Coronavirus Disease 2019 Testing Research Articles

Effectiveness of COVID-19 XBB.1.5 monovalent mRNA vaccine in Korea: interim analysis

As coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) becomes an endemic disease, the virus continues to evolve and become immunologically distinct from previous strains. Immune imprinting has raised concerns about bivalent mRNA vaccines containing both ancestral virus and Omicron variant. To increase efficacy against the predominant strains as of the second half of 2023, the updated vaccine formulation contained only the mRNA of XBB.1.5 sublineage. We conducted a multicenter, test-negative, case-control study to estimate XBB.1.5 monovalent vaccine effectiveness (VE) and present the results of an interim analysis with data collected in November 2023. Patients who underwent COVID-19 testing at eight university hospitals were included and matched based on age (19-49, 50-64, and ≥65 years) and sex in a 1:1 ratio. VE was calculated using the adjusted odds ratio derived from multivariable logistic regression. Of the 992 patients included, 49 (5.3%) received the XBB.1.5 monovalent vaccine at least 7 days before COVID-19 testing. Patients with COVID-19 (cases) were less likely to have received the XBB.1.5 monovalent vaccine (case 3.5% vs. control 7.2%, p=0.019) and to have a history of COVID-19 within 6 months (2.2% vs. 4.6%, p=0.068). In contrast, patients with COVID-19 were more likely to be healthcare workers (8.2% vs. 3.0%, p=0.001) and to have chronic neurological diseases (16.7% vs. 11.9%, p=0.048). The adjusted VE of the XBB.1.5 monovalent mRNA vaccine was 56.8% (95% confidence interval: 18.7-77.9%). XBB.1.5 monovalent mRNA vaccine provided significant protection against COVID-19 in the first one to two months after vaccination.

Drug use and COVID-19 testing, vaccination, and infection among underserved, minority communities in Miami, Florida.

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disproportionately impacted people who use drugs (PWUD). This study explored relationships between drug use, COVID-19 testing, vaccination, and infection. This cross-sectional study was conducted in Miami, Florida between March 2021 and October 2022 as part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics-Underserved Populations (RADx-UP) initiative and the Miami Adult Studies on HIV (MASH) cohort. Users of cannabis, cocaine/crack, heroin/fentanyl, methamphetamines, hallucinogens, and/or prescription drug misuse in the previous 12 months were considered PWUD. Sociodemographic data, COVID-19 testing history, and vaccination-related beliefs were self-reported. Vaccinations were confirmed with medical records and positivity was determined with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing. Statistical analyses included chi-square tests and logistic regression. Of 1,780 participants, median age was 57 years, 50.7% were male, 50.2% Non-Hispanic Black, and 66.0% reported an annual income less than $15,000. Nearly 28.0% used drugs. PWUD were less likely than non-users to self-report ever testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 (14.7% vs. 21.0%, p = 0.006). However, 2.6% of participants tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, with no significant differences between PWUD and non-users (3.7% vs. 2.2%, p = 0.076). PWUD were more likely than non-users to experience difficulties accessing testing (10.2% vs. 7.1%, p = 0.033), vaccine hesitancy (58.9% vs. 43.4%, p = 0.002) and had lower odds of receiving any dose of a COVID-19 vaccine compared to non-users (aOR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.49-0.81; p<0.001). PWUD presented with greater difficulties accessing COVID-19 testing, greater vaccine hesitancy, and lower odds of vaccination. Testing and immunization plans that are tailored to the needs of PWUD and consider access, trust-building campaigns, and education may be needed.

COVID-19 diagnostic testing and vaccinations among First Nations in Manitoba: A nations-based retrospective cohort study using linked administrative data, 2020-2021.

Differential access to healthcare has contributed to a higher burden of illness and mortality among First Nations compared to other people in Canada. Throughout the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, First Nations organizations in Manitoba partnered with public health and Manitoba government officials to ensure First Nations had early, equitable and culturally safe access to COVID-19 diagnostic testing and vaccination. In this study, we examined whether prioritizing First Nations for vaccination was associated with faster uptake of COVID-19 vaccines among First Nations versus All Other Manitobans (AOM). In this retrospective cohort study, we used linked, whole-population administrative data from the Manitoba healthcare system (February 2020 to December 2021) to determine rates of COVID-19 diagnostic testing, infection, and vaccination, and used adjusted restricted mean survival time (RMST) models to test whether First Nations received their first and second vaccine doses more quickly than other Manitobans. The cohort comprised 114,816 First Nations (50.6% female) and 1,262,760 AOM (50.1% female). First Nations were younger (72.3% were age 0 to 39 years) compared to AOM (51% were age 0 to 39 years) and were overrepresented in the lowest 2 income quintiles (81.6% versus 35.6% for AOM). The 2 groups had a similar burden of comorbidities (65.8% of First Nations had none and 6.3% had 3 or more; 65.9% of AOM had none and 6.0% had 3 or more) and existing mental disorders (36.9% of First Nations were diagnosed with a mood/anxiety disorder, psychosis, personality disorder, or substance use disorder versus 35.2% of AOM). First Nations had crude infection rates of up to 17.20 (95% CI 17.15 to 17.24) COVID-19 infections/1,000 person-months compared with up to 6.24 (95% CI 6.16 to 6.32) infections/1,000 person-months among AOM. First Nations had crude diagnostic testing rates of up to 103.19 (95% CI 103.06 to 103.32) diagnostic COVID-19 tests/1,000 person-months compared with up to 61.52 (95% CI 61.47 to 61.57) tests/1,000 person-months among AOM. Prioritizing First Nations to receive vaccines was associated with faster vaccine uptake among First Nations versus other Manitobans. After adjusting for age, sex, income, region of residence, mental health conditions, and comorbidities, we found that First Nations residents received their first vaccine dose an average of 15.5 (95% CI 14.9 to 16.0) days sooner and their second dose 13.9 (95% CI 13.3 to 14.5) days sooner than other Manitobans in the same age group. The study was limited by the discontinuation of population-based COVID-19 testing and data collection in December 2021. As well, it would have been valuable to have contextual data on potential barriers to COVID-19 testing or vaccination, including, for example, information on social and structural barriers faced by Indigenous and other racialized people, or the distrust Indigenous people may have in governments due to historical harms. In this study, we observed that the partnered COVID-19 response between First Nations and the Manitoba government, which oversaw creation and enactment of policies prioritizing First Nations for vaccines, was associated with vaccine acceptance and quick uptake among First Nations. This approach may serve as a useful framework for future public health efforts in Manitoba and other jurisdictions across Canada.

Comparison of Two SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to spread worldwide. A quick, simple, and accurate test to diagnose COVID-19 is essential for this situation. This study aims to evaluate and compare the rapid antigen examination of SARS-CoV-2 with Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) in detecting SARS-CoV-2. A retrospective study with a cross-sectional approach using medical record data from suspected, controlled, and confirmed COVID-19 patients whose samples were taken simultaneously for rapid antigen examination of SARS-CoV-2 (SD-Biosensor and Lungene) and RT-PCR at Labuang Baji Hospital, Makassar from September 2020-September 2021. Each instrument's sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and positive predictive value were analyzed with the Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curve method. This study obtained data from 312 rapid antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2, divided into two categories, 98 using Lungene and 214 using SD-Biosensor. Rapid antigen Lungene had a sensitivity of 71.4%, specificity of 71.4%, an accuracy of 71.4%, and a 31 reactive result in CT value. The SD-Biosensor Rapid antigen had a sensitivity of 62.6%, a specificity of 99.1%, an accuracy of 82.2%, and a 26 reactive result in CT value. In summary, the sensitivity of rapid antigen Lungene is higher than SD-Biosensor. Specificity and accuracy of rapid antigen SD-Biosensor higher than Lungene. Rapid test antigen SARS-CoV-2 has the potential to be a screening test for COVID-19 as long as the sampling time is right.

Comparative study between gold standard real-time RT-PCR assay and rapid antigen test for detection of COVID-19 in Sylhet CMH

Background: The notorious pandemic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been spread all over the world. Its third pandemic wave has been completed and now a fourth wave is running over many countries. Almost 60 million people have been infected and more than 5.7 million people have died. Till now almost 1.2 million people have been infected and about 30000 people have died in Bangladesh from Covid-19. It has not only taken away human lives but also has put a tremendous impact on our society and economy. So early detection of this virus and isolating the patients have a significant role to control the disease. Henceforth there is an urgent need for simple, accurate and rapid identifications of C0VID -19. Rapid antigen tests can provide timely results, which is of particular importance in a primary setting. So, Performance of the Rapid antigen detection test (RAT) should be evaluated and compared with gold standard real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test for diagnosis of COVID-19. Methods: Specimens were collected from both naso and oropharyngeal region from 1000 patients who reported to the flu centre in CMH Sylhet with the complaints of fever, cough &amp; headache for detection of COVID virus-2 RNA by rapid antigen (RAT) and RT-PCR test. We used real time RT-PCR kit (Sansure, Biotech china, gene RdRP &amp; N) and COVID-19 Ag Kit (Wondfo, Republic of China) for detection of COVID-19 RNA. Results: Out of 1000 samples 158 were positive and 842 were negative by real-time RT-PCR assay where 154 samples were positive, and 846 cases were negative by rapid antigen test for severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) CoV-2. The duration from the onset of symptoms to laboratory test in all suspected cases ranged from 0 to 02 days (with a median of 01 days). The rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection tests sensitivity and specificity were 97.29% (95% CI, 90.06–99.89%) and 97.94% (95% CI, 97.26–98.57%), respectively. Seven samples were found negative in RAT but were found positive in RT-PCR, other three samples were found positive in RAT while they were found negative in RT-PCR. Conclusions: It is observed that most rapid antigen tests for COVID-19 are significantly comparable with RT-PCR tests and had enough sensitivity and specificity for 158 individuals, infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome-CoV-2. 

Association between ABO blood type and coronavirus disease 2019 severe outcomes across dominant variant strains.

Existing evidence suggests a link between ABO blood type and severe outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to assess the relationship between blood type and severe outcomes across variant strains throughout the pandemic. This was a multicenter retrospective observational cohort analysis from a large health system in southeastern Michigan using electronic medical records to evaluate emergency encounters, hospitalization, and severe outcomes in COVID-19 based on ABO blood type. Consecutive adult patients presenting to the emergency department with a primary diagnosis of COVID-19 (U07.1) from March 1, 2020 through December 31, 2022 were assessed. Patients who presented during three distinct time intervals that coincided with Alpha, Delta, and Omicron variant predominance were included in the analysis. Exclusions included no record of ABO blood type, positive PCR COVID-19 test within the preceding 28 days, and if transferred from out of the health system. Severe outcomes were inclusive of intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, or death, which, as a composite, represented our primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were hospital admission and length of stay. A logistic regression model was employed to test the association between ABO blood type and severe outcome, adjusting for age, sex, race, vaccination status, Elixhauser comorbidity indices, and the dominant variant time period in which the encounter occurred. Of the 33,796 COVID-19 encounters, 9416 met inclusion criteria; 4071 (43.2%) were type O, 3417 (36.3%) were type A, 459 (4.9%) were type AB, and 1469 (15.6%) were type B blood. Note that 66.4% of the cohort was female (p=0.18). The proportion of composite severe disease among the four blood types was similar and ranged between 8.6% and 8.9% (p=0.98). Note that 53.0% of type A blood patients required hospital admission, compared to 51.9%, 50.4%, and 48.1% of type AB, B, and O blood, respectively (p<0.001). Compared to patients with O blood type (43.2%), non-O blood type (58.8%; composite of A, AB, and B) exhibited no statistically significant difference in the proportion of composite severe disease (8.8%vs. 8.7%; p=0.81) Multivariable regression analyses exhibited no significant difference regarding the presence of severe outcomes among the four blood types or O versus non-O blood types during T1, T2, and T3. ABO blood type was not associated with COVID-19 severe outcomes across the Delta, Alpha, and Omicron dominant COVID waves across a large health system in southeastern Michigan. Further research is needed to better understand if ABO blood type is a risk factor for severe disease among evolving COVID-19 variants and other viral upper respiratory infections.

Mental health in the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal analysis of the CLoCk cohort study.

Little is known about the long-term mental health consequences of the pandemic in children and young people (CYP), despite extremely high levels of exposure to the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus and the disruption to schooling and leisure activities due to the resultant restrictions. There are mixed findings from systematic reviews of how the pandemic affected CYP's mental health, which may be due to heterogeneous methods and poor quality studies. Most, but not all, suggest deterioration in mental health but population level studies may obscure the differing experiences of subgroups. The study questions are: (i) are there subgroups of CYP with distinct mental health profiles over the course of the second year of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic (between April 2021 and May 2022); and (ii) do vulnerability factors influence CYP's mental health trajectories. A matched longitudinal cohort study of non-hospitalised test-positive and test-negative 11- to 17-year-old CYP in England were recruited from the UK Health Security Agency having undergone PCR testing for COVID-19. They completed the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) at least twice over a 12-month follow-up period. Overall, 8,518 of 17,918 (47.5%) CYP who returned their first SDQ at 3 or 6 months post-testing were included in the analytical sample. Associations between age, sex, ethnicity, socioeconomic status (SES), and an educational health and care plan (EHCP, indicating special educational needs) on SDQ score trajectories were examined separately, after adjusting for PCR test result. Findings from multilevel mixed-effects linear regression model showed that on average mental health symptoms as measured by the total SDQ score increased over time (B = 0.11 (per month), 95% CI = 0.09 to 0.12, p < 0.001) although this increase was small and not clinically significant. However, associations with time varied by age, such that older participants reported greater deterioration in mental health over time (B = 0.12 (per month), 95% CI = 0.10 to 0.14 for 15 to 17y; 0.08 (95% CI = 0.06 to 0.10) for 11 to 14y; pinteraction = 0.002) and by sex, with greater deterioration in girls. Children with an EHCP experienced less deterioration in their mental health compared to those without an EHCP. There was no evidence of differences in rate of change in total SDQ by ethnicity, SES, or physical health. Those with worse prior mental health did not appear to be disproportionately negatively affected over time. There are several limitations of the methodology including relatively low response rates in CLoCk and potential for recall bias. Overall, there was a statistically but not clinically significant decline in mental health during the pandemic. Sex, age, and EHCP status were important vulnerability factors that were associated with the rate of mental health decline, whereas ethnicity, SES, and prior poor physical health were not. The research highlights individual factors that could identify groups of CYP vulnerable to worsening mental health.

Estimates of Direct Medical and Indirect Costs Associated With COVID-19 Among U.S. Active Duty Army Soldiers.

This study estimated the direct medical and indirect costs associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnoses among U.S. active duty (AD) Army service members (SMs). These cost estimates provide the U.S. Military with a better understanding of the financial burden of COVID-19 and provide a foundation for cost-effectiveness estimates. The study was approved as Public Health Practice (#17-605) by the U.S. Army Public Health Center, Public Health Review Board. U.S. AD Army SMs with COVID-19 were identified using an Army COVID-19 testing and surveillance database. Encounters for these SMs were captured from medical record where International Classification of Disease Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification code U07.1 was in the first or second diagnostic position. Analyses were conducted on SMs with COVID-19 who either had no healthcare encounters in the Military Health System (MHS); at least one MHS COVID-19 inpatient hospitalization; or at least one MHS outpatient COVID-19 encounter. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) costs captured from the encounters were used to develop direct medical cost estimates. Literature on COVID-19 recovery post-hospitalization, along with the number of COVID-19 hospitalizations and outpatient visits from encounters were used to describe the intensity of COVID-19 care. Estimates of the indirect cost of lost duty were based on SMs salary information, along with recovery time, bed days, or outpatient visit time. The indirect cost of limited duty was estimated using the time associated with the Department of Defense (DoD) COVID-19 pandemic mitigation strategies in place when these SMs were identified as positive for COVID-19. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cost estimates were developed for the Army using data from 19,086 SMs identified as positive for COVID-19 between June 1, 2020, and December 31, 2020. Direct medical costs, or the amount paid by the DoD to facilities for COVID-19 care, averaged $606 per SM with an encounter. Indirect costs for lost duty or the cost for recovery and the time taken to seek care for COVID-19 averaged $319 per SM, while indirect costs for limited duty or isolation associated with COVID-19 averaged $4,111 per SM or $411 per day. Service members (SMs) with an inpatient hospitalization averaged 4.8 bed days (range 1-43) and 266 recovery hours while SMs who sought outpatient care for COVID-19 averaged two outpatient visits (range 1-60 visits). The direct medical costs of a COVID-19 encounter in the MHS ($606) are a small portion of the costs for a SM with COVID-19. Indirect costs of lost and limited duty associated with COVID-19 averaged seven times higher ($4,331) and accounted for the vast majority of costs. Recognition of these costs is important especially given that soldiers in the hospital or in quarters being quarantined are complete losses of manpower to the Army. While the COVID-19 pandemic is ongoing and prevention, treatment, and mitigation efforts continue to evolve, having reliable estimates of direct medical and indirect costs from this study allows the U.S. Army and MHS to better account for the cost of this pandemic for its population.

Comparison of Clinical, Laboratory Parameters, and Outcome of COVID-19-Positive and Negative Neonates Delivered from COVID-19-Positive Mothers

Abstract Objective Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is a highly contagious respiratory viral infection that affects all individuals, although neonates are considered to be the most susceptible populations; therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate the clinical outcome and association between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-positive mothers and newborns. Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted at a dedicated COVID-19 tertiary care hospital in India over a period of 1 year. The pregnant mothers infected with COVID-19 virus were enrolled with their newborn baby up to the age of 28 days. COVID-19 test was done by using a rapid antigen kit and further confirmed by reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction. Results Prevalence of COVID-19-positive newborns born of COVID-19-positive mothers is reported at 8.4%. Female:male ratio was found to be 1:1.2. Raised D-dimer (88.9%) and C-reactive protein (88.9%) were the most common findings in COVID-19-positive newborns followed by leucopenia (33.3%). Among the COVID-19 newborns, Apgar score less than or equal to 7 and respiratory distress were found in 55.6 and 33.3%, respectively. Out of 9 COVID-19-positive newborns, two (22.2%) were expired, and out of 98 COVID-19-negative newborns, 4(4.1%) were expired. Conclusion This study revealed that severity of maternal symptoms is related to mortality of newborns. About 22.2% COVID-19-positive newborns expired, whereas 4.1% of COVID-19-negative newborns expired so risk of mortality increased among COVID-19-positive neonates as compared with negative ones. However, this study was conducted on a small sample size and further research with larger populations is needed to validate these findings.

SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein, rather than spike protein, triggers a cytokine storm originating from lung epithelial cells in patients with COVID-19.

The aim of this study was to elucidate the factors associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that may initiate cytokine cascades and correlate the clinical characteristics of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with their serum cytokine profiles. Recombinant baculoviruses displaying SARS-CoV-2 spike or nucleocapsid protein were constructed and transfected into A549 cells and THP-1-derived macrophages, to determine which protein initiate cytokine release. SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody titers and cytokine profiles of patients with COVID-19 were determined, and the results were associated with their clinical characteristics, such as development of pneumonia or length of hospital stay. The SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein, rather than the spike protein, triggers lung epithelial A549 cells to express IP-10, RANTES, IL-16, MIP-1α, basic FGF, eotaxin, IL-15, PDGF-BB, TRAIL, VEGF-A, and IL-5. Additionally, serum CTACK, basic FGF, GRO-α, IL-1α, IL-1RA, IL-2Rα, IL-9, IL-15, IL-16, IL-18, IP-10, M-CSF, MIF, MIG, RANTES, SCGF-β, SDF-1α, TNF-α, TNF-β, VEGF, PDGF-BB, TRAIL, β-NGF, eotaxin, GM-CSF, IFN-α2, INF-γ, and MCP-1 levels were considerably increased in patients with COVID-19. Among them, patients with pneumonia had higher serum IP-10 and M-CSF levels than patients without. Patients requiring less than 3weeks to show negative COVID-19 tests after contracting COVID-19 had higher serum IP-10 levels than the remaining patients. Our study revealed that nucleocapsid protein, lung epithelial cells, and IP-10 may be potential targets for the development of new strategies to prevent, or control, severe COVID-19.

A population-based study of the trend in SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic modalities from the beginning of the pandemic to the Omicron surge in Kyoto City, Kyoto, Japan

BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) presents critical diagnostic challenges for managing the pandemic. We investigated the 30-month changes in COVID-19 testing modalities and functional testing sites from the early period of the pandemic to the most recent Omicron surge in 2022 in Kyoto City, Japan.MethodsThis is a retrospective-observational study using a local anonymized population database that included patients' demographic and clinical information, testing methods and facilities from January 2020 to June 2022, a total of 30 months. We computed the distribution of symptomatic presentation, testing methods, and testing facilities among cases. Differences over time were tested using chi-square tests of independence.ResultsDuring the study period, 133,115 confirmed COVID-19 cases were reported, of which 90.9% were symptomatic. Although nucleic acid amplification testing occupied 68.9% of all testing, the ratio of lateral flow devices (LFDs) rapidly increased in 2022. As the pandemic continued, the testing capability was shifted from COVID-19 designated facilities to general practitioners, who became the leading testing providers (57.3% of 99,945 tests in 2022).ConclusionsThere was a dynamic shift in testing modality during the first 30 months of the pandemic in Kyoto City. General practitioners increased their role substantially as the use of LFDs spread dramatically in 2022. By comprehending and documenting the evolution of testing methods and testing locations, it is anticipated that this will contribute to the establishment of an even more efficient testing infrastructure for the next pandemic.

Comparing and validating air sampling methods for SARS-CoV-2 detection in HVAC ducts of student dorms

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic demonstrated the threat of airborne pathogenic respiratory viruses such as the airborne Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The ability to detect circulating viruses in a workplace or dormitory setting allows an early warning system that can alert occupants to implement precautions (e.g. masking) and/or trigger individual testing to allow isolation and quarantine measures to halt contagion. This work extends and validates the first successful detection of SARS-CoV-2 virus in dormitory Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) systems and compares different air sampling methods and media types combined with optimized quantitative Reverse-Transcription PCR (qRT-PCR) analysis. The study was performed in two environments; large dormitories of students who underwent periodic testing for COVID-19 (unknown environment) and the HVAC air from a suite with a student who had tested positive for COVID-19 (known dorm). The air sampling methods were performed using Filter Cassettes, BioSampler, AerosolSense Sampler and Button Sampler (with four media types with different pore sizes of 5 μm, 3 μm, 3 μm (gelatin), and 1.2 μm). The SARS-CoV-2 positive air samples were compared with the positive samples collected by individual student campus track tracing methods using PCR testing on saliva and nasopharyngeal samples. The results show a detection rate of 73% in the unknown environment and a 78% detection rate in the known dorm. Our data show that the virus was detectable with all the sampling methods we employed. However, the AerosolSense sampler and BioSampler performed the best at 63% and 61% detection rates, compared to 25% for the Filter Cassettes and 23% for the Button Sampler. Despite the success rate, it is not possible to definitively conclude which method is most sensitive due to the limited number of samples. These results show that with careful sampling and optimized PCR methods, pathogenic respiratory viruses can be detected in large buildings using HVAC return air.

Risk of transfusion-transmitted infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 from blood donors in Japan.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) essentially affects respiratory organs and tissues. SARS-CoV-2 RNAemia is often associated with more severe cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) compared to cases without RNAemia. To determine the impact of the pandemic on transfusion medicine, particularly transfusion-related infection, we examined the frequency of blood donation with RNAemia, the viral RNA (vRNA) concentration, and any possibility of transfusion-transmitted infection (TTI) among transfusion recipients. vRNA was examined in plasma/serum samples from 496 of 513 blood donors who reported having been infected with SARS-CoV-2 within 2 weeks of donation among a total of ca. 9.9 million blood donations in Japan between January 15, 2020, and December 31, 2021. The clinical course of patients transfused with the blood component containing vRNA was also examined. vRNA was detected in 23 of 496 samples. The median period from blood donation to COVID-19 onset was 1 day in 16 RNAemia-positive donors. Most samples had vRNA concentrations below the limit of quantification. Three patients were transfused with either a packed red blood cell or platelet concentrate that tested positive for vRNA, showing no COVID-19 symptoms and testing negative for vRNA in post-transfusion blood. The rate of RNAemia was 4.6% among blood donors who were found to be infected with SARS-CoV-2 shortly after donation, and vRNA concentrations in their donated blood were extremely low. There was no evidence of TTI in the recipients transfused with RNAemia-positive blood components. TTI risk in SARS-CoV-2 is negligible.

Sociodemographic characteristics and COVID-19 testing rates: spatiotemporal patterns and impact of test accessibility in Sweden.

Diagnostic testing is essential for disease surveillance and test-trace-isolate efforts. We aimed to investigate if residential area sociodemographic characteristics and test accessibility were associated with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) testing rates. We included 426 224 patient-initiated COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction tests from Uppsala County in Sweden from 24 June 2020 to 9 February 2022. Using Poisson regression analyses, we investigated if postal code area Care Need Index (CNI; median 1.0, IQR 0.8-1.4), a composite measure of sociodemographic factors used in Sweden to allocate primary healthcare resources, was associated with COVID-19 daily testing rates after adjustments for community transmission. We assessed if the distance to testing station influenced testing, and performed a difference-in-difference-analysis of a new testing station targeting a disadvantaged neighbourhood. We observed that CNI, i.e. primary healthcare need, was negatively associated with COVID-19 testing rates in inhabitants 5-69 years. More pronounced differences were noted across younger age groups and in Uppsala City, with test rate ratios in children (5-14 years) ranging from 0.56 (95% CI 0.47-0.67) to 0.87 (95% CI 0.80-0.93) across three pandemic waves. Longer distance to the nearest testing station was linked to lower testing rates, e.g. every additional 10 km was associated with a 10-18% decrease in inhabitants 15-29 years in Uppsala County. The opening of the targeted testing station was associated with increased testing, including twice as high testing rates in individuals aged 70-105, supporting an intervention effect. Ensuring accessible testing across all residential areas constitutes a promising tool to decrease inequalities in testing.

A Longitudinal Evaluation of Coronavirus Disease 2019 and Its Effects on Spinal Decompressions With or Without Fusion.

Retrospective cohort. The objectives were to (1) compare the safety of spine surgery before and after the emergence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and (2) determine whether patients with a history of COVID-19 were at increased risk of adverse events. The COVID-19 pandemic had a tremendous impact on several health care services. In spine surgery, elective cases were canceled and patients received delayed care due to the uncertainty of disease transmission and surgical outcomes. As new coronavirus variants arise, health care systems require guidance on how to provide optimal patient care to all those in need of our services. A retrospective review of patients undergoing spine surgery between January 1, 2019 and June 30, 2021 was performed. Patients were split into pre-COVID or post-COVID cohorts based on local government guidelines. Inpatient complications, 90-day readmission, and 90-day mortality were compared between groups. Secondary analysis included multiple logistic regression to determine independent predictors of each outcome. A total of 2976 patients were included for analysis with 1701 patients designated as pre-COVID and 1275 as post-COVID. The pre-COVID cohort had fewer patients undergoing revision surgery (16.8% vs 21.9%, P < 0.001) and a lower home discharge rate (84.5% vs 88.2%, P = 0.008). Inpatient complication (9.9% vs 9.2%, P = 0.562), inpatient mortality (0.1% vs 0.2%, P = 0.193), 90-day readmission (3.4% vs 3.2%, P = 0.828), and 90-day mortality rates (0.8% vs 0.8%, P = 0.902) were similar between groups. Patients with positive COVID-19 tests before surgery had similar complication rates (7.7% vs 6.1%, P = 1.000) as those without a positive test documented. After the emergence of COVID-19, patients undergoing spine surgery had a greater number of medical comorbidities, but similar rates of inpatient complications, readmission, and mortality. Prior COVID-19 infection was not associated with an increased risk of postsurgical complications or mortality. Level III.

Factors associated with the utilization of diagnostic tools among countries with different income levels during the COVID-19 pandemic

BackgroundDisparities in the utilization of essential medical products are a key factor contributing to inequality in health outcomes. We aimed to analyze the trends and influencing factors in using Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnostic tools and disparities in countries with different income levels.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study using open and publicly available data sources. Data were mainly collected from the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics, "Our World in Data," and the Global Burden of Disease databases. Negative binomial regression model and generalized linear mixed model were employed to investigate into five sets of factors associated with the usage of diagnostics: severity of COVID-19, socioeconomic status, health status, medical service capacity, and rigidity of response. Dominance analysis was utilized to compare the relative importance of these factors. The Blinder–Oaxaca decomposition was used to decompose the difference in the usage of diagnostics between countries.ResultsThe total COVID-19 testing rate ranged from 5.13 to 22,386.63 per 1000 people from March 2020 to October 2022 and the monthly testing rate declined dramatically from January 2022 to October 2022 (52.37/1000 vs 5.91/1000).. The total testing rate was primarily associated with socioeconomic status (37.84%), with every 1 standard deviation (SD) increase in Gross Domestic Product per capita and the proportion of people aged ≥ 70, the total testing rate increased by 88% and 31%. And so is the medical service capacity (33.66%), with every 1 SD increase in health workforce density, the number increased by 38%. The monthly testing rate was primarily associated with socioeconomic status (34.72%) and medical service capacity (28.67%), and the severity of COVID-19 (21.09%). The average difference in the total testing rates between high-income and low-income countries was 2726.59 per 1000 people, and 2493.43 (91.45%) of the differences could be explained through the five sets of factors.ConclusionsRedoubling the efforts, such as local manufacturing, regulatory reliance, and strengthening the community health workforce and laboratory capacity in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) cannot be more significant for ensuring sustainable and equitable access to diagnostic tools during pandemic.

Facilitators and barriers to COVID-19 testing in community and clinical settings: Lessons learned from Lesotho and Zambia.

The sudden emergence of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) had a devastating impact on health systems and population health globally. To combat the spread of COVID-19, countries enacted guidelines and safety measures, including testing, contact tracing, and quarantine. It was unclear the extent to which uptake of COVID-19 testing and other health initiatives would be accepted in countries with a history of dealing with widespread communicable disease transmission such as HIV or Tuberculosis. The objective of this study was to understand and compare the facilitators and barriers to COVID-19 testing at hospital sites in two rural communities in Lesotho and community spaces (referred to as hubs) in one urban community in Zambia during active phases of COVID-19 pandemic. Individual interviews and focus group discussions (FGDs) were held during March-October 2021 to explore facilitators and barriers to COVID-19 testing. FGDs with 105 community members and health care workers, and 16 individual interviews with key informants and four mystery shoppers were conducted across the two countries. In Zambia, four mystery shopper observations, and eight hub observations were also conducted. Individual country codebooks were developed and combined; thematic analyses were then conducted using the combined codebook. Findings were compared across the two countries, and most were consistent across the two countries. Two primary themes emerged that related to both barriers and facilitators: (1) structural conditions; (2) social implications and attitudes. The structural conditions that operated as barriers in both countries included public health isolation measures and misinformation. In Lesotho, the cost of tests was an additional barrier. The only structural facilitators were in Zambia where the community hubs were found to be accessible and convenient. The social implication barriers related to fear of isolation, stigma, and mental health implications because of quarantine, perceived pain of the test, and compromised privacy. Social facilitators that led to people testing included experiencing COVID-19 firsthand and knowing people who had died because of COVID-19. Across both countries, primary barriers and facilitators to COVID-19 related to structural conditions and social implications and attitudes. Public health measures can be at odds with social and economic realities; pandemic response should balance public health control and the socio-economic needs. Data from Zambia revealed that community-based settings have the potential to increase uptake of testing services. Community-based campaigns to normalize and reduce stigma for COVID-19 testing services are needed.

Cohort profile: investigating SARS-CoV-2 infection and the health and psychosocial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Canadian CHILD Cohort.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected all Canadian families, with some impacted differently than others. Our study aims to: (1) determine the prevalence and transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among Canadian families, (2) identify predictors of infection susceptibility and severity of SARS-CoV-2, and (3) identify health and psychosocial impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study builds upon the CHILD Cohort Study, an ongoing multi-ethnic general population prospective cohort consisting of 3,454 Canadian families with children born in Vancouver, Edmonton, Manitoba, and Toronto between 2009 and 2012. During the pandemic, CHILD households were invited to participate in the CHILD COVID-19 Add-On Study involving: (1) brief biweekly surveys about COVID-19 symptoms and testing; (2) quarterly questionnaires assessing COVID-19 exposure and testing, vaccination status, physical and mental health, and pandemic-driven life changes; and (3) in-home biological sampling kits to collect blood and stool. In total, 1,462 households (5,378 participants) consented to the CHILD COVID-19 Add-On Study: 2,803 children (mean±standard deviation [SD], 9.0±2.7 years; range, 0-17 years) and 2,576 adults (mean±SD, 43.0±6.5 years; range, 18-85 years). We will leverage the wealth of pre-pandemic CHILD data to identify risk and resilience factors for susceptibility and severity to the direct and indirect pandemic effects. Our short-term findings will inform key stakeholders and knowledge users to shape current and future pandemic responses. Additionally, this study provides a unique resource to study the long-term impacts of the pandemic as the CHILD Cohort Study continues.

Clinical manifestations and outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 among pediatric liver transplant recipients in the delta and omicron variant pandemic: A retrospective study.

To determine the clinical manifestations and outcomes of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in children who underwent liver transplantation (LT). A retrospective study was conducted at a transplant center in Thailand to include LT recipients aged < 18 years who had been infected with COVID-19. Out of a total of 54 children, there were 31 probable cases (57.4%) diagnosed using an antigen test kit and 23 confirmed cases (42.6%) diagnosed using polymerase chain reaction (14 children) or severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 antigen (9 children). Approximately half of the children (25, 46.3%) received the BNT162b2 vaccine before the infection, with 3 and 2 doses in 5 and 18 children, respectively. While some had COVID-19 during the delta pandemic, most (46 children, 85.2%) were infected during the omicron pandemic, of which manifestations included fever (67.4%), cough (50%), and rhinorrhea (47.8%), and symptoms lasted approximately 3 days. None had severe diseases. All patients with mild-to-moderate disease were advised to continue the same immunosuppressive therapy as before the infection. Compared to unvaccinated children or children with one dose of the vaccine, fever was less common in those who received ≥ 2 doses (OR: 0.08; 95%CI: 0.01-0.57, adjusted for age and immunosuppressive types). Favipiravir was prescribed in most patients (90.7%). Only a few children had long COVID-19 or abnormal liver function tests lasting > 1 month (4 children, 7.4%, both). Pediatric LT recipients with COVID-19 during the delta and omicron variant pandemic reported mild symptoms despite undergoing immunosuppressive therapy.

User perceptions of COVID-19 telemedicine testing services, disease risk, and pandemic preparedness: findings from a private clinic in Hong Kong.

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, telemedicine has been regarded as a method for providing safe access to healthcare. Here, we explored the experiences of individuals using telemedicine in Hong Kong during the COVID-19 pandemic to understand their risk perceptions and preparedness measures. We conducted a cross-sectional online survey of telemedicine users of private clinic-based COVID-19 testing services from 6 April to 11 May 2020. All users were invited to complete an anonymous online survey regarding COVID-19 risk perception and preparedness measures. The results of the survey were compared with the findings of a previous territory-wide survey. In total, 141 of 187 telemedicine users agreed to participate; the response rate was 75.4%. Of the participants, 95.1% (116/122) believed that telemedicine consultations were useful. Nearly half of the participants (49.0%) agreed or strongly agreed that telemedicine consultations were appropriate during the COVID-19 pandemic. Most participants believed that telemedicine consultations could perform the functions of 'health protection, promotion and disease prevention' (73.6%) and 'diagnosis' (64.0%). Concerning the choice of telemedicine provider, almost all participants (99.2%) were willing to consult medical doctors; more than half of the participants (54.1%) were willing to consult registered nurses, but only 13.1% were willing to consult non-clinical staff who had been trained to provide telemedicine services. The use of telemedicine for screening and patient education can be encouraged during the COVID-19 pandemic in Hong Kong.