RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in health care facilities poses a challenge against pandemic control. Health care workers (HCWs) have frequent and high-risk interactions with COVID-19 patients. We undertook a cost-effectiveness analysis to determine optimal testing strategies for screening HCWs to inform strategic decision-making in health care settings. METHODS: We modeled the number of new infections, quality-adjusted life years lost, and net costs related to six testing strategies including no test. We applied our model to four strata of HCWs, defined by the presence and timing of symptoms. We conducted sensitivity analyses to account for uncertainty in inputs. RESULTS: When screening recently symptomatic HCWs, conducting only a PCR test is preferable; it saves costs and improves health outcomes in the first week post-symptom onset, and costs $83,000 per quality-adjusted life year gained in the second week post-symptom onset. When screening HCWs in the late clinical disease stage, none of the testing approaches is cost-effective and thus no testing is preferable, yielding $11 and 0.003 new infections per 10 HCWs. For screening asymptomatic HCWs, antigen testing is preferable to PCR testing due to its lower cost. CONCLUSIONS: Both PCR and antigen testing are beneficial strategies to identify infected HCWs and reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in health care settings. IgG tests' value depends on test timing and immunity characteristics, however it is not cost-effective in a low prevalence setting. As the context of the pandemic evolves, our study provides insight to health-care decision makers to keep the health care workforce safe and transmissions low.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in health care facilities poses a challenge against pandemic control. Health care workers (HCWs) have frequent and high-risk interactions with COVID-19 patients. We undertook a cost-effectiveness analysis to determine optimal testing strategies for screening HCWs to inform strategic decision-making in health care settings. METHODS: We modeled the number of new infections, quality-adjusted life years lost, and net costs related to six testing strategies including no tests. We applied our model to four strata of HCWs, defined by the presence and timing of symptoms. We conducted sensitivity analyses to account for uncertainty in inputs. RESULTS: When screening recently symptomatic HCWs, conducting only a PCR test is preferable; it saves costs and improves health outcomes in the first week post-symptom onset, and costs $83,000 per quality-adjusted life year gained in the second week post-symptom onset. When screening HCWs in the late clinical disease stage, none of the testing approaches is cost-effective and thus no testing is preferable, yielding $11 and 0.003 new infections per 10 HCWs. For screening asymptomatic HCWs, antigen testing is preferable to PCR testing due to its lower cost. CONCLUSIONS: Both PCR and antigen testing are beneficial strategies to identify infected HCWs and reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in health care settings. IgG testing clinical value depends on test timing and immunity characteristics, however is not cost-effective in a low prevalence setting. As the context of the pandemic evolves, our study provides insight to health-care decision makers to keep the health care workforce safe and transmissions low.
RESUMO
A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether the use of prophylactic postoperative low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or unfractionated heparin after cardiac surgery would significantly reduce morbidity by reducing the incidence of deep vein thromboses (DVTs) and pulmonary emboli (PEs). Altogether 390 papers were identified on Medline. Relevant major guidelines were also searched together with their reference lists. Sixteen papers represented the best evidence on the topic. The author, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes, results and study weaknesses were tabulated. We conclude that the benefit of heparin prophylaxis for the prevention of DVTs and PEs is well established in non-cardiac surgery with reductions in the incidence of DVTs reported to be of the order of 50-70% in orthopaedic, general and obstetric surgery and in general medicine. No studies have yet been performed in cardiac surgery, but contrary to the view that DVTs are rare, in fact the incidence of DVT post-cardiac surgery is up to 15-20% and the incidence of PE is around 0.5 to 4% although many of these occur after discharge and many may be difficult to detect clinically. This is similar to the incidence of patients undergoing high risk general surgery. There is no evidence that heparin prophylaxis started the day after surgery increases the risk of pericardial effusions and the risk of bleeding complications is estimated to be 4%. Thus, we recommend that all patients post-cardiac surgery be commenced on heparin prophylaxis the day after their surgery and continue this up to discharge even if mobile. The particular regime should be guided by the ACCP recommendations for prophylaxis in high risk general surgical patients.
