Seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among staff at primary healthcare institutions in Prishtina

Abstract

Background Many studies examined the spread of SARS-CoV-2 within populations using seroprevalence. Healthcare workers are a high-risk population due to patient contact, and studies are needed to examine seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among healthcare workers. Our study investigates the seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among staff at primary healthcare institutions in Prishtina, and factors associated with seroprevalence. Methods We carried out a cross-sectional survey including SARS-CoV-2 serological testing and questionnaires with primary healthcare workers from primary healthcare facilities in the Prishtina, the capital city of Kosovo. We calculated prevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, and of self-reported positive PCR test among primary healthcare workers, as well as crude and adjusted ORs for explanatory factors. Results Eighty-three of the healthcare workers (17.47%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies IgG or IgM, while 231 (48.63%) either had antibodies or a previous positive PCR test. Odds of seropositivity were affected by male gender (OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.20, 3.61), and infected family members (OR 3.61, 95% CI 2.25, 5.79) of healthcare workers. Higher education, being part of larger families and having infected family members gave higher odds of positive PCR test and seropositivity. Other healthcare workers had lower odds of positive PCR test and seropositivity than physicians. Conclusion Over 17% of healthcare workers were seropositive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and close to half of them were either seropositive or PCR self-reported positive test. Several factors are associated with decreased and increased odds for such outcomes. These findings should be explored further and addressed to Kosovo policy makers, and assist them to intensify vaccination efforts, and maintain control measures until we achieve herd immunity.

COVID-19 seroprevalence after the first UK wave of the pandemic and its association with the physical and mental wellbeing of secondary care healthcare workers

“…The duration for which antibody levels remain elevated is currently unknown ( Hall et al, 2021 ). The low amount of positive antibody tests in comparison with symptomatic infection could be due to antibody loss at the time of testing or not mounting enough of an immunological response when symptomatic ( Halili et al, 2022 ). As stated above, higher stress and anxiety levels can influence the timing, size and longevity of antibody responses ( Glaser and Kiecolt-Glaser, 2005 ; Pedersen et al, 2009 ; Madison et al, 2021 ; Phillips, 2011 ).…”

“…Data related to infection rates in HCWs have largely relied on the real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test, rather than determining seroprevalence using severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)nucleocapsid antibodies. These antibodies indicate previous infection when measured at least two weeks after the onset of symptoms ( Halili et al, 2022 ).…”

Serology as a Tool to Assess Infectious Disease Landscapes and Guide Public Health Policy

“…During the COVID-19 pandemic, serologic studies have proven crucial to understand the amount of past infection, which is necessary to predict future transmission patterns [ 59 , 60 ], monitor the pandemic and guide public health responses [ 87 , 88 , 89 ]. Early on, the WHO proposed a standard protocol for population-based, age-stratified sero-epidemiological studies for assessing SARS-CoV-2 infection and estimating key parameters such as seroprevalence of antibodies to COVID-19, cumulative incidence of infection, attack rates, proportion of asymptomatic infection and case fatality ratio [ 90 ].…”

Immune response against SARS-CoV-2 of primary healthcare personnel in a commune of Santiago, Chile: follow-up at 6 months

“…(11–13) Internationally, these studies report seroprevalence close to 5% during the first wave and between 8.1% and 17% during the second, figures significantly higher than in the general population. (14,15)…”