SARS-CoV-2 Testing of 11,884 Healthcare Workers at an Acute NHS Hospital Trust in England: A Retrospective Analysis.

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are known to be at increased risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2, although whether these risks are equal across all roles is uncertain. Here we report a retrospective analysis of a large real-world dataset obtained from 10 March to 6 July 2020 in an NHS Foundation Trust in England with 17,126 employees. 3,338 HCWs underwent symptomatic PCR testing (14.4% positive, 2.8% of all staff) and 11,103 HCWs underwent serological testing for SARS-CoV-2 IgG (8.4% positive, 5.5% of all staff). Seropositivity was lower than other hospital settings in England but higher than community estimates. Increased test positivity rates were observed in HCWs from BAME backgrounds and residents in areas of higher social deprivation. A multiple logistic regression model adjusting for ethnicity and social deprivation confirmed statistically significant increases in the odds of testing positive in certain occupational groups, most notably domestic services staff, nurses, and health-care assistants. PCR testing of symptomatic HCWs appeared to underestimate overall infection levels, probably due to asymptomatic seroconversion. Clinical outcomes were reassuring, with only a small minority of HCWs with COVID-19 requiring hospitalization (2.3%) or ICU management (0.7%) and with no deaths. Despite a relatively low level of HCW infection compared to other UK cohorts, there were nevertheless important differences in test positivity rates between occupational groups, robust to adjustment for demographic factors such as ethnic background and social deprivation. Quantitative and qualitative studies are needed to better understand the factors contributing to this risk. Robust informatics solutions for HCW exposure data are essential to inform occupational monitoring.

Self-taken vaginal swabs versus clinician-taken for detection of candida and bacterial vaginosis: a case-control study in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Vaginal discharge and vulvitis are common presenting symptoms in general practice. Few studies have specifically looked at the validity of self-taken low vulvovaginal swabs (LVS) for the diagnosis of vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC) and bacterial vaginosis (BV). AIM: To assess if patient self-taken LVS are a valid alternative to clinician-taken high vaginal swabs (HVS) for the detection of VVC and BV. DESIGN AND SETTING: Case-control study with the patient acting as their own control in an urban sexual health centre in Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. METHOD: Females aged 16-65 years attending with symptomatic vaginal discharge, vulval irritation, genital pain, and an offensive genital smell were recruited into the study. Participants took a self-taken LVS before vaginal examination, during which a clinician took an HVS (reference standard). Main outcome measures were the diagnosis of BV or VVC infection. RESULTS: A total of 104 females were enrolled. Of those, 45 were diagnosed with VVC and 26 with BV. The sensitivities of self-taken LVS for VVC and BV were 95.5% and 88.5% respectively. Cohen's κ coefficient showed 'strong agreement' for the detection of both VVC and BV. Vulval itching was the most common symptom associated with VVC (69%), whereas 50% of females diagnosed with BV presented with an offensive discharge. Both symptoms had poor positive predictive values (0.63 and 0.50, respectively). CONCLUSION: Self-taken LVS appears to be a valid alternative to clinician-taken HVS for detecting VVC and BV infections. Symptoms were found to be a poor indicator of underlying infection.

Improving testing for hepatitis B before treatment with rituximab.

AIMS/OBJECTIVES/BACKGROUND: Individuals with current or previous infection with the hepatitis B virus (HBV) can experience viral reactivation when treated with immunosuppression. Rituximab, an anti-CD20 antibody used to treat many diseases, has potent immunosuppressant effects with a high risk of causing HBV reactivation. Reactivation can range from elevated liver enzymes to acute severe hepatitis with liver failure and a significant mortality risk. HBV screening and appropriate use of prophylactic antiviral therapy can prevent reactivation. This work describes the introduction of a local policy for HBV testing in patients before rituximab treatment and assesses its impact. METHODS AND RESULTS: A baseline review (before policy introduction) of 90 patients showed that only 21 (23%) had hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and 17 (19%) had hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBcAb) tested before receiving rituximab. Following introduction of the policy (on the basis of international guidelines), improved laboratory reporting protocols and targeted education sessions, two further reviews of HBV testing rates among patients being initiated onto rituximab were performed. There was a marked increase in pre-rituximab testing for HBsAg from 23 to 79% and for anti-HBcAb from 19 to 78%. Throughout the study period, a total of one (0.8%) HBsAg-positive and six (4.7%) anti-HBcAb-positive patients were identified. CONCLUSIONS: This work clearly indicates that simple strategies can markedly improve appropriate HBV screening. In our cohort, 6% (of whom only 43% had recognized HBV risk factors) required antiviral prophylaxis, which emphasizes the importance of universal screening before rituximab. Reinforcement of the guidelines and ongoing education is needed to further increase testing rates.