Impact of sex and gender on post-COVID-19 syndrome, Switzerland, 2020.

BackgroundWomen are overrepresented among individuals with post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC). Biological (sex) as well as sociocultural (gender) differences between women and men might account for this imbalance, yet their impact on PASC is unknown.AimWe assessed the impact of sex and gender on PASC in a Swiss population.MethodOur multicentre prospective cohort study included 2,856 (46% women, mean age 44.2 ± 16.8 years) outpatients and hospitalised patients with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection.ResultsAmong those who remained outpatients during their first infection, women reported persisting symptoms more often than men (40.5% vs 25.5% of men; p < 0.001). This sex difference was absent in hospitalised patients. In a crude analysis, both female biological sex (RR = 1.59; 95% CI: 1.41-1.79; p < 0.001) and a score summarising gendered sociocultural variables (RR = 1.05; 95% CI: 1.03-1.07; p < 0.001) were significantly associated with PASC. Following multivariable adjustment, biological female sex (RR = 0.96; 95% CI: 0.74-1.25; p = 0.763) was outperformed by feminine gender-related factors such as a higher stress level (RR = 1.04; 95% CI: 1.01-1.06; p = 0.003), lower education (RR = 1.16; 95% CI: 1.03-1.30; p = 0.011), being female and living alone (RR = 1.91; 95% CI: 1.29-2.83; p = 0.001) or being male and earning the highest income in the household (RR = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.60-0.97; p = 0.030).ConclusionSpecific sociocultural parameters that differ in prevalence between women and men, or imply a unique risk for women, are predictors of PASC and may explain, at least in part, the higher incidence of PASC in women. Once patients are hospitalised during acute infection, sex differences in PASC are no longer evident.

SARS-CoV-2 risk in household contacts of healthcare workers: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have assessed whether the increased SARS-CoV-2 risk of healthcare workers (HCW) is carried on to their household contacts. Within a prospective HCW cohort, we assessed the SARS-CoV-2 risk of household contacts of HCW depending on the HCWs cumulative exposure to COVID-19 patients and identified factors influencing this association. METHODS: HCW aged ≥ 16 years from nine Swiss healthcare networks participated. HCW without any household contacts were excluded. For HCW, cumulative patient exposure (number of COVID-19 patient contacts times average contact duration during a 12-month follow-up) was calculated. During follow-up, HCW reported SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal swab results and positive swab results of their household contacts. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify variables associated with SARS-CoV-2 household positivity. RESULTS: Of 2406 HCW, 466 (19%) reported ≥ 1 SARS-CoV-2 positive household. In multivariable analysis, patient exposure of HCW (adjusted OR [aOR] 1.08 per category, 95% CI 1.04-1.12), household size (aOR 1.53 per household member, 95% CI 1.35-1.73) and having children (aOR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53-0.94) remained associated with household positivity. Vaccinated HCW had a lower risk (aOR 0.54, 95% CI 0.38-0.77) of reporting a positive contact, as were those using respirator masks in contact with COVID-19 patients (aOR 0.65, 95% CI 0.49-0.86). Among vaccinated HCW, delayed first vaccination was associated with increased household SARS-CoV-2 positivity (aOR 1.14 per month, 95% CI 1.08-1.21). CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 positivity in household contacts of HCW increases with higher cumulative COVID-19 patient exposure of HCWs. Measures reducing the SARS-CoV-2 risk in HCW might indirectly reduce the infection risk of their households.

Clinical symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection during the Omicron period in relation to baseline immune status and booster vaccination-A prospective multicentre cohort of health professionals (SURPRISE study).

The effects of different types of pre-existing immunity on the frequency of clinical symptoms caused by the SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection were prospectively assessed in healthcare workers during the Omicron period. Among 518 participants, hybrid immunity was associated with symptom reduction for dizziness, muscle or limb pain and headache as compared to vaccination only. Moreover, the frequencies of dizziness, cough and muscle or limb pain were lower in participants who had received a booster vaccine dose. Thus, hybrid immunity appeared to be superior in preventing specific symptoms during breakthrough infection compared to vaccination alone. A booster vaccine dose conferred additional symptom reduction.

Post-Acute Sequelae After Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection by Viral Variant and Vaccination Status: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Disentangling the effects of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants and vaccination on the occurrence of post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (PASC) is crucial to estimate and reduce the burden of PASC. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis (May/June 2022) within a prospective multicenter healthcare worker (HCW) cohort in north-eastern Switzerland. HCWs were stratified by viral variant and vaccination status at time of their first positive SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal swab. HCWs without positive swab and with negative serology served as controls. The sum of 18 self-reported PASC symptoms was modeled with univariable and multivariable negative-binomial regression to analyze the association of mean symptom number with viral variant and vaccination status. RESULTS: Among 2912 participants (median age: 44 years; 81.3% female), PASC symptoms were significantly more frequent after wild-type infection (estimated mean symptom number: 1.12; P < .001; median time since infection: 18.3 months), after Alpha/Delta infection (0.67 symptoms; P < .001; 6.5 months), and after Omicron BA.1 infections (0.52 symptoms; P = .005; 3.1 months) versus uninfected controls (0.39 symptoms). After Omicron BA.1 infection, the estimated mean symptom number was 0.36 for unvaccinated individuals versus 0.71 with 1-2 vaccinations (P = .028) and 0.49 with ≥3 prior vaccinations (P = .30). Adjusting for confounders, only wild-type (adjusted rate ratio [aRR]: 2.81; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.08-3.83) and Alpha/Delta infections (aRR: 1.93; 95% CI: 1.10-3.46) were significantly associated with the outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Previous infection with pre-Omicron variants was the strongest risk factor for PASC symptoms among our HCWs. Vaccination before Omicron BA.1 infection was not associated with a clear protective effect against PASC symptoms in this population.

Risk and symptoms of COVID-19 in health professionals according to baseline immune status and booster vaccination during the Delta and Omicron waves in Switzerland-A multicentre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge about protection conferred by previous Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and/or vaccination against emerging viral variants allows clinicians, epidemiologists, and health authorities to predict and reduce the future Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) burden. We investigated the risk and symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 (re)infection and vaccine breakthrough infection during the Delta and Omicron waves, depending on baseline immune status and subsequent vaccinations. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In this prospective, multicentre cohort performed between August 2020 and March 2022, we recruited hospital employees from ten acute/nonacute healthcare networks in Eastern/Northern Switzerland. We determined immune status in September 2021 based on serology and previous SARS-CoV-2 infections/vaccinations: Group N (no immunity); Group V (twice vaccinated, uninfected); Group I (infected, unvaccinated); Group H (hybrid: infected and ≥1 vaccination). Date and symptoms of (re)infections and subsequent (booster) vaccinations were recorded until March 2022. We compared the time to positive SARS-CoV-2 swab and number of symptoms according to immune status, viral variant (i.e., Delta-dominant before December 27, 2021; Omicron-dominant on/after this date), and subsequent vaccinations, adjusting for exposure/behavior variables. Among 2,595 participants (median follow-up 171 days), we observed 764 (29%) (re)infections, thereof 591 during the Omicron period. Compared to group N, the hazard ratio (HR) for (re)infection was 0.33 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.22 to 0.50, p < 0.001) for V, 0.25 (95% CI 0.11 to 0.57, p = 0.001) for I, and 0.04 (95% CI 0.02 to 0.10, p < 0.001) for H in the Delta period. HRs substantially increased during the Omicron period for all groups; in multivariable analyses, only belonging to group H was associated with protection (adjusted HR [aHR] 0.52, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.77, p = 0.001); booster vaccination was associated with reduction of breakthrough infection risk in groups V (aHR 0.68, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.85, p = 0.001) and H (aHR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.00, p = 0.048), largely observed in the early Omicron period. Group H (versus N, risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.97, p = 0.021) and participants with booster vaccination (versus nonboosted, RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.88, p < 0.001) reported less symptoms during infection. Important limitations are that SARS-CoV-2 swab results were self-reported and that results on viral variants were inferred from the predominating strain circulating in the community at that time, rather than sequencing. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that hybrid immunity and booster vaccination are associated with a reduced risk and reduced symptom number of SARS-CoV-2 infection during Delta- and Omicron-dominant periods. For previously noninfected individuals, booster vaccination might reduce the risk of symptomatic Omicron infection, although this benefit seems to wane over time.

Analysis of Diagnostic Modalities in Hospital-admitted Patients Evaluated for COVID-19.

BACKGROUND/AIM: To assess the diagnostic performance of reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), low-dose chest computed tomography (CT), and serological testing, alone and in combinations, as well as routine inflammatory markers in patients evaluated for COVID-19 during the first wave in early 2020. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data of all patients who were admitted to the emergency department due to fever and/or respiratory symptoms. CT scans were rated using the COVID-19 Reporting and Data System (CO-RADS) suspicion score. True disease status (COVID-19 - positive vs. negative) was adjudicated by two independent clinicians. Receiver-operating characteristic curves and areas under the curves were calculated for inflammatory markers. Sensitivities and specificities were calculated for RT-PCR, CT, and serology alone, as well as the combinations of RT-PCR+CT, RT-PCR+serology, CT+serology, and all three modalities. RESULTS: Of 221 patients with a median age of 72 years, 113 were classified as COVID-19 positive. Among 180 patients from which data on CT and RT-PCR were available, RT-PCR had the highest sensitivity to detect COVID-19 (0.87; 95%CI=0.78-0.93). Notably, the addition of CT in the analysis increased sensitivity to 0.89 (95%CI=0.8-0.94), but lowered specificity from 1 (95%CI=0.96-1) to 0.9 (95%CI=0.83-0.95). The combination of RT-PCR, CT and serology (n=60 patients with complete dataset) yielded a sensitivity of 0.83 (95%CI=0.61-0.94) and specificity of 0.86 (95%CI=0.72-0.93). CONCLUSION: RT-PCR was the best single test in patients evaluated for COVID-19. Conversely, the routine performance of chest CT adds little sensitivity and decreases specificity.

Impact of respirator versus surgical masks on SARS-CoV-2 acquisition in healthcare workers: a prospective multicentre cohort.

BACKGROUND: There is insufficient evidence regarding the role of respirators in the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We analysed the impact of filtering facepiece class 2 (FFP2) versus surgical masks on the risk of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition among Swiss healthcare workers (HCW). METHODS: Our prospective multicentre cohort enrolled HCW from June to August 2020. Participants were asked about COVID-19 risk exposures/behaviours, including preferentially worn mask type when caring for COVID-19 patients outside of aerosol-generating procedures. The impact of FFP2 on (1) self-reported SARS-CoV-2-positive nasopharyngeal PCR/rapid antigen tests captured during weekly surveys, and (2) SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion between baseline and January/February 2021 was assessed. RESULTS: We enrolled 3259 participants from nine healthcare institutions, whereof 716 (22%) preferentially used FFP2. Among these, 81/716 (11%) reported a SARS-CoV-2-positive swab, compared to 352/2543 (14%) surgical mask users; seroconversion was documented in 85/656 (13%) FFP2 and 426/2255 (19%) surgical mask users. Adjusted for baseline characteristics, COVID-19 exposure, and risk behaviour, FFP2 use was non-significantly associated with decreased risk for SARS-CoV-2-positive swab (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.8, 95% CI 0.6-1.0) and seroconversion (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.7, 95% CI 0.5-1.0); household exposure was the strongest risk factor (aHR 10.1, 95% CI 7.5-13.5; aOR 5.0, 95% CI 3.9-6.5). In subgroup analysis, FFP2 use was clearly protective among those with frequent (> 20 patients) COVID-19 exposure (aHR 0.7 for positive swab, 95% CI 0.5-0.8; aOR 0.6 for seroconversion, 95% CI 0.4-1.0). CONCLUSIONS: Respirators compared to surgical masks may convey additional protection from SARS-CoV-2 for HCW with frequent exposure to COVID-19 patients.

Symptoms Compatible With Long Coronavirus Disease (COVID) in Healthcare Workers With and Without Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Infection-Results of a Prospective Multicenter Cohort.

BACKGROUND: The burden of long-term symptoms (ie, long COVID) in patients after mild COVID-19 is debated. Within a cohort of healthcare workers (HCWs), frequency and risk factors for symptoms compatible with long COVID are assessed. METHODS: Participants answered baseline (August/September 2020) and weekly questionnaires on SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) results and acute disease symptoms. In January 2021, SARS-CoV-2 serology was performed; in March, symptoms compatible with long COVID (including psychometric scores) were asked and compared between HCWs with positive NPS, seropositive HCWs without positive NPS (presumable asymptomatic/pauci-symptomatic infections), and negative controls. The effect of time since diagnosis and quantitative anti-spike protein antibodies (anti-S) was evaluated. Poisson regression was used to identify risk factors for symptom occurrence. RESULTS: Of 3334 HCWs (median, 41 years; 80% female), 556 (17%) had a positive NPS and 228 (7%) were only seropositive. HCWs with positive NPS more frequently reported ≥1 symptom compared with controls (73% vs 52%, P < .001); seropositive HCWs without positive NPS did not score higher than controls (58% vs 52%, P = .13), although impaired taste/olfaction (16% vs 6%, P < .001) and hair loss (17% vs 10%, P = .004) were more common. Exhaustion/burnout was reported by 24% of negative controls. Many symptoms remained elevated in those diagnosed >6 months ago; anti-S titers correlated with high symptom scores. Acute viral symptoms in weekly questionnaires best predicted long-COVID symptoms. Physical activity at baseline was negatively associated with neurocognitive impairment and fatigue scores. CONCLUSIONS: Seropositive HCWs without positive NPS are only mildly affected by long COVID. Exhaustion/burnout is common, even in noninfected HCWs. Physical activity might be protective against neurocognitive impairment/fatigue symptoms after COVID-19.

Detection and characterization of COVID-19 findings in chest CT: Feasibility and applicability of an AI-based software tool.

ABSTRACT: The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged institutions' diagnostic processes worldwide. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of an artificial intelligence (AI)-based software tool that automatically evaluates chest computed tomography for findings of suspected COVID-19.Two groups were retrospectively evaluated for COVID-19-associated ground glass opacities of the lungs (group A: real-time polymerase chain reaction positive COVID patients, n = 108; group B: asymptomatic pre-operative group, n = 88). The performance of an AI-based software assessment tool for detection of COVID-associated abnormalities was compared with human evaluation based on COVID-19 reporting and data system (CO-RADS) scores performed by 3 readers.All evaluated variables of the AI-based assessment showed significant differences between the 2 groups (P < .01). The inter-reader reliability of CO-RADS scoring was 0.87. The CO-RADS scores were substantially higher in group A (mean 4.28) than group B (mean 1.50). The difference between CO-RADS scoring and AI assessment was statistically significant for all variables but showed good correlation with the clinical context of the CO-RADS score. AI allowed to predict COVID positive cases with an accuracy of 0.94.The evaluated AI-based algorithm detects COVID-19-associated findings with high sensitivity and may support radiologic workflows during the pandemic.

Impact of baseline SARS-CoV-2 antibody status on syndromic surveillance and the risk of subsequent COVID-19-a prospective multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In a prospective healthcare worker (HCW) cohort, we assessed the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection according to baseline serostatus. METHODS: Baseline serologies were performed among HCW from 23 Swiss healthcare institutions between June and September 2020, before the second COVID-19 wave. Participants answered weekly electronic questionnaires covering information about nasopharyngeal swabs (PCR/rapid antigen tests) and symptoms compatible with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Screening of symptomatic staff by nasopharyngeal swabs was routinely performed in participating facilities. We compared numbers of positive nasopharyngeal tests and occurrence of COVID-19 symptoms between HCW with and without anti-nucleocapsid antibodies. RESULTS: A total of 4812 HCW participated, wherein 144 (3%) were seropositive at baseline. We analyzed 107,807 questionnaires with a median follow-up of 7.9 months. Median number of answered questionnaires was similar (24 vs. 23 per person, P = 0.83) between those with and without positive baseline serology. Among 2712 HCW with ≥ 1 SARS-CoV-2 test during follow-up, 3/67 (4.5%) seropositive individuals reported a positive result (one of whom asymptomatic), compared to 547/2645 (20.7%) seronegative participants, 12 of whom asymptomatic (risk ratio [RR] 0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.07 to 0.66). Seropositive HCWs less frequently reported impaired olfaction/taste (6/144, 4.2% vs. 588/4674, 12.6%, RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.15-0.73), chills (19/144, 13.2% vs. 1040/4674, 22.3%, RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.39-0.90), and limb/muscle pain (28/144, 19.4% vs. 1335/4674, 28.6%, RR 0.68 95% CI 0.49-0.95). Impaired olfaction/taste and limb/muscle pain also discriminated best between positive and negative SARS-CoV-2 results. CONCLUSIONS: Having SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleocapsid antibodies provides almost 80% protection against SARS-CoV-2 re-infection for a period of at least 8 months.

Preoperative chest computed tomography in emergency surgery during COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic challenges the recommendations for patients' preoperative assessment for preventing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 transmission and COVID-19-associated postoperative complications and morbidities. PURPOSE: To evaluate the contribution of chest computed tomography for preoperatively assessing patients who are not suspected of being infected with COVID-19 at the time of referral. METHODS: Candidates for emergency surgery screened via chest computed tomography from 8 to 27 April 2020 were retrospectively evaluated. Computed tomography images were analysed for the presence of COVID-19-associated intrapulmonary changes. When applicable, laboratory and recorded clinical symptoms were extracted. RESULTS: Eighty-eight patients underwent preoperative chest computed tomography; 24% were rated as moderately suspicious and 11% as highly suspicious on computed tomography. Subsequent reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) was performed for seven patients, all of whom tested negative for COVID-19. Seven patients showed COVID-19-associated clinical symptoms, and most were classified as being mildly to moderately severe as per the clinical classification grading system. Only one case was severe. Four cases underwent RT-PCR with negative results. CONCLUSION: In a cohort without clinical suspicion of COVID-19 infection upon referral, preoperative computed tomography during the COVID-19 pandemic can yield a high suspicion of infection, even if the patient lacks clinical symptoms and is RT-PCR-negative. No recommendations can be made based on our results but contribute to the debate.

Non-occupational and occupational factors associated with specific SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among hospital workers - A multicentre cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: Protecting healthcare workers (HCWs) from coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) is critical to preserve the functioning of healthcare systems. We therefore assessed seroprevalence and identified risk factors for severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) seropositivity in this population. METHODS: Between 22 June 22 and 15 August 2020, HCWs from institutions in northern/eastern Switzerland were screened for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. We recorded baseline characteristics, non-occupational and occupational risk factors. We used pairwise tests of associations and multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with seropositivity. RESULTS: Among 4664 HCWs from 23 healthcare facilities, 139 (3%) were seropositive. Non-occupational exposures independently associated with seropositivity were contact with a COVID-19-positive household (adjusted OR 59, 95% CI 33-106), stay in a COVID-19 hotspot (aOR 2.3, 95% CI 1.2-4.2) and male sex (aOR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1-3.1). Blood group 0 vs. non-0 (aOR 0.5, 95% CI 0.3-0.8), active smoking (aOR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.7), living with children <12 years (aOR 0.3, 95% CI 0.2-0.6) and being a physician (aOR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1-0.5) were associated with decreased risk. Other occupational risk factors were close contact to COVID-19 patients (aOR 2.7, 95% CI 1.4-5.4), exposure to COVID-19-positive co-workers (aOR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1-2.9), poor knowledge of standard hygiene precautions (aOR 1.9, 95% CI 1.2-2.9) and frequent visits to the hospital canteen (aOR 2.3, 95% CI 1.4-3.8). DISCUSSION: Living with COVID-19-positive households showed the strongest association with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity. We identified several potentially modifiable work-related risk factors, which might allow mitigation of the COVID-19 risk among HCWs. The lower risk among those living with children, even after correction for multiple confounders, is remarkable and merits further study.

Management of hepatitis C in opioid agonist therapy patients of the Swiss canton Aargau within and outside the cohort study.

With regard to HCV elimination in opioid agonist therapy patients by 2030, case finding and regular screening for new and re-infections remain a challenge, especially for non-cohort patients in a decentralised setting. Documentation of the HCV sero- and RNA status of each opioid agonist therapy  patient by the cantonal physician and a yearly HCV screening reminder sent to the opioid agonist therapy prescriber combined with capillary HCV antibody and HCV RNA testing might facilitate the implementation of the FOPH guidelines. Prescription of direct-acting antivirals directly by the opioid agonist therapy prescriber could increase awareness and improve linkage to care.

Management of hepatitis C in decentralised versus centralised drug substitution programmes and minimally invasive point-of-care tests to close gaps in the HCV cascade.

BACKGROUND: In Switzerland, intravenous drug use accounts for the majority of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections. Early HCV treatment prevents further transmissions and reduces morbidity and mortality due to decompensated liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. Nevertheless, patients in drug substitution programmes are often insufficiently screened and treated. AIM: The aim was to compare the current state of HCV management in centralised and decentralised drug substitution programmes of the canton Aargau. Objectives were human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and HCV prevalence, compliance with guidelines and gaps in the HCV cascade, as well as feasibility/acceptance/validity of HIV/HCV rapid tests on finger-prick blood and noninvasive liver fibrosis assessment with Fibroscan®. METHODS: For the cross-sectional study, in June 2013, questionnaires and free rapid tests for HIV (Determine®) and HCV (OraQuick®) that used capillary blood (finger-stick) were sent to 161 physicians providing drug substitution treatment for 631 patients. Free liver fibrosis assessment with Fibroscan® by a member of the study team was offered to all patients. Additionally, patients were directly recruited by the study team in the heroin substitution programme and several addiction clinics visited every 4-6 months, as well as in the Infectious Diseases Outpatient Clinic (questionnaire, rapid tests and Fibroscan® in the same session). RESULTS: Between July 2013 and July 2015, 205 (32.5%) of the 631 patients receiving opioid substitution in the canton Aargau were enrolled, 192 (93.7%) with HIV/HCV rapid tests and 167 (81.5%) with Fibroscan®. Acceptance of Fibroscan® was higher when offered in the same session (94.1 vs 69.2%). Overall, 77.8% had ever used intravenous drugs. HCV seroprevalence was 53.7% (109/203), HCV RNA prevalence 27.8%. Overall, 7.4% (15/202) were HIV infected, all of whom were HCV co-infected and under antiretroviral treatment. Of the 205 patients included, 104 (50.7%) were recruited in a decentralised setting (family practice / pharmacy) and 101 (49.3%) in a centralised setting (heroin programme, addiction clinic, Infectious Diseases Outpatient Clinic). Compliance with guidelines (regular HIV/HCV screening, workup of HCV-positive patients, availability of HAV/HBV serology) was consistently lower in the decentralised setting, characterised by a higher proportion of females, longer median time in the programme, lower percentage of daily attendance, ever-use of intravenous drugs and HIV and HCV infections. We identified several gaps in the HCV cascade: 23.9% (49/205) had never been HCV screened; 18.9% (18/95) of the HCV positive patients had no HCV RNA test. Of the 61 patients developing chronic HCV infection, 19.7% (12) were not HCV genotyped, 52.5% (32) had no liver fibrosis assessment (liver biopsy) and 54.1% (33) never received treatment; 25.0% (7/28) did not achieve a sustained virological response with interferon-based treatment. The 192 HCV rapid tests showed a sensitivity of 90.4% (94/104; 95% confidence interval 84.7-96.1%) and a specificity of 100% (88/88), and provided 14 new HCV diagnoses. Eight of ten patients with a false-negative HCV rapid test were HCV RNA negative (2 unknown). Among the 88.6% (39/44) currently HCV RNA-positive individuals with valid Fibroscan® results, 24 (61.5%) had a liver stiffness <7.5 kPa. Both HIV co-infection and alcohol overconsumption doubled the risk of severe fibrosis/cirrhosis in HCV positive patients. CONCLUSION: In contrast to HIV, HCV transmission among intravenous drug users is still ongoing. The management of hepatitis C in drug substitution patients needs improvement, especially in family practices. Minimally invasive "point-of-care" diagnostics such as the HCV antibody rapid test using capillary blood and mobile Fibroscan® can close some of the gaps in the HCV cascade. HCV RNA determination in capillary blood is still an unmet need. A "one-stop strategy" might improve linkage to care. Restricting the new, highly efficient (90-100% sustained virological response for all genotypes) direct-acting antivirals to patients with at least stage F2 fibrosis withholds treatment from two thirds of the chronically infected and prevents us from reaching the WHO goal of 80% treatment uptake necessary to eliminate hepatitis C by 2030.

High risk behaviour and fertility desires among heterosexual HIV-positive patients with a serodiscordant partner--two challenging issues.

AIM OF THE STUDY: To evaluate fertility intentions and condom use among HIV-positive persons. METHODS: Multicentre study based on anonymous data collection (questionnaire). RESULTS: 114 questionnaires providing complete information were evaluated. 45% of HIV-positive women and 38% of HIV-positive men expressed the desire for children. Irrespective of this wish, half the study participants felt that health care providers would not sufficiently address their concerns regarding relationship, sexuality and fertility intentions. In HIV-discordant heterosexual couples, consistent condom use was mentioned by 73% of respondents. Among study participants no significant relationship between HAART, viral load and inconsistent condom use was found. In contrast, information on condom use obtained from the Swiss HIV Cohort Study (SHCS), where the information is obtained by interview, gave higher estimates (88%) of consistent condom use. CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of HIV-infected individuals express a wish for parenthood. Issues related to fertility intentions and sexual relations need to be addressed more frequently by health care providers. Non-anonymous data collection on condom use may underestimate high risk behaviour.