Infection prevention and control in Dutch general practices before and during the COVID-19 pandemic and its implications for pandemic preparedness and seasonal respiratory epidemics: a qualitative study on lessons learned.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has prompted a re-evaluation of infection prevention and control (IPC) in general practices, highlighting the need for comprehensive IPC implementation. This study aimed to evaluate healthcare workers' (HCWs) experiences and perspectives regarding IPC in general practices before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, and its implications for post-pandemic IPC implementation. METHODS: This qualitative study involved semi-structured, in-depth interviews during two time periods: (1) prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (July 2019-February 2020), involving 14 general practitioners (GPs) and medical assistants; and (2) during the COVID-19 pandemic (July 2022-February 2023), including 22 GPs and medical assistants. Data analysis included thematic analysis that addressed multiple system levels. RESULTS: Findings indicated a shift towards comprehensive IPC implementation and organisation during the pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic period. Since the Omicron variant, some general practices maintained a broad set of IPC measures, while others released most measures. HCWs' future expectations on post-pandemic IPC implementation varied: some anticipated reduced implementation due to the desire to return to the pre-pandemic standard, while others expected IPC to be structurally scaled up during seasonal respiratory epidemics. Main contextual challenges included patient cooperation, staff shortages (due to infection), shortages of IPC materials/equipment, and frequently changing and ambiguous guidelines. Key lessons learned were enhanced preparedness (e.g., personal protective equipment supply), and a new perspective on care organisation (e.g., digital care). Main recommendations reported by HCWs were to strengthen regional collaboration within primary care, and between primary care, public health, and secondary care. CONCLUSION: HCWs' experiences, perspectives and recommendations provide insights to enhance preparedness for future epidemics and pandemics, and sustain IPC in general practices. For IPC improvement strategies, adopting an integrated system-based approach that encompasses actions across multiple levels and engages multiple stakeholders is recommended.

The association between SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence and cross-border mobility for visiting family or friends among Dutch residents of a Euregional province.

BACKGROUND: Border measures were implemented in many countries as infection prevention measures to interrupt between-country COVID-19 transmission. Border closings impact border region residents, as their professional and social lives are often intertwined across national borders. We studied whether crossing borders to visit family/friends in neighbouring countries (cross-border mobility) was associated with SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in Dutch Euregional residents. METHODS: SARS-CoV-2 serostatus (negative/positive) was assessed (pre-vaccination) using laboratory testing to determine previous infection. Visiting Belgian or German family/friends in February-March 2020 was questioned. The association between cross-border mobility and seroprevalence was tested using logistic regression analysis, adjusted for previously identified exposure factors. RESULTS: In 9,996 participants, 36.8 % (n = 3,677) reported cross-border family/friends. Of these, one-third (n = 1,306) visited their cross-border family/friends in February-March 2020. Multivariable analyses revealed no positive association between cross-border mobility and seropositivity, for both participants living in a border municipality (ORfamily/friends not visited=0.90 [95 % CI:0.78-1.04], ORfamily/friends visited=0.88 [95 % CI:0.73-1.05]), and for participants not living in a border municipality (ORfamily/friends not visited=0.91 [95 % CI:0.72-1.16], ORfamily/friends visited=0.62 [95 % CI:0.41-0.94]). CONCLUSIONS: This study provided no evidence of cross-border mobility as an important exposure factor for SARS-CoV-2. The results of our unique real-world study suggest that cross-border mobility did not substantially contribute to cross-border SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the Netherlands.

Impact of post-COVID-19 condition on health status and activities of daily living: the PRIME post-COVID study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess health and activities of daily living (ADL) in SARS-CoV-2-positive adults with and without post-COVID-19 condition (PCC) and compare this with negative tested individuals. Furthermore, different PCC case definitions were compared with SARS-CoV-2-negative individuals. METHODS: All adults tested PCR positive for SARS-CoV-2 at the Public Health Service South Limburg (Netherlands) between June 2020 and November 2021 (n=41 780) and matched PCR negative individuals (2:1, on age, sex, year-quarter test, municipality; n=19 875) were invited by email. Health (five-level EuroQol five-dimension (EQ5D) index and EuroQol visual analogue scale (EQVAS)) and ADL impairment were assessed. PCC classification was done using the WHO case definition and five other common definitions. RESULTS: In total, 8409 individuals (6381 SARS-CoV-2 positive; 53±15 years; 57% female; 9 (7-11) months since test) were included. 39.4% of positives had PCC by the WHO case definition (EQVAS: 71±20; EQ5D index: 0.800±0.191; ADL impairment: 30 (10-70)%) and perceived worse health and more ADL impairment than negatives, that is, difference of -8.50 points (95% CI -9.71 to -7.29; p<0.001) for EQVAS, which decreased by 1.49 points (95% CI 0.86 to 2.12; p<0.001) in individuals with PCC for each comorbidity present, and differences of -0.065 points (95% CI -0.074 to -0.056; p<0.001) for EQ5D index, and +16.72% (95% CI 15.01 to 18.43; p<0.001) for ADL impairment. Health and ADL impairment were similar in negatives and positives without PCC. Replacing the WHO case definition with other PCC definitions yielded comparable results. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with PCC have substantially worse health and more ADL impairment than negative controls, irrespective of the case definition. Authorities should inform the public about the associated burden of PCC and enable adequate support.

Perceived barriers and facilitators to infection prevention and control in Dutch residential care facilities for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Adequate implementation of infection prevention and control (IPC) in residential care facilities (RCFs) for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDDs) is crucial to safeguarding this vulnerable population. Studies in this field are scarce. This study aimed to identify perceived barriers to and facilitators of IPC among professionals working in these settings, along with recommendations to improve IPC, to inform the development of targeted interventions. METHODS: We administered an online questionnaire to 319 professionals from 16 Dutch RCFs for people with IDDs (March 2021-March 2022). Perceived multilevel barriers and facilitators (guideline, client, interpersonal, organisational, care sector, and policy level) were measured on a 5-point Likert scale (totally disagree-totally agree). Recommendations were assessed using a 5-point Likert scale (not at all helpful-extremely helpful), supplemented by an open-ended question. Barriers, facilitators, and recommendations were analysed by descriptive statistics. Open answers to recommendations were analysed through thematic coding. RESULTS: Barriers to IPC implementation included the client group (e.g., lack of hygiene awareness) (63%), competing values between IPC and the home-like environment (42%), high work pressure (39%), and the overwhelming quantity of IPC guidelines/protocols (33%). Facilitators included perceived social support on IPC between professionals and from supervisors (90% and 80%, respectively), procedural clarity of IPC guidelines/protocols (83%), and the sense of urgency for IPC in the organisation (74%). Main recommendations included the implementation of clear IPC policies and regulations (86%), the development of a practical IPC guideline (84%), and the introduction of structural IPC education and training programmes (for new staff members) (85%). Professionals also emphasised the need for IPC improvement efforts to be tailored to the local care context, and to involve clients and their relatives. CONCLUSIONS: To improve IPC in disability care settings, multifaceted strategies should be adopted. Initial efforts should involve clients (and relatives), develop a practical and context-specific IPC guideline, encourage social support among colleagues through interprofessional coaching, reduce workload, and foster an IPC culture including shared responsibility within the organisation.

Behavioural determinants shaping infection prevention and control behaviour among healthcare workers in Dutch general practices: a qualitative study reflecting on pre-, during and post-COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Since the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, awareness of infection prevention and control (IPC) has increased in primary care settings. This study aimed to examine behavioural determinants shaping IPC behaviour pre-, during, and post-pandemic among healthcare workers (HCWs) in general practices, to inform optimised IPC in primary care. METHODS: For this qualitative study, semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted during two study periods: (1) pre-COVID-19 pandemic: July 2019-February 2020, with 14 general practitioners (GPs) and medical assistants, and (2) during the COVID-19 pandemic: July 2022-February 2023, with 22 GPs and medical assistants. The design was informed by behaviour change theories. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Main themes were: (1) risk perception and IPC awareness, (2) attitudes towards IPC and professional responsibility, (3) decision-making process and risk considerations for IPC adherence, (4) social norm and social influence in GP practice team, and (5) environmental context and resource availability in GP practice. During the pandemic, risk perception and awareness of the importance of IPC increased compared to the pre-pandemic period. A consistent belief emerged that IPC is part of professional responsibility, while needing to be balanced with other aspects of patient care. Decision-making is dependent on the individual GP and mainly influenced by risk assessments and sustainability considerations. The social context in the practice team can reinforce IPC behaviours. GP practice building and layout, and limited IPC resource and material availability were reported as main barriers. CONCLUSIONS: The theory-informed insights of this study can be used for targeted interventions to optimise IPC behaviour in general practices. Adopting multifaceted strategies to target the various determinants is recommended to sustain IPC, by implementing continuous education using tailored communication, integrating IPC in work routines and organisational workflows, refining existing IPC protocols by incorporating decision-making tools for HCWs, fostering a culture of IPC through knowledge-sharing and teamwork, and addressing GP practice physical environment and IPC resource barriers.

Cross-border differences in the prevalence and risk factors for carriage of antimicrobial resistance in children attending daycare centers: a point prevalence study in the Netherlands and Belgium.

BACKGROUND: Day care centres (DCCs) are ideal settings for drug-resistant bacteria to emerge. Prevalence numbers of faecal carriage of antimicrobial resistant bacteria in these settings are rare. We aimed to determine the prevalence of faecal antimicrobial resistant bacteria carriage in children attending DCCs and to assess and identify infection risk factors within DCCs in The Netherlands and Belgium. METHODS: A point-prevalence study was conducted in 28 Dutch (499 children) and 18 Belgian (448 children) DCCs. Stool samples were taken from the children's diapers and a questionnaire was filled in by their parents. Hygiene related to stool and toilet use, hygiene related to food, environmental contamination, hand hygiene and hygiene guidelines were assessed conform a standardized questionnaire by the infection prevention and control expert visiting the DCC. Multilevel logistical regression analyses were used to define which characteristics predicted the presence of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales (ESBL-E), carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales (CPE), vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE), and ciprofloxacin-resistant Enterobacterales (CipR-E). RESULTS: The ESBL-E prevalence was 16% (n = 71) in Belgium and 6% (n = 30) in the Netherlands. The CipR-E prevalence was 17% (n = 78) in Belgium and 8% (n = 38) in the Netherlands. Antimicrobial use (RR: 0.30; 95% CI: 0.33-0.48) and hospital admissions (RR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.25-0.54) were lower in the Netherlands. Children travelling to Asia were at higher risk of being an ESBL-E carrier. Children using antimicrobials were at higher risk of being a CipR-E carrier. Cleaning the changing mat after each use was found as a protective factor for CipR-E carriage. CONCLUSIONS: We established a significant difference in ESBL-E and CipR-E carriage and antimicrobial use and hospital admissions between the Netherlands and Belgium among children attending DCCs. The differences between both countries should be further studied to improve the policy on anti-microbial use and hospital admissions in children.

Prevalence of Long-term Symptoms Varies When Using Different Post-COVID-19 Definitions in Positively and Negatively Tested Adults: The PRIME Post-COVID Study.

Background: Long-term symptoms after a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection (ie, post-coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19] condition or long COVID) constitute a substantial public health problem. Yet, the prevalence remains currently unclear as different case definitions are used, and negatively tested controls are lacking. We aimed to estimate post-COVID-19 condition prevalence using 6 definitions. Methods: The Prevalence, Risk factors, and Impact Evaluation (PRIME) post-COVID-19 condition study is a population-based sample of COVID-19-tested adults. In 2021, 61 655 adults were invited to complete an online questionnaire, including 44 symptoms plus a severity score (0-10) per symptom. Prevalence was calculated in both positively and negatively tested adults, stratified by time since their COVID-19 test (3-5, 6-11, or ≥12 months ago). Results: In positive individuals (n = 7405, 75.6%), the prevalence of long-term symptoms was between 26.9% and 64.1% using the 6 definitions, while in negative individuals (n = 2392, 24.4%), the prevalence varied between 11.4% and 32.5%. The prevalence of long-term symptoms potentially attributable to COVID-19 ranged from 17.9% to 26.3%. Conclusions: There is a (substantial) variation in prevalence estimates when using different post-COVID-19 condition definitions, as is current practice; there is limited overlap between definitions, indicating that the essential post-COVID-19 condition criteria are still unclear. Including negatives is important to determine long-term symptoms attributable to COVID-19. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05128695.

A systematic review of barriers and facilitators for hepatitis B and C screening among migrants in the EU/EEA region.

Introduction: Hepatitis B and C are a threat to public health. Screening of high-risk groups, such as migrants from high-endemic areas, enables early identification and treatment initiation. This systematic review identified barriers and facilitators for hepatitis B and C screening among migrants in the European Union/European Economic Area (EU/EEA). Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, databases PubMed, Embase via Ovid, and Cochrane were searched for English articles published between 1 July 2015 and 24 February 2022. Articles were included, not restricted to a specific study design, if they elaborated on HBV or HCV screening in migrant populations from countries outside Western Europe, North America, and Oceania, and residing in EU/EEA countries. Excluded were studies with solely an epidemiological or microbiological focus, including only general populations or non-migrant subgroups, or conducted outside the EU/EEA, without qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods. Data appraisal, extraction, and quality assessment were conducted and assessed by two reviewers. Barriers and facilitators were categorized into seven levels based on multiple theoretical frameworks and included factors related to guidelines, the individual health professional, the migrant and community, interaction, the organization and economics, the political and legal level, and innovations. Results: The search strategy yielded 2,115 unique articles of which 68 were included. Major identified barriers and facilitators to the success of screening related to the migrant (knowledge and awareness) and community level (culture, religion, support) and the organizational and economic level (capacity, resources, coordinated structures). Given possible language barriers, language support and migrant sensitivity are indispensable for facilitating interaction. Rapid point-of-care-testing is a promising strategy to lower screening barriers. Discussion: The inclusion of multiple study designs provided extensive insight into barriers, strategies to lower these barriers, and facilitators to maximize the success of screening. A great variety of factors were revealed on multiple levels, therefore there is no one-size-fits-all approach for screening, and initiatives should be adopted for the targeted group(s), including tailoring to cultural and religious beliefs. We provide a checklist of facilitators and barriers to inform adapted interventions to allow for optimal screening impact.

Facility- and ward-level factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks among residents in long-term care facilities: A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) have been disproportionately impacted by COVID-19. Yet, the reasons why certain LTCFs are affected more by outbreaks are poorly understood. This study aimed to identify the facility- and ward-level factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks among LTCF residents. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of multiple Dutch LTCFs (N = 60; with 298 wards providing care for ∼5600 residents) from September 2020 to June 2021. A dataset was constructed linking SARS-CoV-2 cases among LTCF residents to facility- and ward-level factors. Multilevel logistic regression analyses examined the associations between these factors and the likelihood of a SARS-CoV-2 outbreak among residents. RESULTS: During periods of the Classic variant, the mechanical recirculation of air was associated with significantly increased odds of a SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. During periods of the Alpha variant, the factors associated with significantly increased odds included large ward size (≥21 beds), wards providing psychogeriatric care, fewer restrictions on staff movement between wards and facilities, and a greater number of cases among staff (>10 cases). CONCLUSION: Policy and protocols on reducing resident density, staff movement, and mechanical recirculation of air in buildings are recommended to enhance outbreak preparedness in LTCFs. The implementation of low-threshold preventive measures among psychogeriatric residents is important because they appear as a particularly vulnerable group.

Trends in antibiotic prescribing in Dutch general practice and determinants of nonprudent antibiotic prescriptions.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotic resistance is mainly driven by (incorrect) use of antibiotics. Most antibiotics are prescribed in family medicine. Therefore, regularly monitoring of antibiotic prescriptions and evaluation of their (non-) prudent use in primary care is warranted. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine time trends in antibiotic prescriptions by Dutch family physicians (FPs) and to identify determinants of nonprudent antibiotic prescriptions by Dutch FPs. METHODS: Retrospective study among 27 Dutch general practices from the Research Network Family Medicine Maastricht, from 2015 to 2019. RESULTS: In total 801,767 patient years were analysed. Antibiotic prescriptions mainly increased in patients aged 65+ while prescriptions mainly decreased in patients below 65 years. Nonprudent antibiotic prescriptions decreased from 2015 to 2019 with the highest percentage of decline found in skin infections (66.9% [2015] to 53.9% [2019]). Overall, higher likelihood of nonprudent antibiotic prescriptions was found among men (odds ratio [OR] 4.11, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.91-4.33), patients aged 80+ (OR 1.44, 95% CI: 1.03-2.01; reference category ≤17 years), patients with comedication (OR 1.24, 95% CI: 1.17-1.31), and patients in urban general practices (OR 1.47, 95% CI: 1.38-1.56). CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic prescriptions increased over time in the elderly aged categories. Although an overall decrease in nonprudent antibiotic prescriptions was established from 2015 to 2019, percentages of nonprudent prescriptions remained high for skin infections and respiratory tract infections. Additionally, men, elderly aged patients (80+), patients with comedication and patients in urban general practices were more likely to receive nonprudent antibiotic prescriptions. Our results will help FPs to prioritize optimalization of antibiotic prescriptions in family medicine.

High proportions of post-exertional malaise and orthostatic intolerance in people living with post-COVID-19 condition: the PRIME post-COVID study.

Background: Exercise-based treatments can worsen/exacerbate symptoms in people who were SARS-CoV-2 positive and living with post-COVID-19 condition (PL-PCC) and who have post-exertional malaise (PEM) or orthostatic intolerance (OI). Nevertheless, PEM and OI are not routinely assessed by clinicians. We estimated PEM and OI proportions in PL-PCC, as well as in people not living with PCC (PnL-PCC) and negatives (i.e., never reported a SARS-CoV-2 positive test), and identified associated factors. Methods: Participants from the Prevalence, Risk factors, and Impact Evaluation (PRIME) post-COVID-19 condition study were included. PEM and OI were assessed using validated questionnaires. PCC was defined as feeling unrecovered after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Multivariable regression analyses to study PEM and OI were stratified for sex. Results: Data from 3,783 participants were analyzed. In PL-PCC, the proportion of PEM was 48.1% and 41.2%, and the proportion of OI was 29.3% and 27.9% in women and men, respectively. Proportions were higher in PL-PCC than negatives, for PEM in women OR=4.38 [95%CI:3.01-6.38]; in men OR = 4.78 [95%CI:3.13-7.29]; for OI in women 3.06 [95%CI:1.97-4.76]; in men 2.71 [95%CI:1.75-4.21]. Associated factors were age ≤ 60 years, ≥1 comorbidities, and living alone. Conclusion: High proportions of PEM and OI are observed in PL-PCC. Standard screening for PEM and OI is recommended in PL-PCC to promote appropriate therapies.

Investigating SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections per variant and vaccine type.

Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections have been reported in fully vaccinated individuals, in spite of the high efficacy of the currently available vaccines, proven in trials and real-world studies. Several variants of concern (VOC) have been proffered to be associated with breakthrough infections following immunization. In this study, we investigated 378 breakthrough infections recorded between January and July 2021 and compared the distribution of SARS-CoV-2 genotypes identified in 225 fully vaccinated individuals to the frequency of circulating community lineages in the region of South Limburg (The Netherlands) in a week-by-week comparison. Although the proportion of breakthrough infections was relatively low and stable when the Alpha variant was predominant, the rapid emergence of the Delta variant lead to a strong increase in breakthrough infections, with a higher relative proportion of individuals vaccinated with Vaxzevria or Jcovden being infected compared to those immunized with mRNA-based vaccines. A significant difference in median age was observed when comparing fully vaccinated individuals with severe symptoms (83 years) to asymptomatic cases (46.5 years) or individuals with mild-to-moderate symptoms (42 years). There was no association between SARS-CoV-2 genotype or vaccine type and disease symptoms. Furthermore, the majority of adaptive mutations were concentrated in the N-terminal domain of the Spike protein, highlighting its role in immune evasion. Interestingly, symptomatic individuals harbored significantly higher SARS-CoV-2 loads than asymptomatic vaccinated individuals and breakthrough infections caused by the Delta variant were associated with increased viral loads compared to those caused by the Alpha variant. In addition, we investigated the role of the Omicron variant in causing breakthrough infections by analyzing 135 samples that were randomly selected for genomic surveillance during the transition period from Delta to Omicron. We found that the proportion of Omicron vs. Delta infections was significantly higher in individuals who received a booster vaccine compared to both unvaccinated and fully vaccinated individuals. Altogether, these results indicate that the emergence of the Delta variant and in particular Omicron has lowered the efficiency of particular vaccine types to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infections and that, although rare, the elderly are particularly at risk of becoming severely infected as the consequence of a breakthrough infection.

Evaluation of symptomatology and viral load among residents and healthcare staff in long-term care facilities: A coronavirus disease 2019 retrospective case-cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated COVID-19 symptoms, case fatality rate (CFR), and viral load among all Long-Term Care Facility (LTCF) residents and staff in South Limburg, the Netherlands (February 2020-June 2020, wildtype SARS-CoV-2 Wuhan strain). METHODS: Patient information was gathered via regular channels used to notify the public health services. Ct-values were obtained from the Maastricht University Medical Centre laboratory. Logistic regression analyses were performed to assess associations between COVID-19, symptoms, CFR, and viral load. RESULTS: Of 1,457 staff and 1,540 residents, 35.1% and 45.2% tested positive for COVID-19. Symptoms associated with COVID-19 for female staff were fever, cough, muscle ache and loss of taste and smell. Associated symptoms for men were cough, and loss of taste and smell. Associated symptoms for residents were subfebrility, fatigue, and fever for male residents only. LTCF residents had a higher mean viral load compared to staff. Male residents had a higher CFR (35.8%) compared to women (22.5%). Female residents with Ct-values 31 or less had increased odds of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Subfebrility and fatigue seem to be associated with COVID-19 in LTCF residents. Therefore, physicians should also consider testing residents who (only) show aspecific symptoms whenever available resources prohibit testing of all residents. Viral load was higher in residents compared to staff, and higher in male residents compared to female residents. All COVID-19 positive male residents, as well as female residents with a medium to high viral load (Ct-values 31 or lower) should be monitored closely, as these groups have an overall increased risk of mortality.

Sex and age differences in the proportion of experienced symptoms by SARS-CoV-2 serostatus in a community-based cross-sectional study.

We examined the possible sex and age differences in the proportion of experienced Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms in unaware (previously) infected adults, and their uninfected counterparts, estimated by serostatus prior to vaccination, at the end of 2020 (Wuhan strain). A cross-sectional community-based study using a convenience sample of 10 001 adult inhabitants of a southern Dutch province, heavily affected by COVID-19, was conducted. Participants donated a blood sample to indicate past infection by serostatus (positive/negative). Experienced symptoms were assessed by questionnaire, before the availability of the serological test result. Only participants without confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were included (n = 9715, age range 18-90 years). The seroprevalence was comparable between men (17.3%) and women (18.0%), and participants aged 18-60 years (17.3%) and aged 60 years and older (18.6%). We showed sex and age differences in the proportion experienced symptoms by serostatus in a large cohort of both unaware (untested) seropositive compared with seronegative reference participants. Irritability only differed by serostatus in men (independent of age), while stomach ache, nausea and dizziness only differed by serostatus in women aged 60 years and older. Besides, the proportion of experiencing pain when breathing and headache differed by serostatus in men aged 18-60 years only. Our study highlights the importance of taking possible sex and age differences into account with respect to acute and long-term COVID-19 outcomes. Identifying symptom profiles for sex and age subgroups can contribute to timely identification of infection, gaining importance once governments currently move away from mass testing again.

Exposure factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence during the first eight months of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Netherlands: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The availability of valid Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronvirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) serological tests overcome the problem of underestimated cumulative Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases during the first months of the pandemic in The Netherlands. The possibility to reliably determine the number of truly infected persons, enabled us to study initial drivers for exposure risk in the absence of routine testing. Numerous activities or circumstances can accelerate virus spread, here defined as exposure factors. Hence, we aimed to evaluate a wide variety of demographic, behavioural and social exposure factors associated with seropositivity during the first eight months of the pandemic in Limburg, The Netherlands. METHODS: SARS-CoV-2 point-seroprevalence was determined cross-sectionally to indicate previous infection in a convenience sample of minimal 10,000 inhabitants of the study province. All adult (18+ years) inhabitants of the study province were eligible to register themselves for participation. Once the initial 10,000 registrations were reached, a reserve list was kept to ensure sufficient participants. Possible exposure factors were mapped by means of an extensive questionnaire. Associated exposure factors were determined using univariable and multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: Seropositivity was established in 19.5% (n = 1,948) of the 10,001 participants (on average 49 years old (SD = 15; range 18-90 years), majority women (n = 5,829; 58.3%). Exposure factors associated with seropositivity included current education, working in healthcare and not working from home, and being a member of three or four associations or clubs. Specifically for February-March 2020, visiting an après-ski bar during winter sports in Austria, travelling to Spain, celebrating carnival, and participating in a singing activity or ball sport were associated with seropositivity. CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirm that relevant COVID-19 exposure factors generally reflected circumstances where social distancing was impossible, and the number and duration of contacts was high, in particular for indoor activities.

Barriers and facilitators to infection prevention and control in Dutch psychiatric institutions: a theory-informed qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The unique characteristics of psychiatric institutions contribute to the onset and spread of infectious agents. Infection prevention and control (IPC) is essential to minimise transmission and manage outbreaks effectively. Despite abundant studies regarding IPC conducted in hospitals, to date only a few studies focused on mental health care settings. However, the general low compliance to IPC in psychiatric institutions is recognised as a serious concern. Therefore, this study aimed to assess perceived barriers and facilitators to IPC among professionals working at psychiatric institutions, and to identify recommendations reported by professionals to improve IPC. METHODS: A descriptive, qualitative study involving 16 semi-structured interviews was conducted (before COVID-19) among professionals from five Dutch psychiatric institutions. The interview guide and data analysis were informed by implementation science theories, and explored guideline, individual, interpersonal, organisational, and broader environment barriers and facilitators to IPC. Data was subjected to thematic analysis, using inductive and deductive approaches. This study followed the Consolidated criteria for Reporting Qualitative research (COREQ) guidelines. RESULTS: Our findings generated six main themes: (1) patients' non-compliance (strongly related to mental illness); (2) professionals' negative cognitions and attitude towards IPC and IPC knowledge deficits; (3) monitoring of IPC performance and mutual professional feedback; (4) social support from professional to patient; (5) organisational support and priority; and (6) financial and material resource limitations (related to financial arrangements regarding mental health services). The main recommendations reported by professionals included: (1) to increase awareness towards IPC among all staff members, by education and training, and the communication of formal agreements as institutional IPC protocols; (2) to make room for and facilitate IPC at the organisational level, by providing adequate IPC equipment and appointing a professional responsible for IPC. CONCLUSIONS: IPC implementation in psychiatric institutions is strongly influenced by factors on the patient, professional and organisational level. Professional interaction and professional-patient interaction appeared to be additional important aspects. Therefore, a multidimensional approach should be adopted to improve IPC. To coordinate this approach, psychiatric institutions should appoint a professional responsible for IPC. Moreover, a balance between mental health care and IPC needs is required to sustain IPC.

Linked nosocomial COVID-19 outbreak in three facilities for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities due to SARS-CoV-2 variant B.1.1.519 with spike mutation T478K in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) living in congregated settings have increased risk of COVID-19 infection and mortality. Little is known about variant B.1.1.519 with spike mutation T478K, dominant in Mexico. We describe a linked SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.519 outbreak in three IDD facilities in the Netherlands. METHODS: Following notification of the index, subsequent cases were identified through serial PCR group testing. Positive specimens were submitted for whole-genome-sequencing. Clinical information was gathered through interviews with staff members of the three facilities. RESULTS: Attack rate (AR) in clients of the index facility was 92% (23/25), total AR in clients 45% (33/73) and in staff members 24% (8/34). 55% (18/33) of client cases were asymptomatic, versus 25% (2/8) of staff members. Five client cases (15%) were hospitalized, two died (6%). Sequencing yielded the same specific B.1.1.519 genotype in all three facilities. No significant difference in median viral load was established comparing the B.1.1.519 variant with other circulating variants. The index of the linked outbreak reported no travel history or link to suspected or confirmed cases suggesting regional surveillance. Observed peak regional prevalence of B.1.1.519 during the outbreak supports this. CONCLUSION: AR, morbidity and mortality prior to control measures taking effect were high, probably related to the specific characteristics of the IDD setting and its clients. We assessed no evidence for intrinsic contributing properties of variant B.1.1.519. Our study argues for enhanced infection prevention protocols in the IDD setting, and prioritization of this group for vaccination against COVID-19.

Design and recruitment of a large-scale cohort study on prevalence, risk factors and impact evaluation of post-COVID-19 condition and its wider long-term social, mental, and physical health impact: The PRIME post-COVID study.

Background: Persistent symptoms, described as long COVID or post-COVID-19 condition, pose a potential public health problem. Here, the design and recruitment of the PRIME post-COVID study is described. PRIME post-COVID is a large-scale population-based observational study that aims to improve understanding of the occurrence, risk factors, social, physical, mental, emotional, and socioeconomic impact of post-COVID-19 condition. Methods: An observational open cohort study was set up, with retrospective and prospective assessments on various health-conditions and health-factors (medical, demographic, social, and behavioral) based on a public health COVID-19 test and by self-report (using online questionnaires in Dutch language). Invited for participation were, as recorded in a public health registry, adults (18 years and older) who were tested for COVID-19 and had a valid Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) positive or negative test result, and email address. In November 2021, 61,655 individuals were invited by email to participate, these included all eligible adults who tested PCR positive between 1 June 2020 and 1 November 2021, and a sample of adults who tested negative (2:1), comparable in distribution of age, sex, municipality of residence and year-quarter of testing. New recruitment periods are planned as well. Participants are followed over time by regular follow-up measurements. Data are analyzed using the appropriate data-analyses methods. Discussion: The PRIME post-COVID study will provide insights into various health-related aspects of post-COVID-19 condition in the context of various stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results will inform practical guidance for society, clinical and public health practice for the prevention and care for long-term impact of COVID-19. Trial registration ClinicalTrialsgov identifier: NCT05128695.