Selected article for: "academic center and active infection"

Author: Datta, Rupak; Campbell, Melissa; Wyllie, Anne; Casanovas-Massana, Arnau; Handoko, Ryan; Sewanan, Lorenzo; Naushad, Nida; Simonov, Michael; White, Elizabeth; Valdez, Jordan; Liu, Feimei; Omer, Saad; Cruz, Charles Dela; Farhadian, Shelli F; Ring, Aaron; Iwasaki, Akiko; Grubaugh, Nathan; Martinello, Richard A; Ko, Albert I
Title: 68. Active Monitoring of a Healthcare Worker Cohort During the COVID-19 Epidemic
  • Cord-id: rf29m6fj
  • Document date: 2020_12_31
  • ID: rf29m6fj
    Snippet: BACKGROUND: Initial CDC recommendations for passive monitoring of COVID-19 related symptoms among staff may not be sufficient in preventing the introduction and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in healthcare settings. We therefore implemented active monitoring for SARS-CoV-2 infection in healthcare workers (HCWs) at an academic medical center during the COVID-19 epidemic in northeast US. METHODS: We recruited a cohort of HCWs at Yale New Haven Hospital who worked in COVID-19 units and did not have COV
    Document: BACKGROUND: Initial CDC recommendations for passive monitoring of COVID-19 related symptoms among staff may not be sufficient in preventing the introduction and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in healthcare settings. We therefore implemented active monitoring for SARS-CoV-2 infection in healthcare workers (HCWs) at an academic medical center during the COVID-19 epidemic in northeast US. METHODS: We recruited a cohort of HCWs at Yale New Haven Hospital who worked in COVID-19 units and did not have COVID-19 related symptoms between March 28 and June 1, 2020. During follow-up, participants provided daily information on symptoms by responding to a web-based questionnaire, self-administered nasopharyngeal (NP) and saliva specimens every 3 days, and blood specimens every 14 days. We performed SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR and an anti-spike protein IgM and IgG ELISA to identify virological and serological-confirmed infection, respectively. RESULTS: We enrolled 525 (13%) amongst 4,136 HCW of whom daily information on symptoms and NP, saliva, and blood specimens were obtained for 66% (of 13208), 42% (or 1977), 44% (of 2071) and 65% (of 1099), respectively, of the follow-up measurement points. We identified 16 (3.0% of 525) HCWs with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and an additional 12 (2.3% of 525) who were not tested by PCR or had negative PCR results but had serological evidence of infection. The overall cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was 5.3% (28 of 525) amongst HCWs. Cases were not identified by hospital protocols for passive staff self-monitoring for symptoms. Amongst 16 PCR-confirmed cases, 9 (56%) of the 16 PCR-confirmed HCW had symptoms during or after the date of initial detection. We did not identify an epidemiological link between the 28 confirmed cases. CONCLUSION: We found that a significant proportion (5.3%) of HCWs were infected with SARS-CoV-2 during the COVID-19 epidemic. In the setting of universal PPE use, infections were possibly acquired in the community rather than stemming from patient-HCW or HCW-HCW transmission. Passive monitoring of symptoms is inadequate in preventing introductions of SARS-CoV-2 into the healthcare setting due to asymptomatic and oligosymptomatic presentations. DISCLOSURES: All Authors: No reported disclosures

    Search related documents:
    Co phrase search for related documents
    • Try single phrases listed below for: 1
    Co phrase search for related documents, hyperlinks ordered by date