Effect of Professional and Extra-Professional Exposure on Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Infection among Healthcare Workers of the French Alps: A Multicentric Cross-Sectional Study

Abstract

We aimed to report SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence after the first wave of the pandemic among healthcare workers, and to explore factors associated with an increased infection rate. We conducted a multicentric cross-sectional survey from 27 June to 31 September 2020. For this survey, we enrolled 3454 voluntary healthcare workers across four participating hospitals, of which 83.4% were female, with a median age of 40.6 years old (31.8–50.3). We serologically screened the employees for SARS-CoV-2, estimated the prevalence of infection, and conducted binomial logistic regression with random effect on participating hospitals to investigate associations. We estimated the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection at 5.0% (95 CI, 4.3%–5.8%). We found the lowest prevalence in health professional management support (4.3%) staff. Infections were more frequent in young professionals below 30 years old (aOR = 1.59, (95 CI, 1.06–2.37)), including paramedical students and residents (aOR = 3.38, (95 CI, 1.62–7.05)). In this group, SARS-CoV-2 prevalence was up 16.9%. The location of work and patient-facing role were not associated with increased infections. Employees reporting contacts with COVID-19 patients without adequate protective equipment had a higher rate of infection (aOR = 1.66, (95 CI, 1.12–2.44)). Aerosol-generating tasks were associated with a ~1.7-fold rate of infection, regardless of the uptake of FFP2. Those exposed to clusters of infected colleagues (aOR = 1.77, (95 CI, 1.24–2.53)) or intra-familial COVID-19 relatives (aOR = 2.09, (95 CI, 1.15–3.80)) also had a higher likelihood of infection. This report highlights that a sustained availability of personal protective equipment limits the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate to what is measured in the general population. It also pinpoints the need for dedicated hygiene training among young professionals, justifies the systematic eviction of infected personnel, and stresses the need for interventions to increase vaccination coverage among any healthcare workers.

Outbreaks of COVID-19 in Nursing Homes: A Cross-Sectional Survey of 74 Nursing Homes in a French Area

“…It was estimated that after the first wave, the prevalence of COVID-19 was of 4.4% (95CI, 2.8–6.5%), ranging between 1.7% in those ≥70 years of age, and 6.3% in those <40 years of age [ 10 ]. In a recent survey that we conducted among 3454 healthcare workers from four public hospitals of the French Alps, the overall prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was 5.0% (95CI, 4.3% to 5.8%) [ 11 ]. No data about local incidence during the first wave are available.…”

SARS-CoV-2 herd immunity of the Kyrgyz population in 2021

“…The results obtained are in good agreement with data from similar studies. In a signi cant number of publications, increased seroprevalence was especially often noted in medical workers who have frequent contact with COVID-19 patients [34,35,36].…”

Risk of transmission of respiratory viruses during aerosol-generating medical procedures (AGMPs) revisited in the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review

“…p-values) Scales (2003), Canada [ 59 ] Retrospective cohort/Single Centre—ICU 2003 n = 69; quarantined HCWs One 74-year-old, signs and symptoms of community-acquired pneumonia; SARS-positive Specific AGMPs: Intubation, non-invasive positive-pressure ventilation (present during procedure), contact with mucous membrane, contact with mucous membranes or respiratory secretions (performed procedure that involved contact with secretions) SARS/ WHO criteria of SARS Number of events Shah (2021), USA [ 40 ] Retrospective cohort/Single Centre – emergency department, inpatient, outpatient May 13 to November 20, 2020 n = 345; RN, physician, RT, patient care assistant, housekeeping, other NR; confirmed of suspected COVID-19-positive; NR; NR AGMPs Combined: Tracheal intubation, non-invasive ventilation, tracheotomy, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, manual ventilation before intubation, bronchoscopy COVID-19/ RT-PCR Number of events and statistical comparisons of groups (i.e. p-values) Teleman (2004), Singapore [ 58 ] Case–control/Single Centre – all units March 1 to March 31, 2003 n = 86; doctors, nurses, other NR; SARS-positive; NR; NR Specific AGMPs: Suction, intubation, oxygen administration, contact with respiratory secretions SARS/ Serology Number of events, unadjusted and adjusted OR Vitrat (2021), France [ 39 ] Cross-sectional/Multicentre – all units June 27 to September 31, 2020 n = 3454; HCW, health-associated professionals, health management, support personals NR AGMPs Combined: Nasopharyngeal test, intubation, etc. (from survey), oral intubation, aerosolized therapy, high flow oxygen (in discussion) COVID-19/ Serology Unadjusted and adjusted OR Wong (2004), Hong Kong [ 57 ] Retrospective cohort/Single Centre – general medical ward March 4 to March 10, 2003 …”

“…Samples sizes varied from 11 [ 41 ] to 3454 [ 39 ] HCWs. Several different types of HCWs were included in the samples, such as nurses, physicians, nurse practitioners, respiratory therapists, physician assistants, and dentists.…”

“…Across all pathogens, 24 studies reported transmission of VRIs during AGMPs that were not specifically identified (n = 5), or results were reported for multiple AGMPs combined (n = 19). Nineteen of these studies conducted a statistical test of significance between AGMPs that were not specified or were combined and the transmission of: COVID-19 (n = 15) [ 30 – 32 , 36 , 37 , 39 , 40 , 42 – 45 , 47 – 50 ], multiple viruses (n = 2) [ 51 , 56 ], influenza (n = 2) [ 52 , 56 ], MERS (n = 1) [ 54 ]. The remaining three studies reported event data only, with no statistical comparison reported [ 35 , 41 , 53 ].…”