Longitudinal Household Assessment of Respiratory Illness in Children and Parents During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: In the early COVID-19 pandemic, SARS-CoV-2 testing was only accessible and recommended for symptomatic persons or adults. This restriction hampered assessment of the true incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in children as well as detailed characterization of the SARS-CoV-2 disease spectrum and how this spectrum compared with that of other common respiratory illnesses. Objective: To estimate the community incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in children and parents and to assess the symptoms and symptom severity of respiratory illness episodes involving SARS-CoV-2-positive test results relative to those with SARS-CoV-2-negative test results. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study randomly selected Dutch households with at least 1 child younger than 18 years. A total of 1209 children and adults from 307 households were prospectively followed up between August 25, 2020, and July 29, 2021, covering the second and third waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Participation included SARS-CoV-2 screening at 4- to 6-week intervals during the first 23 weeks of participation (core study period; August 25, 2020, to July 29, 2021). Participants in all households finishing the core study before July 1, 2021, were invited to participate in the extended follow-up and to actively report respiratory symptoms using an interactive app until July 1, 2021. At new onset of respiratory symptoms or a SARS-CoV-2 positive test result, a household outbreak study was initiated, which included daily symptom recording, repeated polymerase chain reaction testing (nose-throat swabs and saliva and fecal samples), and SARS-CoV-2 antibody measurement (paired dried blood spots) in all household members. Outbreaks, households, and episodes of respiratory illness were described as positive or negative depending on SARS-CoV-2 test results. Data on participant race and ethnicity were not reported because they were not uniformly collected in the original cohorts and were therefore not representative or informative. Exposures: SARS-CoV-2-positive and SARS-CoV-2-negative respiratory illness episodes. Main Outcomes and Measures: Age-stratified incidence rates, symptoms, and symptom severity for SARS-CoV-2-positive and SARS-CoV-2-negative respiratory illness episodes. Results: Among 307 households including 1209 participants (638 female [52.8%]; 403 [33.3%] aged <12 years, 179 [14.8%] aged 12-17 years, and 627 [51.9%] aged ≥18 years), 183 household outbreaks of respiratory illness were observed during the core study and extended follow-up period, of which 63 (34.4%) were SARS-CoV-2 positive (59 outbreaks [32.2%] during the core study and 4 outbreaks [2.2%] during follow-up). SARS-CoV-2 incidence was similar across all ages (0.24/person-year [PY]; 95% CI, 0.21-0.28/PY). Overall, 33 of 134 confirmed SARS-CoV-2 episodes (24.6%) were asymptomatic. The incidence of SARS-CoV-2-negative respiratory illness episodes was highest in children younger than 12 years (0.94/PY; 95% CI, 0.89-0.97/PY). When comparing SARS-CoV-2-positive vs SARS-CoV-2-negative respiratory illness episodes in children younger than 12 years, no differences were observed in number of symptoms (median [IQR], 2 [2-4] for both groups), symptom severity (median [IQR] maximum symptom severity score, 6 [4-9] vs 7 [6-13]), or symptom duration (median [IQR], 6 [5-12] days vs 8 [4-13] days). However, among adults, SARS-CoV-2-positive episodes had a significantly higher number (median [IQR], 6 [4-8] vs 3 [2-4]), severity (median [IQR] maximum symptom severity score, 15 [9-19] vs 7 [6-11]), and duration (median [IQR] 13 [8-29] days vs 5 [3-11] days; P < .001 for all comparisons) of symptoms vs SARS-CoV-2-negative episodes. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, during the first pandemic year when mostly partial or full in-person learning occurred, the SARS-CoV-2 incidence rate in children was substantially higher than estimated from routine testing or seroprevalence data and was similar to that of adult household members. Unlike in unvaccinated adults, SARS-CoV-2 symptoms and symptom severity in children were similar to other common respiratory illnesses. These findings may prove useful when developing pediatric COVID-19 vaccine recommendations.

Performance- and cost-benefit analysis of an influenza point-of-care test compared to laboratory-based multiplex RT-PCR in the emergency department.

INTRODUCTION: Influenza poses a heavy burden on emergency departments (ED) and hospital wards. Fast and reliable bedside tests are invaluable in obtaining indications for (cohort) droplet isolation precautions and improving patient flow. We performed a cost-benefit analysis comparing influenza point-of-care testing (POCT) to laboratory-based multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification. METHODS: Data of 275 ED presentations between January-April 2019 were analyzed. Patients received both POCT and MLPA to calculate POCT sensitivity and specificity. Costs were calculated for both a POCT and MLPA scenario, including costs for testing, admission, droplet isolation precautions and cleaning. RESULTS: In our study population, 34 patients (12%) were identified with influenza A. No cases of influenza B were identified. Mean age of the influenza positive patients was 75(18) years and 56% were male. The most common symptoms upon presentation were cough, malaise and fever, with 74%, 56% and 50%, respectively. Compared to MLPA, POCT yielded a sensitivity of 94%, a specificity of 98% and a negative predictive value of 99% for influenza A. Using POCT yielded a cost reduction of €93,26 per patient. CONCLUSIONS: Influenza POCT is an accurate and cost-beneficial method to differentiate between admission with or without droplet isolation precautions. It can be useful in clinical decision making and reducing pressure on ED and hospital beds in an influenza peak season, by enabling fast patient flow and cohort isolation.

Costs and Benefits Associated with the MRSA Search and Destroy Policy in a Hospital in the Region Kennemerland, The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to analyze the costs and benefits of the MRSA Search and Destroy (S&D) policy between 2008 and 2013 in the Kennemer Gasthuis, a 400 bed teaching hospital in the region Kennemerland, the Netherlands. METHODS: A patient registration database was used to retrospectively calculate costs, including screening, isolation, follow-up, contact tracing, cleaning, treatment, deployment of extra healthcare workers, salary for an infection control practitioner (ICP) and service of isolation rooms. The estimated benefits (costs and lives when no MRSA S&D was applied) were based on a varying MRSA prevalence rate (up to 50%). RESULTS: When no MRSA S&D policy was applied, the additional costs and deaths due to MRSA bacteraemia were estimated to be € 1,388,907 and 33 respectively (at a MRSA prevalence rate of 50%). Currently, the total costs were estimated to be € 290,672 (€ 48,445 annually) and a MRSA prevalence rate of 17.3% was considered as break-even point. Between 2008 and 2013, a total of 576 high risk patients were screened for MRSA carriage, of whom 19 (3.3%) were found to be MRSA positive. Forty-nine patients (72.1%) were found unexpectedly. CONCLUSIONS: Application of the MRSA S&D policy saves lives and money, although the high rate of unexpected MRSA cases is alarming.