Selected article for: "chain reaction and health care"

Author: Haidar, Ghady; Ayres, Ashley; King, Wendy C; McDonald, Mackenzie; Wells, Alan; Mitchell, Stephanie L; Bilderback, Andrew L; Minnier, Tami; Mellors, John W
Title: Preprocedural SARS-CoV-2 Testing to Sustain Medically Needed Health Care Delivery During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Prospective Observational Study
  • Cord-id: 2nzpd93m
  • Document date: 2021_1_18
  • ID: 2nzpd93m
    Snippet: BACKGROUND: We implemented a preprocedural severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) screening initiative designed to sustain health care during a time when the extent of SARS-CoV-2 infection was unknown. METHODS: This was a prospective study of patients undergoing procedures at 3 academic hospitals in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (April 21–June 11), and 19 community hospitals across Middle/Western Pennsylvania and Southwestern New York (May 1–June 11). Patients at academic ho
    Document: BACKGROUND: We implemented a preprocedural severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) screening initiative designed to sustain health care during a time when the extent of SARS-CoV-2 infection was unknown. METHODS: This was a prospective study of patients undergoing procedures at 3 academic hospitals in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (April 21–June 11), and 19 community hospitals across Middle/Western Pennsylvania and Southwestern New York (May 1–June 11). Patients at academic hospitals underwent symptom screening ≤7 days preprocedure, then SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing 1–4 days preprocedure. A subset also underwent day-of-procedure testing. Community hospital patients underwent testing per local protocols. We report SARS-CoV-2 PCR positivity rates, impact, and barriers to testing encountered through June 11. PCR positivity rates of optional preprocedural SARS-CoV-2 testing for 2 consecutive periods following the screening initiative are also reported. RESULTS: Of 5881 eligible academic hospital patients, 2415 (41.1%) were tested (April 21–June 11). Lack of interest, distance, self-isolation, and nursing home/incarceration status were barriers. There were 11 PCR-positive patients (10 asymptomatic) among 10 539 patients tested (0.10%; 95% CI, 0.05%–0.19%): 3/2415 (0.12%; 95% CI, 0.02%–0.36%) and 8/8124 (0.10%; 95% CI, 0.04%–0.19%) at academic and community hospitals, respectively. Procedures were performed as scheduled in 40% (4/10) of asymptomatic PCR-positive patients. Positivity increased during subsequent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) surges: 54/34( )948 (0.15%; 95% CI, 0.12%–0.20%) and 101/24( )741 (0.41%; 95% CI, 0.33%–0.50%) PCR-positive patients from June 12–September 10 and September 11–December 15, respectively (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Implementing preprocedural PCR testing was complex and revealed low infection rates (0.24% overall), which increased during COVID-19 surges. Additional studies are needed to define the COVID-19 prevalence threshold at which universal preprocedural screening is warranted.

    Search related documents:
    Co phrase search for related documents
    • abbott realtime sars and lod detection limit: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
    • abbott sars and academic hospital: 1
    • abbott sars and lod detection limit: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
    • abbott sars lod and lod detection limit: 1
    • academic hospital and local infrastructure: 1