Descriptive study of COVID-19 vaccinations and infections within an NHS workforce.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers were a priority group for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination during the pandemic. Occupational exposure may account for some of the increased risk faced. AIMS: Describe COVID-19 vaccine uptake and infection rates in staff across a large NHS board in Scotland to better understand occupational risk during the pandemic. METHODS: Descriptive cross-sectional study. Demographic data were extracted on 5 August 2021 from 26 058 members of staff. COVID-19 vaccination status and positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) results were extracted on two separate dates to describe the timeline of staff infections between March 2020 and January 2022. RESULTS: There was high uptake of all three vaccine doses across all demographic groups in hospital staff. PCR positivity decreased with increasing age and Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation score. Staff and nosocomial COVID-19 infections followed peaks in community infection rates. CONCLUSIONS: NHS Lothian is a typical NHS workforce with good vaccine uptake. Beyond very early cases, there seems to be minimal evidence of occupational acquisition of COVID-19. The large number of nosocomial infections at the start of the pandemic may, in fact, reflect lack of community testing at this time. Despite protection from high vaccine coverage, job type and good Infection Prevention and Control practices, it seems that staff remain at high risk of catching the highly transmissible omicron variant from the community rather than work.

Diagnostic utility of hepatitis E virus antigen-specific ELISA versus PCR testing in a cohort of post liver transplant patients in a large university hospital.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is an important infectious agent causing acute and chronic disease. Chronic hepatitis E affects immunocompromised people and serological testing is neither reliable nor sufficient to infer whether a patient has infection; therefore HEV RNA testing is the only reliable diagnostic test presently available. An HEV antigen-specific ELISA test is commercially available but is not yet in clinical use. OBJECTIVES: 1) determine the prevalence of HEV infection in the Royal Free Hospital (RFH) liver transplant cohort; 2) compare the diagnostic utility of HEV antigen-detection against the current gold standard; 3) consider screening strategies for HEV infection in immunocompromised groups. STUDY DESIGN: The serum samples of 490 post liver transplant patients visiting the outpatient clinic at the RFH over an eight-month period were tested for HEV with both an HEV antigen-specific ELISA and HEV RNA test. RESULTS: The prevalence of HEV infection was 0.20% (95% CI 0.0%-1.1%). The specificity of the ELISA was 98.2% with a positive predictive value of 10.0%. There was one true positive HEV case, which was picked up correctly by the antigen-specific ELISA. These results were improved by incorporating a neutralisation step into further ELISA tests. CONCLUSIONS: The antigen-specific ELISA test gave no false negative results, supporting its utility as a screening tool. There was one true antigen positive result. Further investigation including cost analysis is indicated to determine the efficacy of HEV antigen-specific ELISA testing in a screening context and in the clinical investigation of HEV infection in immunocompromised patients.