Refine
Year of publication
Has Fulltext
- yes (23)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (23)
Keywords
- SARS-CoV-2 (4)
- COVID-19 (3)
- mandatory reporting (2)
- Air traffic (1)
- Antigen test (1)
- Arbeitsbedingt erworbene Infektion (1)
- B.1.1.7 (1)
- B.1.617.1 (1)
- B.1.617.2 (1)
- BNT2b2 (1)
Institute
- Medizin (20)
- Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies (FIAS) (3)
- Informatik (3)
- Physik (3)
Background: In Emergency and Medical Admission Departments (EDs and MADs), prompt recognition and appropriate infection control management of patients with Highly Infectious Diseases (HIDs, e.g. Viral Hemorrhagic Fevers and SARS) are fundamental for avoiding nosocomial outbreaks.
Methods: The EuroNHID (European Network for Highly Infectious Diseases) project collected data from 41 EDs and MADs in 14 European countries, located in the same facility as a national/regional referral centre for HIDs, using specifically developed checklists, during on-site visits from February to November 2009.
Results: Isolation rooms were available in 34 facilities (82,9%): these rooms had anteroom in 19, dedicated entrance in 15, negative pressure in 17, and HEPA filtration of exhausting air in 12. Only 6 centres (14,6%) had isolation rooms with all characteristics. Personnel trained for the recognition of HIDs was available in 24 facilities; management protocols for HIDs were available in 35.
Conclusions: Preparedness level for the safe and appropriate management of HIDs is partially adequate in the surveyed EDs and MADs.
Background: International travel poses the risk of importing SARS-CoV-2 infections and introducing new viral variants into the country of destination. Established measures include mandatory quarantine with the opportunity to abbreviate it with a negative rapid antigen test (RAT).
Methods: A total of 1,488 returnees were tested for SARS-CoV-2 with both PCR and RAT no earlier than 5 days after arrival. We assessed the sensitivity and specificity of the RAT. Positive samples were evaluated for infectivity in vitro in a cell culture outgrowth assay. We tracked if participants who tested negative were reported positive within 2 weeks of the initial test.
Results: Potential infectiousness was determined based on symptom onset analysis, resulting in a sensitivity of the antigen test of 89% in terms of infectivity. The specificity was 100%. All positive outgrowth assays were preceded by a positive RAT, indicating that all participants with proven in vitro infectivity were correctly identified. None of the negative participants tested positive during the follow-up.
Conclusions: RAT no earlier than the 5th day after arrival was a reliable method for detecting infectious travellers and can be recommended as an appropriate method for managing SARS-CoV-2 travel restrictions. Compliance to the regulations and a high standard of test quality must be ensured.
The capacity of convalescent and vaccine-elicited sera and monoclonal antibodies (mAb) to neutralize SARS-CoV-2 variants is currently of high relevance to assess the protection against infections.
We performed a cell culture-based neutralization assay focusing on authentic SARS-CoV-2 variants B.1.617.1 (Kappa), B.1.617.2 (Delta), B.1.427/B.1.429 (Epsilon), all harboring the spike substitution L452R.
We found that authentic SARS-CoV-2 variants harboring L452R had reduced susceptibility to convalescent and vaccine-elicited sera and mAbs. Compared to B.1, Kappa and Delta showed a reduced neutralization by convalescent sera by a factor of 5.71 and 3.64, respectively, which constitutes a 2-fold greater reduction when compared to Epsilon. BNT2b2 and mRNA1273 vaccine-elicited sera were less effective against Kappa, Delta, and Epsilon compared to B.1. No difference was observed between Kappa and Delta towards vaccine-elicited sera, whereas convalescent sera were 1.6-fold less effective against Delta, respectively. Both B.1.617 variants Kappa (+E484Q) and Delta (+T478K) were less susceptible to either casirivimab or imdevimab.
In conclusion, in contrast to the parallel circulating Kappa variant, the neutralization efficiency of convalescent and vaccine-elicited sera against Delta was moderately reduced. Delta was resistant to imdevimab, which however, might be circumvented by a combination therapy with casirivimab together.
The capacity of convalescent and vaccine-elicited sera and monoclonal antibodies (mAb) to neutralize SARS-CoV-2 variants is currently of high relevance to assess the protection against infections.
We performed a cell culture-based neutralization assay focusing on authentic SARS-CoV-2 variants B.1.617.1 (Kappa), B.1.617.2 (Delta), B.1.427/B.1.429 (Epsilon), all harboring the spike substitution L452R.
We found that authentic SARS-CoV-2 variants harboring L452R had reduced susceptibility to convalescent and vaccine-elicited sera and mAbs. Compared to B.1, Kappa and Delta showed a reduced neutralization by convalescent sera by a factor of 8.00 and 5.33, respectively, which constitutes a 2-fold greater reduction when compared to Epsilon. BNT2b2 and mRNA1273 vaccine-elicited sera were less effective against Kappa, Delta, and Epsilon compared to B.1. No difference was observed between Kappa and Delta towards vaccine-elicited sera, whereas convalescent sera were 1.5-fold less effective against Delta, respectively. Both B.1.617 variants Kappa (+E484Q) and Delta (+T478K) were less susceptible to either casirivimab or imdevimab.
In conclusion, in contrast to the parallel circulating Kappa variant, the neutralization efficiency of convalescent and vaccine-elicited sera against Delta was moderately reduced. Delta was resistant to imdevimab, which however, might be circumvented by a combination therapy with casirivimab together.
The capacity of convalescent and vaccine-elicited sera and monoclonal antibodies (mAb) to neutralize SARS-CoV-2 variants is currently of high relevance to assess the protection against infections. We performed a cell culture-based neutralization assay focusing on authentic SARS-CoV-2 variants B.1.617.1 (Kappa), B.1.617.2 (Delta), B.1.427/B.1.429 (Epsilon), all harboring the spike substitution L452R. We found that authentic SARS-CoV-2 variants harboring L452R had reduced susceptibility to convalescent and vaccine-elicited sera and mAbs. Compared to B.1, Kappa and Delta showed a reduced neutralization by convalescent sera by a factor of 8.00 and 5.33, respectively, which constitutes a 2-fold greater reduction when compared to Epsilon. BNT2b2 and mRNA1273 vaccine-elicited sera were less effective against Kappa, Delta, and Epsilon compared to B.1. No difference was observed between Kappa and Delta towards vaccine-elicited sera, whereas convalescent sera were 1.51-fold less effective against Delta, respectively. Both B.1.617 variants Kappa (+E484Q) and Delta (+T478K) were less susceptible to either casirivimab or imdevimab. In conclusion, in contrast to the parallel circulating Kappa variant, the neutralization efficiency of convalescent and vaccine-elicited sera against Delta was moderately reduced. Delta was resistant to imdevimab, which, however, might be circumvented by combination therapy with casirivimab together.
Testing for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by RT-PCR is a vital public health tool in the pandemic. Self-collected samples are increasingly used as an alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs. Several studies suggested that they are sufficiently sensitive to be a useful alternative. However, there are limited data directly comparing several different types of self-collected materials to determine which material is preferable. A total of 102 predominantly symptomatic adults with a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection self-collected native saliva, a tongue swab, a mid-turbinate nasal swab, saliva obtained by chewing a cotton pad and gargle lavage, within 48 h of initial diagnosis. Sample collection was unsupervised. Both native saliva and gargling with tap water had high diagnostic sensitivity of 92.8% and 89.1%, respectively. Nasal swabs had a sensitivity of 85.1%, which was not significantly inferior to saliva (p = 0.092), but 16.6% of participants reported they had difficult in self-collection of this sample. A tongue swab and saliva obtained by chewing a cotton pad had a significantly lower sensitivity of 74.2% and 70.2%, respectively. Diagnostic sensitivity was not related to the presence of clinical symptoms or to age. When comparing self-collected specimens from different material, saliva, gargle lavage or mid-turbinate nasal swabs may be considered for most symptomatic patients. However, complementary experiments are required to verify that differences in performance observed among the five sampling modes were not attributed to collection impairment.
Hintergrund: Eine standardisierte Erhebung von COVID-19-Infektionen bei Gesundheitspersonal während der laufenden Pandemie war und ist nicht gegeben. Vor allem der Anteil von arbeitsbedingten Infektionen beim Gesundheitspersonal und die Frage, welche Arbeitnehmer/-innen darunter am meisten gefährdet sind, bleiben unklar.
Ziel: Ziel dieser Studie war es, die gemeldeten COVID-19-Fälle beim Gesundheitspersonal in Frankfurt/Main in den ersten 6 Monaten der Pandemie zu analysieren, die Zahl der arbeitsbedingten Infektionen zu ermitteln und somit eine bessere Interpretation der durch das Robert Koch-Institut veröffentlichten Daten zu ermöglichen.
Methoden: Die Daten des Gesundheitsamts Frankfurt/Main wurden für den Zeitraum vom 01.03. bis zum 31.08.2020 betrachtet und medizinisches Personal für eine Querschnittserhebung im Rahmen einer Umfrage rekrutiert. Drei Subgruppen wurden nach Ort des Infektionskontakts, am Arbeitsplatz, im Privaten und unbekannt, unterteilt und analysiert.
Ergebnisse: Medizinisches Personal machte 11,8 % (319/2700) aller gemeldeten COVID-19-Fälle in Frankfurt/Main im untersuchten Zeitraum aus. In der Umfrage gaben 47,2 % der Befragten an, dass ihre Infektion am Arbeitsplatz erworben wurde. Es zeigte sich eine Assoziation von Kontakt zu COVID-19-Patient/-innen sowie der Beschäftigung auf einer internistischen Station und einer arbeitsbedingten Infektion. Ersichtlich wurde außerdem ein Zusammenhang zwischen mutmaßlichen Infektionen am Arbeitsplatz und folglich gestellten Verdachtsanzeigen auf Berufskrankheit.
Diskussion und Fazit: Gesundheitsämter sind in der Lage, relevante Daten von arbeitsbedingten Transmissionen in Berufen und Arbeitsplätzen im Gesundheitswesen zu erheben, und sollten standardisierte Daten zu infiziertem Gesundheitspersonal generieren. Diese Daten sind notwendig, um gezielte Maßnahmen der Infektionsprävention zu ergreifen, die Gesundheitspersonal und ihre Patient/-innen schützen.
For infectious diseases caused by highly pathogenic agents (e. g., Ebola/Lassa fever virus, SARS-/MERS-CoV, pandemic influenza virus) which have the potential to spread over several continents within only a few days, international Health Protection Authorities have taken appropriate measures to limit the consequences of a possible spread. A crucial point in this context is the disinfection of an aircraft that had a passenger on board who is suspected of being infected with one of the mentioned diseases. Although, basic advice on hygiene and sanitation on board an aircraft is given by the World Health Organization, these guidelines lack details on available and effective substances as well as standardized operating procedures (SOP). The purpose of this paper is to give guidance on the choice of substances that were tested by a laboratory of Lufthansa Technik and found compatible with aircraft components, as well as to describe procedures which ensure a safe and efficient disinfection of civil aircrafts. This guidance and the additional SOPs are made public and are available as mentioned in this paper.
Background: The federal state of Hesse, Germany, introduced a laboratory-based reporting scheme for carbapenem-resistant organisms (CROs).
Method: The results of the first year of mandated reporting of CROs from April 2012 through March 2013 to the Public Health Authority of Frankfurt/Main, responsible for a population of 700,000 inhabitants, are described.
Results: Within a period of 12 months 243 CROs were notified to the health authority. Of these 213 isolates had been reported from 16 of the 17 hospitals in Frankfurt/Main, 6 from ambulatory settings and 24 from clinics outside of Frankfurt/Main. Mean incidence rate per 1,000 patient days in hospitals was 0.138 (range 0.02-0.28).
Conclusion: In Frankfurt/Main almost all hospitals have reported CROs in the study period though the frequency of isolation varies strongly and many facilities only report CROs sporadically. Molecular data indicate a high diversity of different carbapenemases. Autochthonous transmission must be assumed despite the absence of major outbreaks. Rapid and coordinated efforts by clinicians and health departments are crucial to control the spread of CRO infections. The mandatory reporting scheme provides important data to guide the implementation of preventive measures.
Background: Highly infectious diseases (HIDs) are defined as being transmissible from person to person, causing life-threatening illnesses and presenting a serious public health hazard. The sampling, handling and transport of specimens from patients with HIDs present specific bio-safety concerns. Findings The European Network for HID project aimed to record, in a cross-sectional study, the infection control capabilities of referral centers for HIDs across Europe and assesses the level of achievement to previously published guidelines. In this paper, we report the current diagnostic capabilities and bio-safety measures applied to diagnostic procedures in these referral centers. Overall, 48 isolation facilities in 16 European countries were evaluated. Although 81% of these referral centers are located near a biosafety level 3 laboratory, 11% and 31% of them still performed their microbiological and routine diagnostic analyses, respectively, without bio-safety measures.
Conclusions: The discrepancies among the referral centers surveyed between the level of practices and the European Network of Infectious Diseases (EUNID) recommendations have multiple reasons of which the interest of the individuals in charge and the investment they put in preparedness to emerging outbreaks. Despite the fact that the less prepared centers can improve by just updating their practice and policies any support to help them to achieve an acceptable level of biosecurity is welcome.
