DRUL for school: Opening Pre-K with safe, simple, sensitive saliva testing for SARS-CoV-2.

To address the need for simple, safe, sensitive, and scalable SARS-CoV-2 tests, we validated and implemented a PCR test that uses a saliva collection kit use at home. Individuals self-collected 300 µl saliva in vials containing Darnell Rockefeller University Laboratory (DRUL) buffer and extracted RNA was assayed by RT-PCR (the DRUL saliva assay). The limit of detection was confirmed to be 1 viral copy/µl in 20 of 20 replicate extractions. Viral RNA was stable in DRUL buffer at room temperature up to seven days after sample collection, and safety studies demonstrated that DRUL buffer immediately inactivated virus at concentrations up to 2.75x106 PFU/ml. Results from SARS-CoV-2 positive nasopharyngeal (NP) swab samples collected in viral transport media and assayed with a standard FDA Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) test were highly correlated with samples placed in DRUL buffer. Direct comparison of results from 162 individuals tested by FDA EUA oropharyngeal (OP) or NP swabs with co-collected saliva samples identified four otherwise unidentified positive cases in DRUL buffer. Over six months, we collected 3,724 samples from individuals ranging from 3 months to 92 years of age. This included collecting weekly samples over 10 weeks from teachers, children, and parents from a pre-school program, which allowed its safe reopening while at-risk pods were quarantined. In sum, we validated a simple, sensitive, stable, and safe PCR-based test using a self-collected saliva sample as a valuable tool for clinical diagnosis and screening at workplaces and schools.

Zika Virus Preparedness and Response Efforts Through the Collaboration Between a Health Care Delivery System and a Local Public Health Department.

ABSTRACTThe Zika virus was largely unknown to many health care systems before the outbreak of 2015. The unique public health threat posed by the Zika virus and the evolving understanding of its pathology required continuous communication between a health care delivery system and a local public health department. By leveraging an existing relationship, NYC Health+Hospitals worked closely with New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene to ensure that Zika-related processes and procedures within NYC Health+Hospitals facilities aligned with the most current Zika virus guidance. Support given by the public health department included prenatal clinical and laboratory support and the sharing of data on NYC Health+Hospitals Zika virus screening and testing rates, thus enabling this health care delivery system to make informed decisions and practices. The close coordination, collaboration, and communication between the health care delivery system and the local public health department examined in this article demonstrate the importance of working together to combat a complex public health emergency and how this relationship can serve as a guide for other jurisdictions to optimize collaboration between external partners during major outbreaks, emerging threats, and disasters that affect public health. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2018;12:689-691).

Preparedness for Zika Virus Disease - New York City, 2016.

The rapid spread of Zika virus across the World Health Organization's Region of the Americas has had a direct effect on the U.S. health care delivery system. Hospitals in New York City (NYC) have been implementing prevention and response efforts consistent with CDC guidance. As of September 21, 2016, a total of 715 cases of laboratory-confirmed Zika virus disease had been diagnosed in New York state among travelers who returned from affected areas, their sexual contacts, or infants infected in utero. This represents the highest number of reported cases in any state to date, and underscores the importance of health care systems preparing to care for patients with possible Zika virus disease (1). Building upon a framework that was established in 2014 to screen patients for possible exposure to Ebola virus disease (Ebola), NYC Health + Hospitals,* the largest municipal health care delivery system in the United States, implemented a Zika Preparedness and Response Action Plan† (Zika Action Plan) to address the threat from Zika and ensure appropriate patient care. The plan developed by NYC Health + Hospitals includes universal travel screening, signage depicting areas with active Zika virus transmission, clinical and epidemiologic evaluation for possible Zika virus exposure, diagnostic testing for Zika virus infection and linking of infected patients to appropriate specialists, and education on Zika virus disease and preventive measures (e.g., avoiding travel to areas with active Zika virus transmission).

An intervention connecting low-acuity emergency department patients with primary care: effect on future primary care linkage.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Our objective is to determine whether a point-of-care intervention that navigates willing, low-acuity patients from the emergency department (ED) to a Primary Care Clinic will increase future primary care follow-up. METHODS: We conducted a quasi-experimental trial at an urban safety net hospital. Adults presenting to the ED for select low-acuity problems were eligible. Patients were excluded if arriving by emergency medical services, if febrile, or if the triage nurse believed they required ED care. We enrolled 965 patients. Navigators escorted a subset of willing participants to the Primary Care Clinic (in the same hospital complex), where they were assigned a personal physician, were given an overview of clinic services, and received same-day clinic care. The primary outcome was Primary Care Clinic follow-up within 1 year of the index ED visit among patients having no previous primary care provider. RESULTS: In the bivariate intention-to-treat analysis, 50.3% of intervention group patients versus 36.9% of control group patients with no previous primary care provider had at least 1 Primary Care Clinic follow-up visit in the year after the intervention. In the multivariable analysis, the absolute difference in having at least 1 Primary Care Clinic follow-up for the intervention group compared with the control group was 9.3% (95% confidence interval 2.2% to 16.3%). There was no significant difference in the number of future ED visits. CONCLUSION: A point-of-care intervention offering low-acuity ED patients the opportunity to alternatively be treated at the hospital's Primary Care Clinic resulted in increased future primary care follow-up compared with standard ED referral practices.