consistent with its successful global displacement of Delta. We identified a reduced effectiveness of vaccination in lowering risk of transmission, a likely contributor for the rapid propagation of Omicron.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Estudios de Cohortes , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunación , Inglaterra/epidemiología
6.
Nature ; 610(7930): 154-160, 2022 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1991629

RESUMEN

The SARS-CoV-2 Delta (Pango lineage B.1.617.2) variant of concern spread globally, causing resurgences of COVID-19 worldwide1,2. The emergence of the Delta variant in the UK occurred on the background of a heterogeneous landscape of immunity and relaxation of non-pharmaceutical interventions. Here we analyse 52,992 SARS-CoV-2 genomes from England together with 93,649 genomes from the rest of the world to reconstruct the emergence of Delta and quantify its introduction to and regional dissemination across England in the context of changing travel and social restrictions. Using analysis of human movement, contact tracing and virus genomic data, we find that the geographic focus of the expansion of Delta shifted from India to a more global pattern in early May 2021. In England, Delta lineages were introduced more than 1,000 times and spread nationally as non-pharmaceutical interventions were relaxed. We find that hotel quarantine for travellers reduced onward transmission from importations; however, the transmission chains that later dominated the Delta wave in England were seeded before travel restrictions were introduced. Increasing inter-regional travel within England drove the nationwide dissemination of Delta, with some cities receiving more than 2,000 observable lineage introductions from elsewhere. Subsequently, increased levels of local population mixing-and not the number of importations-were associated with the faster relative spread of Delta. The invasion dynamics of Delta depended on spatial heterogeneity in contact patterns, and our findings will inform optimal spatial interventions to reduce the transmission of current and future variants of concern, such as Omicron (Pango lineage B.1.1.529).


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , COVID-19/transmisión , COVID-19/virología , Ciudades/epidemiología , Trazado de Contacto , Inglaterra/epidemiología , Genoma Viral/genética , Humanos , Cuarentena/legislación & jurisprudencia , SARS-CoV-2/genética , SARS-CoV-2/crecimiento & desarrollo , SARS-CoV-2/aislamiento & purificación , Viaje/legislación & jurisprudencia
7.
Euro Surveill ; 27(20)2022 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1862539

RESUMEN

BackgroundThe emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 Alpha variant in England coincided with a rapid increase in the number of PCR-confirmed COVID-19 cases in areas where the variant was concentrated.AimOur aim was to assess whether infection with Alpha was associated with more severe clinical outcomes than the wild type.MethodsLaboratory-confirmed infections with genomically sequenced SARS-CoV-2 Alpha and wild type between October and December 2020 were linked to routine healthcare and surveillance datasets. We conducted two statistical analyses to compare the risk of hospital admission and death within 28 days of testing between Alpha and wild-type infections: a matched cohort study and an adjusted Cox proportional hazards model. We assessed differences in disease severity by comparing hospital admission and mortality, including length of hospitalisation and time to death.ResultsOf 63,609 COVID-19 cases sequenced in England between October and December 2020, 6,038 had the Alpha variant. In the matched cohort analysis, we matched 2,821 cases with Alpha to 2,821 to cases with wild type. In the time-to-event analysis, we observed a 34% increased risk in hospitalisation associated with Alpha compared with wild type, but no significant difference in the risk of mortality.ConclusionWe found evidence of increased risk of hospitalisation after adjusting for key confounders, suggesting increased infection severity associated with the Alpha variant. Rapid assessments of the relative morbidity in terms of clinical outcomes and mortality associated with emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants compared with dominant variants are required to assess overall impact of SARS-CoV-2 mutations.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Estudios de Cohortes , Inglaterra/epidemiología , Hospitalización , Hospitales , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2/genética
8.
9.
J Infect Dis ; 226(5): 808-811, 2022 09 13.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1758754

RESUMEN

To investigate if the AY.4.2 sublineage of the SARS-CoV-2 delta variant is associated with hospitalization and mortality risks that differ from non-AY.4.2 delta risks, we performed a retrospective cohort study of sequencing-confirmed COVID-19 cases in England based on linkage of routine health care datasets. Using stratified Cox regression, we estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) of hospital admission (aHR = 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], .77-.94), hospital admission or emergency care attendance (aHR = 0.87; 95% CI, .81-.94), and COVID-19 mortality (aHR = 0.85; 95% CI, .71-1.03). The results indicate that the risks of hospitalization and mortality are similar or lower for AY.4.2 compared to cases with other delta sublineages.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Hospitalización , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos
10.
Lancet ; 399(10332): 1303-1312, 2022 04 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1740323

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The omicron variant (B.1.1.529) of SARS-CoV-2 has demonstrated partial vaccine escape and high transmissibility, with early studies indicating lower severity of infection than that of the delta variant (B.1.617.2). We aimed to better characterise omicron severity relative to delta by assessing the relative risk of hospital attendance, hospital admission, or death in a large national cohort. METHODS: Individual-level data on laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases resident in England between Nov 29, 2021, and Jan 9, 2022, were linked to routine datasets on vaccination status, hospital attendance and admission, and mortality. The relative risk of hospital attendance or admission within 14 days, or death within 28 days after confirmed infection, was estimated using proportional hazards regression. Analyses were stratified by test date, 10-year age band, ethnicity, residential region, and vaccination status, and were further adjusted for sex, index of multiple deprivation decile, evidence of a previous infection, and year of age within each age band. A secondary analysis estimated variant-specific and vaccine-specific vaccine effectiveness and the intrinsic relative severity of omicron infection compared with delta (ie, the relative risk in unvaccinated cases). FINDINGS: The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of hospital attendance (not necessarily resulting in admission) with omicron compared with delta was 0·56 (95% CI 0·54-0·58); for hospital admission and death, HR estimates were 0·41 (0·39-0·43) and 0·31 (0·26-0·37), respectively. Omicron versus delta HR estimates varied with age for all endpoints examined. The adjusted HR for hospital admission was 1·10 (0·85-1·42) in those younger than 10 years, decreasing to 0·25 (0·21-0·30) in 60-69-year-olds, and then increasing to 0·47 (0·40-0·56) in those aged at least 80 years. For both variants, past infection gave some protection against death both in vaccinated (HR 0·47 [0·32-0·68]) and unvaccinated (0·18 [0·06-0·57]) cases. In vaccinated cases, past infection offered no additional protection against hospital admission beyond that provided by vaccination (HR 0·96 [0·88-1·04]); however, for unvaccinated cases, past infection gave moderate protection (HR 0·55 [0·48-0·63]). Omicron versus delta HR estimates were lower for hospital admission (0·30 [0·28-0·32]) in unvaccinated cases than the corresponding HR estimated for all cases in the primary analysis. Booster vaccination with an mRNA vaccine was highly protective against hospitalisation and death in omicron cases (HR for hospital admission 8-11 weeks post-booster vs unvaccinated: 0·22 [0·20-0·24]), with the protection afforded after a booster not being affected by the vaccine used for doses 1 and 2. INTERPRETATION: The risk of severe outcomes following SARS-CoV-2 infection is substantially lower for omicron than for delta, with higher reductions for more severe endpoints and significant variation with age. Underlying the observed risks is a larger reduction in intrinsic severity (in unvaccinated individuals) counterbalanced by a reduction in vaccine effectiveness. Documented previous SARS-CoV-2 infection offered some protection against hospitalisation and high protection against death in unvaccinated individuals, but only offered additional protection in vaccinated individuals for the death endpoint. Booster vaccination with mRNA vaccines maintains over 70% protection against hospitalisation and death in breakthrough confirmed omicron infections. FUNDING: Medical Research Council, UK Research and Innovation, Department of Health and Social Care, National Institute for Health Research, Community Jameel, and Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Estudios de Cohortes , Inglaterra/epidemiología , Hospitalización , Humanos , Vacunas Sintéticas , Vacunas de ARNm
11.
N Engl J Med ; 386(16): 1532-1546, 2022 04 21.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1730372

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: A rapid increase in coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) cases due to the omicron (B.1.1.529) variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in highly vaccinated populations has aroused concerns about the effectiveness of current vaccines. METHODS: We used a test-negative case-control design to estimate vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic disease caused by the omicron and delta (B.1.617.2) variants in England. Vaccine effectiveness was calculated after primary immunization with two doses of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech), ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AstraZeneca), or mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine and after a booster dose of BNT162b2, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, or mRNA-1273. RESULTS: Between November 27, 2021, and January 12, 2022, a total of 886,774 eligible persons infected with the omicron variant, 204,154 eligible persons infected with the delta variant, and 1,572,621 eligible test-negative controls were identified. At all time points investigated and for all combinations of primary course and booster vaccines, vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic disease was higher for the delta variant than for the omicron variant. No effect against the omicron variant was noted from 20 weeks after two ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 doses, whereas vaccine effectiveness after two BNT162b2 doses was 65.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 63.9 to 67.0) at 2 to 4 weeks, dropping to 8.8% (95% CI, 7.0 to 10.5) at 25 or more weeks. Among ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 primary course recipients, vaccine effectiveness increased to 62.4% (95% CI, 61.8 to 63.0) at 2 to 4 weeks after a BNT162b2 booster before decreasing to 39.6% (95% CI, 38.0 to 41.1) at 10 or more weeks. Among BNT162b2 primary course recipients, vaccine effectiveness increased to 67.2% (95% CI, 66.5 to 67.8) at 2 to 4 weeks after a BNT162b2 booster before declining to 45.7% (95% CI, 44.7 to 46.7) at 10 or more weeks. Vaccine effectiveness after a ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 primary course increased to 70.1% (95% CI, 69.5 to 70.7) at 2 to 4 weeks after an mRNA-1273 booster and decreased to 60.9% (95% CI, 59.7 to 62.1) at 5 to 9 weeks. After a BNT162b2 primary course, the mRNA-1273 booster increased vaccine effectiveness to 73.9% (95% CI, 73.1 to 74.6) at 2 to 4 weeks; vaccine effectiveness fell to 64.4% (95% CI, 62.6 to 66.1) at 5 to 9 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Primary immunization with two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 vaccine provided limited protection against symptomatic disease caused by the omicron variant. A BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 booster after either the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 primary course substantially increased protection, but that protection waned over time. (Funded by the U.K. Health Security Agency.).


Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Eficacia de las Vacunas , Vacuna nCoV-2019 mRNA-1273/uso terapéutico , Vacuna BNT162/uso terapéutico , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/uso terapéutico , Estudios de Casos y Controles , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Inmunización Secundaria/efectos adversos , SARS-CoV-2/genética
12.
N Engl J Med ; 386(4): 340-350, 2022 01 27.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1621313

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), have been used since December 2020 in the United Kingdom. Real-world data have shown the vaccines to be highly effective against Covid-19 and related severe disease and death. Vaccine effectiveness may wane over time since the receipt of the second dose of the ChAdOx1-S (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) and BNT162b2 vaccines. METHODS: We used a test-negative case-control design to estimate vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic Covid-19 and related hospitalization and death in England. Effectiveness of the ChAdOx1-S and BNT162b2 vaccines was assessed according to participant age and status with regard to coexisting conditions and over time since receipt of the second vaccine dose to investigate waning of effectiveness separately for the B.1.1.7 (alpha) and B.1.617.2 (delta) variants. RESULTS: Vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic Covid-19 with the delta variant peaked in the early weeks after receipt of the second dose and then decreased by 20 weeks to 44.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 43.2 to 45.4) with the ChAdOx1-S vaccine and to 66.3% (95% CI, 65.7 to 66.9) with the BNT162b2 vaccine. Waning of vaccine effectiveness was greater in persons 65 years of age or older than in those 40 to 64 years of age. At 20 weeks or more after vaccination, vaccine effectiveness decreased less against both hospitalization, to 80.0% (95% CI, 76.8 to 82.7) with the ChAdOx1-S vaccine and 91.7% (95% CI, 90.2 to 93.0) with the BNT162b2 vaccine, and death, to 84.8% (95% CI, 76.2 to 90.3) and 91.9% (95% CI, 88.5 to 94.3), respectively. Greater waning in vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization was observed in persons 65 years of age or older in a clinically extremely vulnerable group and in persons 40 to 64 years of age with underlying medical conditions than in healthy adults. CONCLUSIONS: We observed limited waning in vaccine effectiveness against Covid-19-related hospitalization and death at 20 weeks or more after vaccination with two doses of the ChAdOx1-S or BNT162b2 vaccine. Waning was greater in older adults and in those in a clinical risk group.


Asunto(s)
Vacuna BNT162 , COVID-19/prevención & control , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Eficacia de las Vacunas , Adolescente , Adulto , Factores de Edad , Anciano , COVID-19/mortalidad , COVID-19/virología , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Femenino , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Inmunización Secundaria , Inmunogenicidad Vacunal , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Gravedad del Paciente , Factores de Riesgo , SARS-CoV-2 , Factores de Tiempo , Reino Unido/epidemiología
13.
Euro Surveill ; 26(48)2021 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1613505

RESUMEN

Easing of COVID-19 restrictions in England in the summer of 2021 was followed by a sharp rise in cases among school-aged children. Weekly rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection in primary and secondary school children reached 733.3 and 1,664.7/100,000 population, respectively, by week 39 2021. A surge in household clusters with school-aged index cases was noted at the start of the school term, with secondary cases predominantly in children aged 5-15 years and adults aged 30-49 years.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adulto , Niño , Inglaterra/epidemiología , Composición Familiar , Humanos , Instituciones Académicas
14.
Lancet Infect Dis ; 22(1): 35-42, 2022 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1598838

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 delta (B.1.617.2) variant was first detected in England in March, 2021. It has since rapidly become the predominant lineage, owing to high transmissibility. It is suspected that the delta variant is associated with more severe disease than the previously dominant alpha (B.1.1.7) variant. We aimed to characterise the severity of the delta variant compared with the alpha variant by determining the relative risk of hospital attendance outcomes. METHODS: This cohort study was done among all patients with COVID-19 in England between March 29 and May 23, 2021, who were identified as being infected with either the alpha or delta SARS-CoV-2 variant through whole-genome sequencing. Individual-level data on these patients were linked to routine health-care datasets on vaccination, emergency care attendance, hospital admission, and mortality (data from Public Health England's Second Generation Surveillance System and COVID-19-associated deaths dataset; the National Immunisation Management System; and NHS Digital Secondary Uses Services and Emergency Care Data Set). The risk for hospital admission and emergency care attendance were compared between patients with sequencing-confirmed delta and alpha variants for the whole cohort and by vaccination status subgroups. Stratified Cox regression was used to adjust for age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation, recent international travel, area of residence, calendar week, and vaccination status. FINDINGS: Individual-level data on 43 338 COVID-19-positive patients (8682 with the delta variant, 34 656 with the alpha variant; median age 31 years [IQR 17-43]) were included in our analysis. 196 (2·3%) patients with the delta variant versus 764 (2·2%) patients with the alpha variant were admitted to hospital within 14 days after the specimen was taken (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 2·26 [95% CI 1·32-3·89]). 498 (5·7%) patients with the delta variant versus 1448 (4·2%) patients with the alpha variant were admitted to hospital or attended emergency care within 14 days (adjusted HR 1·45 [1·08-1·95]). Most patients were unvaccinated (32 078 [74·0%] across both groups). The HRs for vaccinated patients with the delta variant versus the alpha variant (adjusted HR for hospital admission 1·94 [95% CI 0·47-8·05] and for hospital admission or emergency care attendance 1·58 [0·69-3·61]) were similar to the HRs for unvaccinated patients (2·32 [1·29-4·16] and 1·43 [1·04-1·97]; p=0·82 for both) but the precision for the vaccinated subgroup was low. INTERPRETATION: This large national study found a higher hospital admission or emergency care attendance risk for patients with COVID-19 infected with the delta variant compared with the alpha variant. Results suggest that outbreaks of the delta variant in unvaccinated populations might lead to a greater burden on health-care services than the alpha variant. FUNDING: Medical Research Council; UK Research and Innovation; Department of Health and Social Care; and National Institute for Health Research.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19/virología , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia/estadística & datos numéricos , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , SARS-CoV-2/patogenicidad , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , COVID-19/epidemiología , Niño , Preescolar , Estudios de Cohortes , Inglaterra/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , SARS-CoV-2/clasificación , Adulto Joven
15.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 27(11): 1658-1665, 2021 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1392218

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: The impact of bacterial/fungal infections on the morbidity and mortality of persons with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains unclear. We have investigated the incidence and impact of key bacterial/fungal infections in persons with COVID-19 in England. METHODS: We extracted laboratory-confirmed cases of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection (1st January 2020 to 2nd June 2020) and blood and lower-respiratory specimens positive for 24 genera/species of clinical relevance (1st January 2020 to 30th June 2020) from Public Health England's national laboratory surveillance system. We defined coinfection and secondary infection as a culture-positive key organism isolated within 1 day or 2-27 days, respectively, of the SARS-CoV-2-positive date. We described the incidence and timing of bacterial/fungal infections and compared characteristics of COVID-19 patients with and without bacterial/fungal infection. RESULTS: 1% of persons with COVID-19 (2279/223413) in England had coinfection/secondary infection, of which >65% were bloodstream infections. The most common causative organisms were Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus and Klebsiella pneumoniae. Cases with coinfection/secondary infections were older than those without (median 70 years (IQR 58-81) versus 55 years (IQR 38-77)), and a higher percentage of cases with secondary infection were of Black or Asian ethnicity than cases without (6.7% versus 4.1%, and 9.9% versus 8.2%, respectively, p < 0.001). Age-sex-adjusted case fatality rates were higher in COVID-19 cases with a coinfection (23.0% (95%CI 18.8-27.6%)) or secondary infection (26.5% (95%CI 14.5-39.4%)) than in those without (7.6% (95%CI 7.5-7.7%)) (p < 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Coinfection/secondary bacterial/fungal infections were rare in non-hospitalized and hospitalized persons with COVID-19, varied by ethnicity and age, and were associated with higher mortality. However, the inclusion of non-hospitalized persons with asymptomatic/mild COVID-19 likely underestimated the rate of secondary bacterial/fungal infections. This should inform diagnostic testing and antibiotic prescribing strategy.


Asunto(s)
Infecciones Bacterianas , COVID-19 , Coinfección , Micosis , Adulto , Anciano , Infecciones Bacterianas/epidemiología , COVID-19/epidemiología , Coinfección/epidemiología , Inglaterra/epidemiología , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Micosis/epidemiología
16.
J Infect ; 83(5): 565-572, 2021 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1377763

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Nosocomial transmission was an important aspect of SARS-CoV-1 and MERS-CoV outbreaks. Healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 infection has been reported in single and multi-site hospital-based studies in England, but not nationally. METHODS: Admission records for all hospitals in England were linked to SARS-CoV-2 national test data for the period 01/03/2020 to 31/08/2020. Case definitions were: community-onset community-acquired, first positive test <14 days pre-admission, up to day 2 of admission; hospital-onset indeterminate healthcare-associated, first positive on day 3-7; hospital-onset probable healthcare-associated, first positive on day 8-14; hospital-onset definite healthcare-associated, first positive from day 15 of admission until discharge; community-onset possible healthcare-associated, first positive test ≤14 days post-discharge. RESULTS: One-third (34.4%, 100,859/293,204) of all laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases were linked to a hospital record. Hospital-onset probable and definite cases represented 5.3% (15,564/293,204) of all laboratory-confirmed cases and 15.4% (15,564/100,859) of laboratory-confirmed cases among hospital patients. Community-onset community-acquired and community-onset possible healthcare-associated cases represented 86.5% (253,582/293,204) and 5.1% (14,913/293,204) of all laboratory-confirmed cases, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Up to 1 in 6 SARS-CoV-2 infections among hospitalised patients with COVID-19 in England during the first 6 months of the pandemic could be attributed to nosocomial transmission, but these represent less than 1% of the estimated 3 million COVID-19 cases in this period.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Cuidados Posteriores , Atención a la Salud , Humanos , Almacenamiento y Recuperación de la Información , Alta del Paciente , SARS-CoV-2
17.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 27(8): 2183-2186, 2021 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1319581

RESUMEN

Using laboratory data and a novel address matching methodology, we identified 734 cases of coronavirus disease in 88 prisons in England during March 16-October 12, 2020. An additional 412 cases were identified in prison staff and household members. We identified 84 prison outbreaks involving 86% of all prison-associated cases.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Prisioneros , Brotes de Enfermedades , Inglaterra/epidemiología , Humanos , Prisiones , SARS-CoV-2
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA