Group Of Health Care Workers Research Articles

Humoral Immune Response in Hematooncological Patients and Health Care Workers Who Received SARS-CoV-2 Vaccinations

To our knowledge, little is known about antibody development after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in immunocompromised individuals, such as patients with cancer. To determine whether hematooncological patients develop anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after vaccination. This retrospective cohort study included 2 independent cohorts of patients who were treated for hematological and solid malignant tumors between October 2020 and May 2021, comprising 901 samples from 595 patients and 58 health care workers (HCWs). Serum samples were collected from patients who were treated at an academic center and a community hospital in a rural area and a control group of HCWs, all of whom received SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Total anti-SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (anti-NC) and antispike protein (anti-S) antibodies were measured retrospectively. In total, 595 patients (320 women [53.8%] and 275 men [46.2%]; median [range] age, 67 [19-96] years) and 58 HCWs (40 women [69.0%] and 18 men [31.0%]; median [range] age, 42 [24-60] years) were included. Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection was documented in 43 of 595 (7.2%), while anti-NC antibodies that suggested previous infections were observed in 49 of 573 evaluable patients (8.6%). In both cohorts, anti-S antibody levels were higher in fully vaccinated patients compared with patients who received 1 dose. After the first vaccination, patients with hematological cancer who received B cell-targeting agents had lower anti-S levels (median, 1.6 AU/mL; range: 0-17 244 AU/mL) than patients who received other therapies (median, 191.6 AU/mL; range, 0-40 000; P < .001) or patients with solid tumors (median, 246.4 AU/mL; range, 0-40 000 AU/mL; P < .001). Anti-S levels after the first vaccination differed according to ongoing antineoplastic treatment modalities, with the lowest median levels in patients who received chemotherapy alone (157.7 AU/mL; range, 0-40 000 AU/mL) or in combination with immunotherapy (118.7 AU/mL; range, 14.1-38 727 AU/mL) and the highest levels in patients with no ongoing antineoplastic treatment (median, 634.3 AU/mL; range, 0-40 000 AU/mL; P = .01). Antibody levels after full immunization were higher in HCWs (median, 2500 U/mL; range, 485-2500 U/mL) than in patients with cancer (median, 117.0 U/mL; range, 0-2500 U/mL; P < .001). In this cohort study of patients with hematooncological diseases and a control group of HCWs, anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after vaccination could be detected in patients with cancer. Lower antibody levels compared with HCWs and differences in seroconversion in specific subgroups underscore the need for further studies on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with hematooncological disease.

Covid-19 as occupational disease in healthcare workers: a brief review of cases in the Clinical Hospital Centre Rijeka, Croatia.

The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a tremendous impact on every facet of private life and work organisation in virtually all social and economic sectors worldwide. People who stand on the first line of defence are healthcare workers (HCWs) risking exposure to infected patients. However, even though they are often affected by COVID-19 and associated somatic and mental health problems, COVID-19 as a new illness was not immediately acknowledged as occupational disease. This is why several groups of HCWs contacted their occupational medicine physicians in 2020 with a request to register the infection with SARS-CoV-2 as occupational disease. In an attempt to support their appeals and show that hospital workers have a high occupational risk of COVID-19, this study presents COVID-19 incidence and symptoms in 100 employees working at 11 clinics of the Clinical Hospital Centre (CHC) Rijeka, Croatia from 1 June to end December 2020. All of them were infected with SARS-CoV-2 and took sick leave, which lasted 13.6±2.6 days in average. This study also looks into the role of occupational medicine physicians in prospective monitoring of acute and long-acting consequences of COVID-19 that might occur in HCWs.

Adverse Events following AstraZeneca COVID-19 Vaccine in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study among Healthcare and Nonhealthcare Workers

Introduction: Many COVID-19 vaccines have been emerging with different efficacy and safety profiles. So far, very little attention has been paid to severity and reactogenicity of COVID-19 vaccine among healthcare workers. Thus, the aim of this study is to investigate the side effects associated with the first dose of AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine among healthcare workers (HCWs) and nonhealthcare workers (non-HCWs). Method: This is an observational cross-sectional study conducted at King Abdullah bin AbdulAziz University Hospital, Saudi Arabia, between February 28 and March 12, 2021. The major outcomes were the reported side effects of day 1, day 2, and day 3 after vaccination among HCWs and non-HCWs. Other outcomes included the onset and the duration of the reactions or the side effects that were reported. Results: A total of 526 participants completed the survey with 173 (32.8%) HCWs and the remaining majority were non-HCWs. Some of the most frequently reported side effects among the participants on the first day were muscle aches (49%), followed by fever (42%) and headache (40%). HCWs experienced more muscle aches, headache, sore throat, and abdominal pain, which were statically significant, compared to non-HCWs. The mean onset of symptoms was 16 (±15.3) h in the HCW arm compared with 12.2 (±10.2) h in non-HCWs (p = 0.0024). Furthermore, the mean duration of symptoms in the HCW group was 37 (±19) h compared with 32.3 (±13) h in the non-HCW group (p = 0.067). Conclusion: The reported side effects were common but not pressing in both groups. HCW respondents appeared to have more COVID-19 vaccine-associated symptoms.

Self-reported COVID-19 among physicians: An Egyptian online study during the pandemic

: Background: COVID-19 causes a critical occupational risk to frontline healthcare workers (HCWs) who respond to the pandemic, as they are placed in environments with an increased risk of infection exposure. It is a public health priority to understand how transmission occurs to protect this vulnerable group of HCWs. This study was conducted to estimate the incidence of self-reported COVID-19 infection among physicians and its possible associated factors. Methods: An online national survey using Survey Monkey was initiated to collect sociodemographic e.g. age and sex, occupational e.g. place and duration of work, and clinical data e.g. COVID symptoms and laboratory investigations, and to describe affected physicians' diagnoses. Results: The self-reported incidence of COVID-19 infection was found to be 65.4% among studied physicians. The significant independent predictors of COVID-19 infection were smoking, working as a frontline physician, having contact with a COVID-19 case, and working for less than ten years [ARR (95% CI): 3.0(1.6-5.7), 2.3(1.4-3.8), 2.1(1.2-3.6), and 1.8(1.2-2.9); respectively]. Conclusions: The incidence of COVID-19 infection among Egyptian physicians is relatively high. Smoking, being a frontline physician, having contact with a COVID-19 case, and working for less than 10 years are all factors associated with an increased risk of infection. There should be strict application of preventive measures, periodic screening for COVID-19 for early detection and isolation of infected HCWs together with effective vaccination.

The German Translation of the Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemics-9 (SAVE-9) Scale: Results from Healthcare Workers during the Second Wave of COVID-19.

Healthcare workers (HCW) are among those most directly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Most research with this group has used ad hoc measures, which limits comparability across samples. The Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemics-9 scale (SAVE-9) is a nine-item scale first developed in Korea, and has since been translated into several languages. We report on data collected from 484 German HCW between November 2020 and March 2021, during the “second wave” of coronavirus infections. We conducted item analysis, confirmatory factor analysis on the previously found factor solutions of the SAVE-9, examined correlations with established measures of depression, generalized anxiety, and insomnia, and compared scores between different groups of HCW. The psychometric properties of the German SAVE-9 were satisfactory and comparable to previous findings from Korea and Russia. Correlations with mental health measures were positive, as expected. We found some significant differences between groups of HCW on the SAVE-9 which were consistent with the literature but did not appear on the other mental health measures. This suggests that the SAVE-9 taps into specifically work-related stress, which may make it a helpful instrument in this research area.

Mental Health and Quality of Life of Frontline Health Care Workers After One Year of Covid-19 Pandemic

Abstract Aim: This study aimed to investigate the impact of more than one year of COVID-19 pandemic on the quality of life and mental health (in terms of depression, anxiety, stress, fear, burnout – workload) among Frontline Health Care Workers (HCWs). Subjects and methods: This is a cross-sectional survey based on 1,479 frontline HCW participants aged 20-65 years in Turkey who completed a survey including the 21-item Depression, Anxiety, Stress Scale (DASS-21), Burnout, Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S), and WHO (World Health Organization) Quality of Life instruments during March-July 2021. Bivariate, factorial and multivariate statistical analyses were performed. Results: Statistically significant differences were found between three frontline groups of HCWs (Physicians, Nurses, Others) including: age (p&lt;0.001), gender (p&lt;0.001), educational level (p&lt;0.001), income (p&lt;0.001), number of calls per week (p&lt;0.001). There were significantly high scores of fear of COVID-19 for all items among physicians. The findings also showed that the prevalence of depression (p=0.002), anxiety (p&lt;0.001), and stress (p&lt;10.005) and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (p=0.011) were significantly different among the three groups of frontline HCWs. The work-related burnout was over 30% in general. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure was 0.840 and indicated that the data of the study were suitable for a factor analysis. The factor analysis found out three factors with eigenvalue greater than one. These factors were consistent with the original scale. The multiple linear regression analysis revealed anxiety (p&lt;0.001), stress(p&lt;0.001), fear of COVID-19 and Burnout (p=0.008), depression (p=0.004), lack of sleeping- Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (p=0.014) and feeling exhausted (p=0.025) were associated with the quality of life during the COVID-19 pandemic after adjusting for the age and gender. Conclusion: The findings of this study show that fear and burnout related to COVID-19 were significantly associated with high scores of depression, anxiety, stress, and burnout after one year of pandemic among frontline-HCWs, with poor quality of life and sleep.

Serologic response to mRNA COVID‐19 vaccination in lymphoma patients

Serologic response to <scp>mRNA COVID</scp>‐19 vaccination in lymphoma patients

Associations between Personality Traits, Intolerance of Uncertainty, Coping Strategies, and Stress in Italian Frontline and Non-Frontline HCWs during the COVID-19 Pandemic-A Multi-Group Path-Analysis.

The COVID-19 pandemic represented a very difficult physical and psychological challenge for the general population and even more for healthcare workers (HCWs). The main aim of the present study is to test whether there were significant differences between frontline and non-frontline Italian HCWs concerning (a) personality traits, intolerance of uncertainty, coping strategies and perceived stress, and (b) the models of their associations. A total of 682 Italian HCWs completed a self-report questionnaire: 280 employed in COVID-19 wards and 402 in other wards. The analysis of variance omnibus test revealed significant differences between the two groups only for perceived stress, which was higher among the frontline. The multi-group path analysis revealed significant differences in the structure of the associations between the two groups of HCWs, specifically concerning the relations between: personality traits and intolerance of uncertainty; intolerance of uncertainty and coping strategies. Regarding the relation between coping strategies and stress no difference was identified between the two groups. In both of them, emotionally focused coping was negatively related with perceived stress, whereas dysfunctional coping was positively related with stress. These results could be useful in planning actions aiming to reduce stress and improve the effectiveness of HCWs’ interventions. Training programs aimed to provide HCWs with a skillset to tackle uncertain and stressful circumstances could represent an appropriate support to develop a preventive approach during outbreaks.

Higher rate of SARS-CoV-2 IgG seropositivity in hospital-based healthcare workers compared to elderly care staff in a Swedish low-prevalence region: a cross-sectional study

Background Previous seroprevalence studies have demonstrated higher anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG seroprevalence in healthcare workers (HCWs) than in the background population during the first phase of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. These studies, however, focussed mainly on hospital employees. Aim To perform a cross-sectional study comparing the seroprevalence of hospital-based HCWs with those employed in elderly care (home care and nursing homes). Methods Employees (n = 4955) in the county of Värmland, Sweden, were recruited between weeks 27 and 42 and tested for IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Serological results were combined with self-reported questionnaire data. Findings IgG seroprevalence was 5.7% in the total group of HCWs, and was higher among those employed in hospital-based healthcare than among those working in elderly care (8.4% vs. 3.7%, p < .001). Being employed as an assistant nurse, working in a COVID-19 unit, and being exposed via co-workers or private acquaintances were all associated with IgG seropositivity. Conclusion The difference in seroprevalence between HCWs in the two settings suggests that not only the profession but also factors in the workplace environment may be of importance. As all studied exposures were associated with IgG seropositivity, and asymptomatic infection was detected in 7.5% of participants, preventing outbreaks among HCWs is challenging. Adequate use of personal protective equipment when working with patients regardless of COVID-19 status, source control in situations with co-workers in which distancing is not possible, and routines enabling symptomatic staff to isolate pending PCR results are required to prevent healthcare-associated outbreaks of COVID-19.

Seropositivity of COVID-19 among asymptomatic healthcare workers: A multi-site prospective cohort study from Northern Virginia, United States

BackgroundBecause of their direct patient contact, healthcare workers (HCW) face an unprecedented risk of exposure to COVID-19. The aim of this study was to examine incidence of COVID-19 disease among asymptomatic HCW and community participants in Northern Virginia during 6 months of follow-up. MethodsThis is a prospective cohort study that enrolled healthy HCW and residents who never had a symptomatic COVID-19 infection prior to enrolment from the community in Northern Virginia from April to November 2020. All participants were invited to enrol in study, and they were followed at 2-, and 6-months intervals. Participants were evaluated by commercial chemiluminescence SARS-CoV-2 serology assays as part of regional health system and public health surveillance program to monitor the spread of COVID-19 disease. FindingsOf a total of 1,819 asymptomatic HCW enrolled, 1,473 (96%) had data at two-months interval, and 1,323 (73%) participants had data at 6-months interval. At baseline, 21 (1.15%) were found to have prior COVID-19 exposure. At two-months interval, COVID-19 rate was 2.8% and at six months follow-up, the overall incidence rate increased to 4.8%, but was as high as 7.9% among those who belong to the youngest age group (20–29 years). Seroconversion rates in HCW were comparable to the seropositive rates in the Northern Virginia community. The overall incidence of COVID-19 in the community was 4.5%, but the estimate was higher among Hispanic ethnicity (incidence rate = 15.3%) potentially reflecting different socio-economic factors among the community participants and the HCW group. Using cross-sectional logistic regression and spatio-temporal mixed effects models, significant factors that influence the transmission rate among HCW include age, race/ethnicity, resident ZIP-code, and household exposure, but not direct patient contact. InterpretationIn Northern Virginia, the seropositive rate of COVID-19 disease among HCW was comparable to that in the community.

Current Practices on Diagnosis, Prevention and Treatment of Post-Transplant Lymphoproliferative Disorder in Pediatric Patients after Solid Organ Transplantation: Results of ERN TransplantChild Healthcare Working Group Survey.

(1) Background: Post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) is a significant complication of solid organ transplantation (SOT). However, there is lack of consensus in PTLD management. Our aim was to establish a present benchmark for comparison between international centers and between various organ transplant systems and modalities; (2) Methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire of relevant PTLD practices in pediatric transplantation was sent to multidisciplinary teams from 17 European center members of ERN TransplantChild to evaluate the centers’ approach strategies for diagnosis and treatment and how current practices impact a cross-sectional series of PTLD cases; (3) Results: A total of 34 SOT programs from 13 European centers participated. The decision to start preemptive treatment and its guidance was based on both EBV viremia monitoring plus additional laboratory methods and clinical assessment (61%). Among treatment modalities the most common initial practice at diagnosis was to reduce the immunosuppression (61%). A total of 126 PTLD cases were reported during the period 2012–2016. According to their histopathological classification, monomorphic lesions were the most frequent (46%). Graft rejection after PTLD remission was 33%. Of the total cases diagnosed with PTLD, 88% survived; (4) Conclusions: There is still no consensus on prevention and treatment of PTLD, which implies the need to generate evidence. This might successively allow the development of clinical guidelines.

Serologic Surveillance and Phylogenetic Analysis of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Hospital Health Care Workers

It is unclear when, where, and by whom health care workers (HCWs) working in hospitals are infected with SARS-CoV-2. To determine how often and in what manner nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infection occurs in HCW groups with varying exposure to patients with COVID-19. This cohort study comprised 4 weekly measurements of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies and collection of questionnaires from March 23 to June 25, 2020, combined with phylogenetic and epidemiologic transmission analyses at 2 university hospitals in the Netherlands. Included individuals were HCWs working in patient care for those with COVID-19, HCWs working in patient care for those without COVID-19, and HCWs not working in patient care. Data were analyzed from August through December 2020. Varying work-related exposure to patients infected with SARS-CoV-2. The cumulative incidence of and time to SARS-CoV-2 infection, defined as the presence of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies in blood samples, were measured. Among 801 HCWs, there were 439 HCWs working in patient care for those with COVID-19, 164 HCWs working in patient care for those without COVID-19, and 198 HCWs not working in patient care. There were 580 (72.4%) women, and the median (interquartile range) age was 36 (29-50) years. The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 was increased among HCWs working in patient care for those with COVID-19 (54 HCWs [13.2%; 95% CI, 9.9%-16.4%]) compared with HCWs working in patient care for those without COVID-19 (11 HCWs [6.7%; 95% CI, 2.8%-10.5%]; hazard ratio [HR], 2.25; 95% CI, 1.17-4.30) and HCWs not working in patient care (7 HCWs [3.6%; 95% CI, 0.9%-6.1%]; HR, 3.92; 95% CI, 1.79-8.62). Among HCWs caring for patients with COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2 cumulative incidence was increased among HCWs working on COVID-19 wards (32 of 134 HCWs [25.7%; 95% CI, 17.6%-33.1%]) compared with HCWs working on intensive care units (13 of 186 HCWs [7.1%; 95% CI, 3.3%-10.7%]; HR, 3.64; 95% CI, 1.91-6.94), and HCWs working in emergency departments (7 of 102 HCWs [8.0%; 95% CI, 2.5%-13.1%]; HR, 3.29; 95% CI, 1.52-7.14). Epidemiologic data combined with phylogenetic analyses on COVID-19 wards identified 3 potential HCW-to-HCW transmission clusters. No patient-to-HCW transmission clusters could be identified in transmission analyses. This study found that HCWs working on COVID-19 wards were at increased risk for nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infection with an important role for HCW-to-HCW transmission. These findings suggest that infection among HCWs deserves more consideration in infection prevention practice.

Evaluation of the mental health of health professionals in the COVID-19 era. What mental health conditions are our health care workers facing in the new wave of coronavirus?

BackgroundThe aims of this study were to analyse the mental health and health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) of a broad sample of healthcare workers (HCWs) in Spain and to identify potential factors that have a significant effect on their mental health and HRQoL.MethodThis prospective cohort study comprised 2089 HCWs who completed the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7‐item (GAD‐7) Scale, the Patient Health Questionnaire‐9 (PHQ‐9), the Impact Event Scale‐Revised (IES‐R), the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), and the health‐related quality of life Questionnaire (EQ‐5D). Sociodemographic and clinical data in relation to Covid‐19 were also recorded. Descriptive statistics, univariable analysis and multivariable linear regression models were applied to identify factors associated with mental health and HRQoL.Results80.87% of participants were female and 19.13% male; 82.38% were aged under 55 years; 39.13% were physicians and 50.17% were nurses or auxiliaries; 80.42% of the health workers have directly treated patients with Covid‐19 and 12.28% have themselves tested positive for Covid‐19. 38.58% of HCWs had clinical depression; over half (51.75%) had clinical anxiety; 60.4% had clinical stress; and 21.57% had clinical insomnia. Older professionals (>55 years) reported lower rates of anxiety, depression, insomnia, and stress. Having worked directly with Covid‐19 patients appears to be an explanatory variable of suffering greater anxiety, depression, stress and insomnia, and of having a worse HRQoL amongst our HCWs. The group of HCWs suffering the worst mental state were nursing home workers.ConclusionsOur study confirms that symptomatology of anxiety, depression, stress, insomnia, and HRQoL were affected amongst HCW during the Covid‐19 pandemic.

Occupational Sharp Injury and Splash Exposure among Healthcare Workers in a Tertiary Hospital.

Background Occupational hazards like sharp injury and splash exposure (SISE) are frequently encountered in health-care settings. The adoption of standard precautions by healthcare workers (HCWs) has led to significant reduction in the incidence of such injuries, still SISE continues to pose a serious threat to certain groups of HCWs. Materials and Methods This was a retrospective study which examined the available records of all patients from January 2015 to August 2019 who self-reported to our emergency department with history of sharp injury and/or splash exposure. Details of the patients, mechanism of injury, the circumstances leading to the injury, status of the source (hepatitis B surface antigen, human immunodeficiency virus, and hepatitis C virus antibody status), and the postexposure prophylaxis given were recorded and analyzed. Data were represented in frequency and percentages. Results During the defined period, a total of 834 HCWs reported with SISE, out of which 44.6% were doctors. Majority of the patients have SISE while performing medical procedures on patients (49.5%), while 19.2% were exposed during segregation of waste. The frequency of needle stick injury during cannulation, sampling, and recapping of needle were higher in emergency department than in wards. More than 80% of HCWs received hepatitis B vaccine and immunoglobulin postexposure. Conclusion There is need for periodical briefings on practices of sharp handling as well as re-emphasizing the use of personal protective equipment while performing procedures.

ATTITUDE & BELIEF OF HEATH CARE WORKERS TOWARDS HYDROXYCHOLOROQUINE CHEMOPROPHYLAXIS VERSUS PERSONAL HYGIENE PRACTICES IN EARLY PHASE OF COVID 19 PANDEMIC – A WEB BASED SURVEY IN PRE-VACCINE TIME.

Objective: The objective of the study was to assess the attitude &amp; beliefs of Health Care Workers (HCWs) regarding personal hygiene practices &amp; hydroxycholoroquine chemoprophylaxis as a preventive measure of COVID-19 infection. Design: Predesigned &amp; validated survey proforma was circulated among individual as well as groups of HCWs through social-media from a period th th of 9 May to 30 June and responders who completed full questionnaire were included in the analysis Setting: The study was a web based survey among HCWs belonging to Public or Government hospital, private tertiary care hospitals having &gt;50 beds &amp; nursing home with 1-50 beds. Participants: The study included HCWs of &gt;18 years of age consisting of doctors, nurses, allied health care professionals who completed the survey. Result: Among total 262 responders 123(46.95%) were attending/visiting COVID-19 cases directly during the survey.Total166 (63.36%) doctors, 80 (30.53%) nurses,3 (1.15%) house-keeping and rest from other category participated in the survey. All responders (100%) adopted at least one or multiple methods of personal hygiene for infection control Having shower after duty and using hand sanitizer were most commonly preferred practices among HCWs. Only 88 (33.59%) responders had taken Hydroxychloroquine at the time of survey and majority 172 (65.65%) deferred any kind of chemoprophylaxis. Majority 227 (86.64%) practiced some precaution at their staying place as well. Conclusion: During early pandemic majority of the Indian HCWs had a higher attitude and belief towards personal hygiene as the best preventive measure towards COVID-19 infection rather than belief on hydroxychloroquine chemoprophylaxis which is still advised for caregivers and close contacts in existing national guideline.

Baseline Anti-HBs Antibody Titre in Health Care Workers in a Tertiary Health Care Centre in Faridabad, India

Introduction: Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at a high risk of acquiring hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection through occupational exposure which is preventable through hepatitis B vaccination. Aims: Therefore, we aim to establish the seroprevalence of anti-Hepatitis B surface (anti-HBs) antibody in the HCWs in a tertiary care setup to assess the level of protection that workers in these high-risk zones have. Methods and Material: Serum specimens from participants were tested at the Microbiology laboratory of ESIC Medical College &amp; Hospital, Faridabad. Three ml of venous blood was collected aseptically in a vacutainer. The serum anti-HBs titre was detected by Enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA) using the Monolisa Anti-HBs PLUS (Bio-Rad) as per manufacturer’s instruction. Results: Of the 218 HCWs included, 145 (66.51%) were vaccinated, and 73 (33.49%) were unvaccinated. HCWs were grouped into five categories which comprise doctors from all disciplines (n=53), nursing staff (n=50), technicians (n=52), nursing orderly (NO) (n=34),and housekeeping (n=29). Among various groups of HCWs, the vaccination rate was highest among doctors (96.23%) than the other groups. While comparing the anti-HBs titre among the unvaccinated HCWs, it has been seen that out of 73 (33.49%) HCWs, majority of the NO (76.47%) were having titre below 10 mIU/ml followed by housekeeping (73.68%), technicians (70.58%), and nursing staff (33.33%). Conclusions: All HCWs should be regularly screened for HBs antigen along with administration of a booster dose and monitoring of anti-HBs titre.

Evaluation of immune response to hepatitis B vaccine among health care workers at a tertiary care hospital in south India: a retrospective record based study

Seroprevalence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) among healthcare workers (HCWs) is two to four times higher than that of the general population due to repeated exposure. To determine the hepatitis B (hep B) vaccination status, non-response rate to (hep B) and its determinants among HCWs at a tertiary care teaching hospital in south India. A secondary analysis of the medical records of a group of HCWs who joined the hospital from 1st January 2015 to 31st December 2016 was done. A total of 451 HCWs received the vaccine at the study hospital. Mean age of the HCWs was 25.3±6.1 years, majority 374 (82.1%) of them were females and joined as staff nurses 213 (47.2%). Only 164 (36.3%) had received all 3 doses of hep B vaccination. Complete vaccination with (hep B) among HCWs was poor. Health education and suitable administrative controls must be instituted to ensure protection.

Impacts of Side Effects to BNT162b2 and the First Dose of ChAdOx1 Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination on Work Productivity, the Need for Medical Attention, and Vaccine Acceptance: A Multicenter Survey on Healthcare Workers in Referral Teaching Hospitals in the Republic of Korea.

To establish a successful anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination strategy, it is necessary to take possible tradeoffs into account. We conducted a survey on vaccinated healthcare workers (HCWs) inthree referral teaching hospitals in the Republic of Korea. We investigated the frequency of vaccination side effects (SEs), the impact on their work productivity, the need for medical attention, and vaccine acceptance. Three groups of HCWs were surveyed: 1406 who had received the first dose of BNT162b2 (BNT162b2#1), 1168 who had received the second dose of BNT162b2 (BNT162b2#2), and 1679 who had received the first dose of ChAdOx1 (ChAdOx1#1). More SEs and impact on work productivity were reported in ChAdOx1#1 than in the other two groups. However, among individuals aged ≥40 years, no significant difference of absence from work was found between ChAdOx1#1 and BN162b2#2 (4.4%, 31/699 vs. 3.0%, 12/405; p = 0.26), and none were hospitalized. Older HCWs in ChAdOx1#1 showed intention to receive the second dose of the vaccine. Although the incidence of SEs and their impacts were greater after the first dose of ChAdOx1 than BNT162b2 in young people, significant impact of SEs seemed to be rare in individuals aged ≥40 years, regardless of the vaccine they received.

Association between previous infection with SARS CoV-2 and the risk of self-reported symptoms after mRNA BNT162b2 vaccination: Data from 3,078 health care workers

BackgroundHealth care workers (HCWs) are at high risk of contracting an infection by SARS CoV-2 and thus they are a priority for vaccination. We hereby aim to investigate whether the risk of severe and moderate systemic symptoms (MSS) after vaccination is higher in HCWs with a history of previous COVID-19.MethodsAn online questionnaire was offered to the cohort all HCWs undergoing anti-SARS CoV-2 mRNA BNT162b2 vaccination between January 4th and February 9th 2021 in two large tertiary hospitals (ASST Santi Paolo and Carlo) in Milan, Italy. Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection/COVID-19 was recorded. Local and systemic symptoms after each of the two doses were reported. MSS were those either interfering with daily activities or resulting in time off-work. Factors associated to MSS were identified by logistic regression.Findings3,078 HCW were included. Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection/COVID-19 occurred in 396 subjects (12·9%). 59·6% suffered from ≥1 local or systemic symptom after the first and 73·4% after the second dose. MSS occurred in 6·3% of cases (14·4% with previous vs 5·1% with no COVID-19 p<0·001) and in 28·3% (24·5% in COVID-19 vs 28·3% no COVID, p = 0·074) after the first and second dose, respectively. Subjects already experiencing COVID-19 had an independent 3-fold higher risk of MSS after the first and a 30% lower risk after the second dose. No severe adverse events were reported.InterpretationOur data confirm in a real-world setting, the lack of severe adverse events and the short duration of reactogenicity in already infected HCWs. Possible differences in immune reactivity are drivers of MSS among this group of HCWs, as well as among females and younger individuals.FundingNone.

Performance Evaluation: Four Chemiluminescent SARS-Cov-2 Immunoassays and Rapid-Card Test in Mild Disease and Seroprevalence of SARS CoV-2 in Frontline Healthcare Workers

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic raised a host of challenges to modern medicine. Key amongst these were in diagnostics, as most SARS-CoV-2 assays had been rapidly developed and released under emergency-use authorization with limited validation on clinical samples and secondly, an increased risk of COVID-19 infection to healthcare workers (HCW). There are limited inter-assay comparisons to detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in cases with milder symptoms of COVID-19, necessary to evaluate whether assays can detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in patients with mild infection. &#x0D; Aim: Therefore this study aimed to evaluate the performance of four chemiluminescence immunoassays and a rapid immunochromatographic assay in 100 rRT-PCR diagnosed-recovered frontline HCW with milder COVID-19 disease and secondly to evaluate the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the asymptomatic frontline HCW at a multispeciality hospital in Delhi, India. Study Design: Serum and plasma samples were obtained from 100 rRT-PCR diagnosed-recovered frontline HCWs with mild disease working across the hospital, and performance of four common chemiluminescence immunoassays evaluated. Also samples of 505 asymptomatic, frontline HCWs working in hospital, who had not developed or shown any symptoms of COVID-19 infection to date was collected and the seroprevalence of infection was evaluated.&#x0D; Place and Duration of the Study: A study was conducted at BLK Superspeciality Hospital, New Delhi from September to October 2020.&#x0D; Methods: Four chemiluminescence immunoassays [Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG (Nucleocapsid), Roche Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Total (Nucleocapsid), Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics: VITROS Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG (Spike) and Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Total (Spike)] and a rapid assay [Medsource Ozone Biomedicals] were evaluated in 100 rRT-PCR diagnosed-recovered frontline HCW with mild disease. Also, seroprevalence was studied in 505 asymptomatic, frontline HCW. &#x0D; Results: At manufacturers' thresholds, overall sensitivity for Abbott was 71%, Roche 96%, Ortho (both total and IgG(S) 99% and rapid card 56%. Seroprevalence in asymptomatic frontline HCW was found to be 17.6%, with positivity being higher in the HCW group not facing patients directly compared to direct patient caregivers (P = 0.0034).&#x0D; Conclusion: Assay performance depends on assay design (total IgM &amp; IgG antibodies versus IgG alone), choice of antigen, and time of sample testing from the onset of disease. In our study, Ortho Vitros total-Ab; IgG (Spike), and Roche Elecsys total-Ab (Nucleocapsid) assays were found to have optimal sensitivity. A seroprevalence study in the frontline HCWs at our institute showed that seroprevalence was higher (17.6%) in HCWs in comparison to the community.