Disparities of SARS-CoV-2 Nucleoprotein-Specific IgG in Healthcare Workers in East London, UK.

Introduction: SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection serves as an important diagnostic marker for past SARS-CoV-2 infection and is essential to determine the spread of COVID-19, monitor potential COVID-19 long-term effects, and to evaluate possible protection from reinfection. A study was conducted across three hospital sites in a large central London NHS Trust in the UK, to evaluate the prevalence and duration of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody positivity in healthcare workers. Methods: A matrix equivalence study consisting of 228 participants was undertaken to evaluate the Abbott Panbio™ COVID-19 IgG/IgM rapid test device. Subsequently, 2001 evaluable healthcare workers (HCW), representing a diverse population, were enrolled in a HCW study between June and August 2020. A plasma sample from each HCW was evaluated using the Abbott Panbio™ COVID-19 IgG/IgM rapid test device, with confirmation of IgG-positive results by the Abbott ArchitectTM SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay. 545 participants, of whom 399 were antibody positive at enrolment, were followed up at 3 months. Results: The Panbio™ COVID-19 IgG/IgM rapid test device demonstrated a high concordance with laboratory tests. SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were detected in 506 participants (25.3%) at enrolment, with a higher prevalence in COVID-19 frontline (28.3%) than non-frontline (19.9%) staff. At follow-up, 274/399 antibody positive participants (68.7%) retained antibodies; 4/146 participants negative at enrolment (2.7%) had seroconverted. Non-white ethnicity, older age, hypertension and COVID-19 symptoms were independent predictors of higher antibody levels (OR 1.881, 2.422-3.034, 2.128, and 1.869 respectively), based on Architect™ index quartiles; participants in the first three categories also showed a greater antibody persistence at 3 months. Conclusion: The SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleocapsid IgG positivity rate among healthcare staff was high, declining by 31.3% during the 3-month follow-up interval. Interestingly, the IgG-positive participants with certain risk factors for severe COVID-19 illness (older age, Black or Asian Ethnicity hypertension) demonstrated greater persistence over time when compared to the IgG-positive participants without these risk factors.

Pelvic floor examination performed by medical students: a model to obtain consent.

Student-led clinical examinations, including pelvic floor examinations, are an integral part of clinical training and can be beneficial to both students and patients alike. However, our experience and previous literature catalog numerous obstacles in obtaining consent for student-led pelvic floor examinations. Although some of these factors may not be modifiable, it is evident that efforts can be made to overcome those that are. An examination of these obstacles can help to provide a clear and succinct template to overcoming them: we propose a "5-Rs" framework that may bridge the apparent gap between the students' need to practice and obtain valid consent.

Analysis of the first 2645 registrations at the research registry®: A global repository for all study types involving human participants.

BACKGROUND: The Declaration of Helsinki has called for the registration of all research studies involving human participants. Despite this, prior registries did not allow registration certain study types, or retrospective registration. The Research Registry® (www.researchregistry.com) was established in 2015 to provide a venue of registration for any study involving human participants. METHODS: and analysis: This retrospective database analysis describes the first 3000 registrations received by the Research Registry®. Since the launch of the Registry in 2015, we have collected data on each registration and excluded inappropriate registrations through a weekly curation process. The characteristics of all studies registered is presented. Each registration was marked against a quality score by two researchers acting independently, and we describe how this has changed over time. No ethical approval was required for this data only study including no human participants. RESULTS: Of 3000 registrations, we included 2645 that were submitted to the registry between February 2015 and October 2017. The number of registrations increased year on year, and we now receive between 60 and 80 registrations per month. One fifth of registrations were from China (537 [20.3%]). Retrospective observational studies were most commonly registered (1125 [42.5%]), and studies included in excess of 20 million patients (median 80 [IQR:25-200]). The quality score of registrations improved over the time (Kruskal-Wallis p < 0.05), and the 'control/comparator' component of the quality score was most poorly completed (completed by 1199 [54%]). CONCLUSION: The Research Registry® has received registrations on over 2500 registrations, including in excess of 20 million patients, with the quality of registrations improving over time. Retrospective observational studies and case series are the most commonly registered.