ABSTRACT
To investigate whether wastewater surveillance can be used as an early warning system to detect a rise in SARS-CoV-2 positive cases, and to follow the circulation of specific variants of concern (VOC) in particular geographical areas, wastewater samples were collected from local neighborhood sewers and from a large regional wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) in the area of Leuven, Belgium. In two residential sampling sites, a rise in viral SARS-CoV-2 copies in wastewater preceded the peaks in positive cases. In the WWTP, peaks in the wastewater viral load were seen simultaneous with the waves op positive cases caused by the original Wuhan SARS-CoV-2 strain, the Alpha variant and the Delta variant. For the Omicron BA.1 variant associated wave, the viral load in wastewater increased to a lesser degree, and much later than the increase in positive cases, which could be attributed to a lower level of fecal excretion, as measured in hospitalized patients. Circulation of SARS-CoV-2 VOCs (Alpha, Delta and Omicron) could be detected based on the presence of specific key mutations. The shift in variants was noticeable in the wastewater, with key mutations of two different variants being present simultaneously during the transition period. We found that wastewater based surveillance is a sensitive tool to monitor SARS-CoV-2 circulation levels and VOCs in larger regions. This can prove to be highly valuable in times of reducing testing capacity. Differences in excretion levels of various SARS-CoV-2 variants should however be taken into account when using wastewater surveillance to monitor SARS-CoV-2 circulation levels in the population.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: A clinical trial, "Belgian Improvement Study on Oral Anticoagulation Therapy (BISOAT)," significantly improved the quality after implementing four different quality-improving interventions in four randomly divided groups of general practitioners (GPs). The quality-improving interventions consisted of multifaceted education with or without feedback reports on their performance, international normalized ratio (INR) testing by the GP with a CoaguChek device or computer-assisted advice for adapting oral anticoagulation therapy. The quality improvement in INR control versus baseline was similar in the four groups. The aim of the current study was to calculate the cost-effectiveness and influencing factors of the four quality-improving interventions compared with usual care. METHODS: Activity-based costing techniques with questionnaires were used to determine the global costs per patient per month in the different intervention groups. Effectiveness data were obtained from the BISOAT study. Cost-effectiveness was expressed as cost per additional day within a 0.5 range from INR target. RESULTS: The one-time cost of multifaceted education was 49,997 euro for the whole study. Monthly continuous costs per intervention ranged between 37 euro and 54 euro per patient. Using the CoaguChek in combination with the multifaceted education was associated with net savings and quality improvement, hence dominated usual care. Sensitivity analyses showed improved cost-effectiveness with extended duration and with increased program size. CONCLUSION: Implementation of the combination multifaceted education with the use of the CoaguChek is a cost-effective new organizational model of oral anticoagulation management in general practice.
