Abstract:Objectives: To determine the prevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 and the incidence of seroconversion in the first month of follow-up among interns, residents, and medical doctors attending patients at a University Hospital in Bogota (Colombia). Design or methods: A cross-sectional and a prospective study were performed during June, July, and August 2020 to assess seroprevalence and seroconversion rates using CLIA IgG for SARS-CoV-2. LFA IgG and IgM and ELFA IgM were also determined to explore concordance wi… Show more
“…One reason could be that HCW adhere more to biosafety measures if they feel responsible for their family. On the contrary, comorbidities previously associated with severity (47)(48)(49) were not associated with the infection in our study (50).…”
Background: Healthcare Workers (HCW) are repeatedly exposed to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCW in one of the largest cities in Colombia. Methods: We conducted a case-control study, where cases had a positive reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction and controls had a negative result. Participants were randomly selected and interviewed by phone. Analyses were performed using logistic regression models. Results: A total of 110 cases and 113 controls were included. Men (AdjOR 4.1 95%CI 1.7-10), Nurses (AdjOR 11.2 95%CI 1.1-119.6), not using a high-performance filtering mask (AdjOR 2.2 95%CI 1-5.1) and inadequate use of personal protective equipment (AdjOR 4.8 95%CI 1.1-19.6) were identified as risk factors. Conversely, graduate (AdjOR 0.1 95%CI 0.01-0.5) and postgraduate (AdjOR 0.05 95%CI 0.004-0.5) education, feeling scared or nervous (AdjOR 0.5 95%CI0.2-0.9), not wearing any of gloves, hat and googles/face shields (AdjOR 0.1 95%CI0.02-0.4), and the use of high-performance filtering or a combination of fabric plus surgical mask (AdjOR 0.2 95%CI 0.1-0.8) outside the workplace were protective factors. Conclusion: This study highlights the protection provided by high-performance filtering mask or double masking among HCW. Individual factors and the difficulties of wearing other protective equipment needs to be considered in designing, implementing and monitoring COVID-19 biosafety protocols for HCW.
“…One reason could be that HCW adhere more to biosafety measures if they feel responsible for their family. On the contrary, comorbidities previously associated with severity (47)(48)(49) were not associated with the infection in our study (50).…”
Background: Healthcare Workers (HCW) are repeatedly exposed to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCW in one of the largest cities in Colombia. Methods: We conducted a case-control study, where cases had a positive reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction and controls had a negative result. Participants were randomly selected and interviewed by phone. Analyses were performed using logistic regression models. Results: A total of 110 cases and 113 controls were included. Men (AdjOR 4.1 95%CI 1.7-10), Nurses (AdjOR 11.2 95%CI 1.1-119.6), not using a high-performance filtering mask (AdjOR 2.2 95%CI 1-5.1) and inadequate use of personal protective equipment (AdjOR 4.8 95%CI 1.1-19.6) were identified as risk factors. Conversely, graduate (AdjOR 0.1 95%CI 0.01-0.5) and postgraduate (AdjOR 0.05 95%CI 0.004-0.5) education, feeling scared or nervous (AdjOR 0.5 95%CI0.2-0.9), not wearing any of gloves, hat and googles/face shields (AdjOR 0.1 95%CI0.02-0.4), and the use of high-performance filtering or a combination of fabric plus surgical mask (AdjOR 0.2 95%CI 0.1-0.8) outside the workplace were protective factors. Conclusion: This study highlights the protection provided by high-performance filtering mask or double masking among HCW. Individual factors and the difficulties of wearing other protective equipment needs to be considered in designing, implementing and monitoring COVID-19 biosafety protocols for HCW.
“…However, other studies conducted in North American grounds such as that of Stubblefield et al or that of Hunter et al display a noticeable heterogeneity, with positivity rates of 7.6% and 1.6% in July and August, respectively (21,22). A South-American study estimated seroprevalence among HCW at a University Hospital in Colombia in December at nearly 6% (23). These compiled data connote that HCW, who have an augmented exposure to the virus and hence an increased probability of becoming infected, do have an increased seroprevalence as compared to general data from the aforementioned dashboard.…”
The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to spread worldwide as a severe pandemic. Although its seroprevalence is highly variable among territories, it has been reported at around 10%, but higher in health workers. Evidence regarding cross-neutralizing response between SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 is still controversial. However, other previous coronaviruses may interfere with SARS-CoV-2 infection, since they are phylogenetically related and share the same target receptor. Further, the seroconversion of IgM and IgG occurs at around 12 days post onset of symptoms and most patients have neutralizing titers on days 14-20, with great titer variability. Neutralizing antibodies correlate positively with age, male sex, and severity of the disease. Moreover, the use of convalescent plasma has shown controversial results in terms of safety and efficacy, and due to the variable immune response among individuals, measuring antibody titers before transfusion is mostly required. Similarly, cellular immunity seems to be crucial in the resolution of the infection, as SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cells circulate to some extent in recovered patients. Of note, the duration of the antibody response has not been well established yet.
“…Currently, and especially in Latin America, not enough studies have been conducted to assess the seroprevalence for COVID-19 in health care workers who are involved in the primary care of patients with COVID-19 infection. 15 The present study is one of the first reports in Colombia to study the seroprevalence in health care workers with a high burden of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.…”
Purpose
This study aims to determine the seroprevalence of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) among health care workers and describe the associated sociodemographic and labor features.
Patients and Methods
An observational study with an analytical component was conducted at a clinic in Cali, Colombia. The sample size was 708 health workers and they were selected by stratified random sampling. A Bayesian analysis was developed to determine the raw and adjusted prevalence. A Poisson regression model was used to estimate the prevalence ratios.
Results
Overall seroprevalence of COVID-19 among healthcare workers was 29%. Miscellaneous services workers, healthcare, and administrative workers, was 38%, 33%, and 32%, respectively. Factors related to seropositivity were having a contact with a COVID-19 patient for >120 minutes and being diagnosed with COVID-19 by laboratory tests.
Conclusion
The present study shows a adjusted seroprevalence of 29% in health workers, indicating a high level of disease transmission and an increased risk of infection in this population group.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.