Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 71
Filtrar
2.
Am J Prev Med ; 65(3): 521-527, 2023 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36878415

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare personnel are at risk for acquiring and transmitting respiratory infections in the workplace. Paid sick leave benefits allow workers to stay home and visit a healthcare provider when ill. The objectives of this study were to quantify the percentage of healthcare personnel reporting paid sick leave, identify differences across occupations and settings, and determine the factors associated with having paid sick leave. METHODS: In a national nonprobability Internet panel survey of healthcare personnel in April 2022, respondents were asked, Does your employer offer paid sick leave? Responses were weighted to the U.S. healthcare personnel population by age, sex, race/ethnicity, work setting, and census region. The weighted percentage of healthcare personnel who reported paid sick leave was calculated by occupation, work setting, and type of employment. Using multivariable logistic regression, the factors associated with having paid sick leave were identified. RESULTS: In April 2022, 73.2% of 2,555 responding healthcare personnel reported having paid sick leave, similar to 2020 and 2021 estimates. The percentage of healthcare personnel reporting paid sick leave varied by occupation, ranging from 63.9% (assistants/aides) to 81.2% (nonclinical personnel). Female healthcare personnel and those working as licensed independent practitioners, in the Midwest, and in the South were less likely to report paid sick leave. CONCLUSIONS: Most healthcare personnel from all occupational groups and healthcare settings reported having paid sick leave. However, differences by sex, occupation, type of work arrangement, and Census region exist and highlight disparities. Increasing healthcare personnel's access to paid sick leave may decrease presenteeism and subsequent transmission of infectious diseases in healthcare settings.


Assuntos
Salários e Benefícios , Licença Médica , Humanos , Feminino , Emprego , Acesso aos Serviços de Saúde , Pessoal de Saúde
3.
Public Health Rep ; 138(2): 333-340, 2023.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36482712

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, several outbreaks were linked with facilities employing essential workers, such as long-term care facilities and meat and poultry processing facilities. However, timely national data on which workplace settings were experiencing COVID-19 outbreaks were unavailable through routine surveillance systems. We estimated the number of US workplace outbreaks of COVID-19 and identified the types of workplace settings in which they occurred during August-October 2021. METHODS: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention collected data from health departments on workplace COVID-19 outbreaks from August through October 2021: the number of workplace outbreaks, by workplace setting, and the total number of cases among workers linked to these outbreaks. Health departments also reported the number of workplaces they assisted for outbreak response, COVID-19 testing, vaccine distribution, or consultation on mitigation strategies. RESULTS: Twenty-three health departments reported a total of 12 660 workplace COVID-19 outbreaks. Among the 12 470 workplace types that were documented, 35.9% (n = 4474) of outbreaks occurred in health care settings, 33.4% (n = 4170) in educational settings, and 30.7% (n = 3826) in other work settings, including non-food manufacturing, correctional facilities, social services, retail trade, and food and beverage stores. Eleven health departments that reported 3859 workplace outbreaks provided information about workplace assistance: 3090 (80.1%) instances of assistance involved consultation on COVID-19 mitigation strategies, 1912 (49.5%) involved outbreak response, 436 (11.3%) involved COVID-19 testing, and 185 (4.8%) involved COVID-19 vaccine distribution. CONCLUSIONS: These findings underscore the continued impact of COVID-19 among workers, the potential for work-related transmission, and the need to apply layered prevention strategies recommended by public health officials.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Teste para COVID-19 , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Local de Trabalho , Surtos de Doenças
5.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 71(42): 1319-1326, 2022 Oct 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36264832

RESUMO

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and CDC recommend that all health care personnel (HCP) receive annual influenza vaccination to reduce influenza-related morbidity and mortality among these personnel and their patients (1). ACIP also recommends that all persons aged ≥6 months, including HCP, be vaccinated with COVID-19 vaccines and remain up to date (2,3). During March 29-April 19, 2022, CDC conducted an opt-in Internet panel survey of 3,618 U.S. HCP to estimate influenza vaccination coverage during the 2021-22 influenza season as well as receipt of the primary COVID-19 vaccination series and a booster dose. Influenza vaccination coverage was 79.9% during the 2021-22 season, and 87.3% of HCP reported having completed the primary COVID-19 vaccination series; among these HCP, 67.1% reported receiving a COVID-19 booster dose. Among HCP, influenza, COVID-19 primary series, and COVID-19 booster dose vaccination coverage were lowest among assistants and aides, those working in long-term care (LTC) or home health care settings, and those whose employer neither required nor recommended the vaccines. Overall, employer requirements for influenza and COVID-19 primary series vaccines were reported by 43.9% and 59.9% of HCP, respectively; among HCP who completed the primary series of COVID-19 vaccines, 23.5% reported employer requirements for COVID-19 booster vaccines. Vaccination coverage for all three vaccine measures was higher among HCP who reported employer vaccination requirements and ranged from 95.8% to 97.3% for influenza, 90.2% to 95.1% for COVID-19 primary series, and 76.4% to 87.8% for COVID-19 booster vaccinations among HCP who completed the primary series of COVID-19 vaccines, by work setting. Implementing workplace strategies demonstrated to improve vaccination coverage among HCP, including vaccination requirements or active promotion of vaccination, can increase influenza and COVID-19 vaccination coverage among HCP and reduce influenza and COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality among HCP and their patients (4).


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Cobertura Vacinal , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinação , Pessoal de Saúde , Atenção à Saúde
6.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 71(42): 1348-1349, 2022 Oct 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36264845

RESUMO

In August 2022, the Florida Department of Health notified CDC of a nurse who acquired monkeypox through an occupational exposure while providing care to a patient with monkeypox. To date, occupationally acquired Monkeypox virus (MPXV) infections in health care personnel (HCP) have been rarely reported during the 2022 multinational outbreak (1,2). This report describes the first reported U.S. case and recommends approaches for preventing occupationally acquired MPXV infections in HCP.


Assuntos
Ferimentos Penetrantes Produzidos por Agulha , Humanos , Vírus da Varíola dos Macacos , /epidemiologia , Ferimentos Penetrantes Produzidos por Agulha/epidemiologia , Florida/epidemiologia
7.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 71(38): 1216-1219, 2022 Sep 23.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36136939

RESUMO

The risk for monkeypox transmission to health care personnel (HCP) caring for symptomatic patients is thought to be low but has not been thoroughly assessed in the context of the current global outbreak (1). Monkeypox typically spreads through close physical (often skin-to-skin) contact with lesions or scabs, body fluids, or respiratory secretions of a person with an active monkeypox infection. CDC currently recommends that HCP wear a gown, gloves, eye protection, and an N95 (or higher-level) respirator while caring for patients with suspected or confirmed monkeypox to protect themselves from infection† (1,2). The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) evaluated HCP exposures and personal protective equipment (PPE) use in health care settings during care of patients who subsequently received a diagnosis of Orthopoxvirus infection (presumptive monkeypox determined by a polymerase chain reaction [PCR] DNA assay) or monkeypox (real-time PCR assay and genetic sequencing performed by CDC). During May 1-July 31, 2022, a total of 313 HCP interacted with patients with subsequently diagnosed monkeypox infections while wearing various combinations of PPE; 23% wore all recommended PPE during their exposures. Twenty-eight percent of exposed HCP were considered to have had high- or intermediate-risk exposures and were therefore eligible to receive postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) with the JYNNEOS vaccine§; among those, 48% (12% of all exposed HCP) received the vaccine. PPE use varied by facility type: HCP in sexually transmitted infection (STI) clinics and community health centers reported the highest adherence to recommended PPE use, and primary and urgent care settings reported the lowest adherence. No HCP developed a monkeypox infection during the 21 days after exposure. These results suggest that the risk for transmission of monkeypox in health care settings is low. Infection prevention training is important in all health care settings, and these findings can guide future updates to PPE recommendations and risk classification in health care settings.


Assuntos
Transmissão de Doença Infecciosa do Paciente para o Profissional , Colorado/epidemiologia , Atenção à Saúde , Pessoal de Saúde , Humanos , Transmissão de Doença Infecciosa do Paciente para o Profissional/prevenção & controle , /epidemiologia , Equipamento de Proteção Individual
8.
Vaccine ; 40(51): 7476-7482, 2022 12 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35941037

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Employer vaccination requirements have been used to increase vaccination uptake among healthcare personnel (HCP). In summer 2021, HCP were the group most likely to have employer requirements for COVID-19 vaccinations as healthcare facilities led the implementation of such requirements. This study examined the association between employer requirements and HCP's COVID-19 vaccination status and attitudes about the vaccine. METHODS: Participants were a national representative sample of United States (US) adults who completed the National Immunization Survey Adult COVID Module (NIS-ACM) during August-September 2021. Respondents were asked about COVID-19 vaccination and intent, requirements for vaccination, place of work, attitudes surrounding vaccinations, and sociodemographic variables. This analysis focused on HCP respondents. We first calculated the weighted proportion reporting COVID-19 vaccination for HCP by sociodemographic variables. Then we computed unadjusted and adjusted prevalence ratios for vaccination coverage and key indicators on vaccine attitudes, comparing HCP based on individual self-report of vaccination requirements. RESULTS: Of 12,875 HCP respondents, 41.5% reported COVID-19 vaccination employer requirements. Among HCP with vaccination requirements, 90.5% had been vaccinated against COVID-19, as compared to 73.3% of HCP without vaccination requirements-a pattern consistent across sociodemographic groups. Notably, the greatest differences in uptake between HCP with and without employee requirements were seen in sociodemographic subgroups with the lowest vaccination uptake, e.g., HCP aged 18-29 years, HCP with high school or less education, HCP living below poverty, and uninsured HCP. In every sociodemographic subgroup examined, vaccine uptake was more equitable among HCP with vaccination requirements than in HCP without. Finally, HCP with vaccination requirements were also more likely to express confidence in the vaccine's safety (68.3% vs. 60.1%) and importance (89.6% vs 79.6%). CONCLUSION: In a large national US sample, employer requirements were associated with higher and more equitable HCP vaccination uptake across all sociodemographic groups examined. Our findings suggest that employer requirements can contribute to improving COVID-19 vaccination coverage, similar to patterns seen for other vaccines.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Adulto , Estados Unidos , Humanos , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinação , Pessoal de Saúde , Inquéritos e Questionários , Atitude , Atenção à Saúde
9.
Pathogens ; 11(8)2022 07 23.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35894048

RESUMO

Abstract Bacillus cereus group bacteria containing the anthrax toxin genes can cause fatal anthrax pneumonia in welders. Two welder's anthrax cases identified in 2020 were investigated to determine the source of each patient's exposure. Environmental sampling was performed at locations where each patient had recent exposure to soil and dust. Samples were tested for the anthrax toxin genes by real-time PCR, and culture was performed on positive samples to identify whether any environmental isolates matched the patient's clinical isolate. A total of 185 environmental samples were collected in investigation A for patient A and 108 samples in investigation B for patient B. All samples from investigation B were real-time PCR-negative, but 14 (8%) samples from investigation A were positive, including 10 from patient A's worksite and 4 from his work-related clothing and gear. An isolate genetically matching the one recovered from patient A was successfully cultured from a worksite soil sample. All welder's anthrax cases should be investigated to determine the source of exposure, which may be linked to their worksite. Welding and metalworking employers should consider conducting a workplace hazard assessment and implementing controls to reduce the risk of occupationally associated illnesses including welder's anthrax.

10.
Am J Infect Control ; 50(5): 548-554, 2022 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35431105

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Health care personnel (HCP) have experienced significant SARS-CoV-2 risk, but exposure settings among HCP COVID-19 cases are poorly characterized. METHODS: We assessed exposure settings among HCP COVID-19 cases in the United States from March 2020 to March 2021 with reported exposures (n = 83,775) using national COVID-19 surveillance data. Exposure setting and reported community incidence temporal trends were described using breakpoint estimation. Among cases identified before initiation of COVID-19 vaccination programs (n = 65,650), we used separate multivariable regression models to estimate adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) for associations of community incidence with health care and household and/or community exposures. RESULTS: Health care exposures were the most reported (52.0%), followed by household (30.8%) and community exposures (25.6%). Health care exposures and community COVID-19 incidence showed similar temporal trends. In adjusted analyses, HCP cases were more likely to report health care exposures (aPR = 1.31; 95% CI:1.26-1.36) and less likely to report household and/or community exposures (aPR = 0.73; 95% CI:0.70-0.76) under the highest vs lowest community incidence levels. DISCUSSION: These findings highlight HCP exposure setting temporal trends and workplace exposure hazards under high community incidence. Findings also underscore the need for robust collection of work-related data in infectious disease surveillance. CONCLUSIONS: Many reported HCP cases experienced occupational COVID-19 exposures, particularly during periods of higher community COVID-19 incidence.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Atenção à Saúde , Pessoal de Saúde , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
11.
Pathogens ; 11(4)2022 Mar 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35456077

RESUMO

Since 1997, nine cases of severe pneumonia, caused by species within the B. cereus group and with a presentation similar to that of inhalation anthrax, were reported in seemingly immunocompetent metalworkers, with most being welders. In seven of the cases, isolates were found to harbor a plasmid similar to the B. anthracis pXO1 that encodes anthrax toxins. In this paper, we review the literature on the B. cereus group spp. pneumonia among welders and other metalworkers, which we term welder's anthrax. We describe the epidemiology, including more information on two cases of welder's anthrax in 2020. We also describe the health risks associated with welding, potential mechanisms of infection and pathological damage, prevention measures according to the hierarchy of controls, and clinical and public health considerations. Considering occupational risk factors and controlling exposure to welding fumes and gases among workers, according to the hierarchy of controls, should help prevent disease transmission in the workplace.

12.
Am J Prev Med ; 62(5): 705-715, 2022 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34965901

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare personnel are at increased risk for COVID-19 from workplace exposure. National estimates on COVID-19 vaccination coverage among healthcare personnel are limited. METHODS: Data from an opt-in Internet panel survey of 2,434 healthcare personnel, conducted on March 30, 2021-April 15, 2021, were analyzed to assess the receipt of ≥1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine and vaccination intent. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination and intent for vaccination. RESULTS: Overall, 68.2% of healthcare personnel reported a receipt of ≥1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, 9.8% would probably/definitely get vaccinated, 7.1% were unsure, and 14.9% would probably/definitely not get vaccinated. COVID-19 vaccination coverage was highest among physicians (89.0%), healthcare personnel working in hospitals (75.0%), and healthcare personnel of non-Hispanic White or other race (75.7%-77.4%). Healthcare personnel who received influenza vaccine in 2020-2021 (adjusted prevalence ratio=1.92) and those aged ≥60 years (adjusted prevalence ratio=1.37) were more likely to report a receipt of ≥1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. Non-Hispanic Black healthcare personnel (adjusted prevalence ratio=0.74), nurse practitioners/physician assistants (adjusted prevalence ratio=0.55), assistants/aides (adjusted prevalence ratio=0.73), and nonclinical healthcare personnel (adjusted prevalence ratio=0.79) were less likely to have received a COVID-19 vaccine. The common reasons for vaccination included protecting self (88.1%), family and friends (86.3%), and patients (69.2%) from COVID-19. The most common reason for nonvaccination was concern about side effects and safety of COVID-19 vaccine (59.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Understanding vaccination status and intent among healthcare personnel is important for addressing barriers to vaccination. Addressing concerns on side effects, safety, and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines as well as their fast development and approval may help improve vaccination coverage among healthcare personnel.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Atenção à Saúde , Pessoal de Saúde , Humanos , Intenção , Vacinação
14.
J Fungi (Basel) ; 7(7)2021 Jun 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34206791

RESUMO

In areas where Histoplasma is endemic in the environment, occupations involving activities exposing workers to soil that contains bird or bat droppings may pose a risk for histoplasmosis. Occupational exposures are frequently implicated in histoplasmosis outbreaks. In this paper, we review the literature on occupationally acquired histoplasmosis. We describe the epidemiology, occupational risk factors, and prevention measures according to the hierarchy of controls.

15.
J Occup Environ Med ; 63(8): 646-656, 2021 08 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34016912

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To propose a framework for considering SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing of unexposed asymptomatic workers in selected workplaces. METHODS: This is a commentary based on established occupational safety and health principles, published articles, and other pertinent literature, including non-peer-reviewed preprints in medrixiv.org prior to April 16, 2021. RESULTS: Not applicable to this commentary/viewpoint article. CONCLUSION: Antigen testing is a rapidly evolving and useful public health tool that can be used to guide measures to reduce spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the community and in selected workplaces. This commentary provides a proposed framework for occupational safety and health practitioners and employers for considering antigen testing as a method to screen asymptomatic workers in selected non-healthcare settings. When applied selectively, antigen testing can be a useful, effective part of a comprehensive workplace program for COVID-19 prevention and control.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Saúde Ocupacional , Teste Sorológico para COVID-19 , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , Local de Trabalho
16.
Public Health Rep ; 136(3): 315-319, 2021 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33617374

RESUMO

We aimed to describe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) deaths among first responders early in the COVID-19 pandemic. We used media reports to gather timely information about COVID-19-related deaths among first responders during March 30-April 30, 2020, and evaluated the sensitivity of media scanning compared with traditional surveillance. We abstracted information about demographic characteristics, occupation, underlying conditions, and exposure source. Twelve of 19 US public health jurisdictions with data on reported deaths provided verification, and 7 jurisdictions reported whether additional deaths had occurred; we calculated the sensitivity of media scanning among these 7 jurisdictions. We identified 97 COVID-19-related first-responder deaths during the study period through media and jurisdiction reports. Participating jurisdictions reported 5 deaths not reported by the media. Sixty-six decedents worked in law enforcement, and 31 decedents worked in fire/emergency medical services. Media reports rarely noted underlying conditions. The media scan sensitivity was 88% (95% CI, 73%-96%) in the subset of 7 jurisdictions. Media reports demonstrated high sensitivity in documenting COVID-19-related deaths among first responders; however, information on risk factors was scarce. Routine collection of data on industry and occupation could improve understanding of COVID-19 morbidity and mortality among all workers.


Assuntos
COVID-19/mortalidade , Socorristas/estatística & dados numéricos , Meios de Comunicação de Massa , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Adulto Jovem
17.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(2): 56-57, 2021 Jan 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33444298

RESUMO

In July 2020, the Florida Department of Health was alerted to three Candida auris bloodstream infections and one urinary tract infection in four patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who received care in the same dedicated COVID-19 unit of an acute care hospital (hospital A). C. auris is a multidrug-resistant yeast that can cause invasive infection. Its ability to colonize patients asymptomatically and persist on surfaces has contributed to previous C. auris outbreaks in health care settings (1-7). Since the first C. auris case was identified in Florida in 2017, aggressive measures have been implemented to limit spread, including contact tracing and screening upon detection of a new case. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, hospital A conducted admission screening for C. auris and admitted colonized patients to a separate dedicated ward.


Assuntos
COVID-19/terapia , Candida/isolamento & purificação , Candidíase/epidemiologia , Surtos de Doenças , Unidades Hospitalares , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Feminino , Florida/epidemiologia , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade
18.
J Occup Environ Med ; 63(1): 1-9, 2021 01 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33378322

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To identify important background information on pooled tested of employees that employers workers, and health authorities should consider. METHODS: This paper is a commentary based on the review by the authors of pertinent literature generally from preprints in medrixiv.org prior to August 2020. RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS: Pooled testing may be particularly useful to employers in communities with low prevalence of COVID-19. It can be used to reduce the number of tests and associated financial costs. For effective and efficient pooled testing employers should consider it as part of a broader, more comprehensive workplace COVID-19 prevention and control program. Pooled testing of asymptomatic employees can prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and help assure employers and customers that employees are not infectious.


Assuntos
Teste para COVID-19 , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Serviços de Saúde do Trabalhador , Saúde Ocupacional , SARS-CoV-2/isolamento & purificação , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Humanos , Sensibilidade e Especificidade
19.
Clin Chest Med ; 41(4): 739-751, 2020 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33153691

RESUMO

Occupational respiratory infections can be caused by bacterial, viral, and fungal pathogens. Transmission in occupational settings can occur from other humans, animals, or the environment, and occur in various occupations and industries. In this article, we describe 4 occupationally acquired respiratory infections at the focus of NIOSH investigations over the last decade: tuberculosis (TB), influenza, psittacosis, and coccidioidomycosis. We highlight the epidemiology, clinical manifestations, occupational risk factors, and prevention measures.


Assuntos
Doenças Profissionais/etiologia , Exposição Ocupacional/efeitos adversos , Infecções Respiratórias/etiologia , Humanos
20.
MMWR Recomm Rep ; 69(6): 1-8, 2020 07 24.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32701942

RESUMO

Exposure to hepatitis viruses is a recognized occupational risk for health care personnel (HCP). This report establishes new CDC guidance that includes recommendations for a testing algorithm and clinical management for HCP with potential occupational exposure to hepatitis C virus (HCV). Baseline testing of the source patient and HCP should be performed as soon as possible (preferably within 48 hours) after the exposure. A source patient refers to any person receiving health care services whose blood or other potentially infectious material is the source of the HCP's exposure. Two options are recommended for testing the source patient. The first option is to test the source patient with a nucleic acid test (NAT) for HCV RNA. This option is preferred, particularly if the source patient is known or suspected to have recent behaviors that increase risk for HCV acquisition (e.g., injection drug use within the previous 4 months) or if risk cannot be reliably assessed. The second option is to test the source patient for antibodies to hepatitis C virus (anti-HCV), then if positive, test for HCV RNA. For HCP, baseline testing for anti-HCV with reflex to a NAT for HCV RNA if positive should be conducted as soon as possible (preferably within 48 hours) after the exposure and may be simultaneous with source-patient testing. If follow-up testing is recommended based on the source patient's status (e.g., HCV RNA positive or anti-HCV positive with unavailable HCV RNA or if the HCV infection status is unknown), HCP should be tested with a NAT for HCV RNA at 3-6 weeks postexposure. If HCV RNA is negative at 3-6 weeks postexposure, a final test for anti-HCV at 4-6 months postexposure is recommended. A source patient or HCP found to be positive for HCV RNA should be referred to care. Postexposure prophylaxis of hepatitis C is not recommended for HCP who have occupational exposure to blood and other body fluids. This guidance was developed based on expert opinion (CDC. Updated U.S. Public Health Service guidelines for the management of occupational exposures to HBV, HCV, and HIV and recommendations for postexposure prophylaxis. MMWR Recommend Rep 2001;50[No. RR-11]; Supplementary Figure, https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/90288) and reflects updated guidance from professional organizations that recommend treatment for acute HCV infection. Health care providers can use this guidance to update their procedures for postexposure testing and clinical management of HCP potentially exposed to hepatitis C virus.


Assuntos
Pessoal de Saúde , Hepatite C/prevenção & controle , Transmissão de Doença Infecciosa do Paciente para o Profissional/prevenção & controle , Exposição Ocupacional , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Hepacivirus/genética , Hepacivirus/isolamento & purificação , Hepatite C/transmissão , Humanos , Profilaxia Pós-Exposição , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , RNA Viral/análise , Estados Unidos , United States Public Health Service
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...