RESUMO
The emergency department (ED) is the initial point of contact between hospital staff and patients potentially infected with SARS-CoV-2, thus, prevention of inadvertent exposure to other patients is a top priority. We aimed to assess whether the introduction of antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) to the ED affected the likelihood of unwanted SARS-CoV-2 exposures. In this retrospective single-center study, we compared the rate of unwarranted exposure of uninfected adult ED patients to SARS-CoV-2 during two separate research periods; one before Ag-RDTs were introduced, and one with Ag-RDT used as a decision-support tool. The introduction of Ag-RDTs to the ED significantly decreased the relative risk of SARS-CoV-2-negative patients being incorrectly assigned to the COVID-19 designated site ("red ED"), by 97%. There was no increase in the risk of SARS-CoV-2-positive patients incorrectly assigned to the COVID-19-free site ("green ED"). In addition, duration of ED admission was reduced in both the red and the green ED. Therefore, implementing the Ag-RDT-based triage protocol proved beneficial in preventing potential COVID-19 nosocomial transmission.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To assess the validity of Antigen rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDT) for SARS-CoV-2 as decision support tool in various hospital-based clinical settings. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study among symptomatic and asymptomatic patients and Healthcare workers (HCW). SETTING: A large tertiary teaching medical center serving as a major COVID-19 hospitalizing facility. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Ag-RDTs' performance was assessed in three clinical settings: 1. Symptomatic patients and HCW presenting at the Emergency Departments 2. Asymptomatic patients screened upon hospitalization 3. HCW of all sectors tested at the HCW clinic following exposure. RESULTS: We obtained 5172 samples from 4595 individuals, who had both Ag-RDT and quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR) results available. Of these, 485 samples were positive by qRT-PCR. The positive percent agreement (PPA) of Ag-RDT was greater for lower cycle threshold (Ct) values, reaching 93% in cases where Ct-value was <25 and 85% where Ct-value was <30. PPA was similar between symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals. We observed a significant correlation between Ct-value and time from infection onset (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Ag-RDT are highly sensitive to the infectious stage of COVID-19 manifested by either high viral load (lower Ct) or proximity to infection, whether patient is symptomatic or asymptomatic. Thus, this simple-to-use and inexpensive detection method can be used as a decision support tool in various in-hospital clinical settings, assisting patient flow and maintaining sufficient hospital staffing.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The role of school closure in mitigating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) transmission has been questioned. In our medical centre, during a 9-week national lockdown, an alternative school was opened for health-care workers' (HCW) children with a small number of children per class and strict symptom surveillance. After lockdown was lifted we screened children and their parents for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) serology. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of HCW parents and their children after one teacher contracted COVID-19 following exposure at home and 53 children were exposed, isolated and tested by RT-PCR. We compared families with children attending the alternative school with families whose children who remained at home during the 9-week lockdown. Epidemiological and medical data were collected using a short questionnaire; nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs were obtained and tested for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR, and blood was collected for SARS-CoV-2 IgA and IgG titres. RESULTS: A total of 435 children attended the Sheba alternative school. Among the 53 children exposed to the infected teacher, none tested positive by RT-PCR. Of these, 18 children-parent pairs were tested for serology and all were negative. A total of 106/435 (24%) children and their 78 parents were recruited for the cross-sectional study; 70 attended the Sheba school and 36 did not. Approximately 16% of children in either group reported symptoms (11/70 in the school group and 6/36 in the 'stay home' group), but SARS-CoV-2 was not detected by PCR in any, and previous exposure, as determined by serological tests, was low and not significantly different between the groups. CONCLUSION: In an alternative school for children of HCWs, active during COVID-19 national outbreak, we found no evidence of increased infection compared with children that stayed home.