Search

The author comments on a research paper on mass testing as a means to mitigate further transmission of COVID-19 infection in care homes in Great Britain, which references a study by S. Tang et al., published in an issue of "Age and Ageing." Topics discussed include the basis to declare an outbreak under the British policy, the requirement for a polymerase chain reaction testing during an outbreak, and the significant role of an intensive testing regimens in public health.

Introduction Care homes have been severely affected by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Rapid antigen testing could identify most SARS-CoV-2 infected staff and visitors before they enter homes. We explored implementation of staff and visitor testing protocols using lateral flow devices (LFDs). Methods An evaluation of a SARS-CoV-2 LFD-based testing protocol in 11 care homes in Liverpool, UK, including staff and visitor testing, plus a qualitative exploratory study in nine of these homes. The proportion of pilot homes with outbreaks, and outbreak size, were compared to non-pilot homes in Liverpool. Adherence to testing protocols was evaluated. Fifteen staff were interviewed, and transcript data were thematically coded using an iterative analysis to identify and categorize factors influencing testing implementation. Results In total, 1,638 LFD rapid tests were performed on 407 staff. Protocol adherence was poor with 8.6% of staff achieving >75% protocol adherence, and 25.3% achieving |$\ge$| 50%. Six care homes had outbreaks during the study. Compared to non-pilot care homes, there was no evidence of significant difference in the proportion of homes with outbreaks, or the size of outbreaks. Qualitative data showed difficulty implementing testing strategies due to excessive work burden. Factors influencing adherence related to test integration and procedural factors, socio-economic factors, cognitive overload and the emotional value of testing. Conclusion Implementation of staff and visitor care home LFD testing protocols was poorly adhered to and consequently did not reduce the number or scale of COVID-19 outbreaks. More focus is needed on the contextual and behavioural factors that influence protocol adherence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Sars-CoV-2 outbreaks resulted in a high case fatality rate in nursing homes (NH) worldwide. It is unknown to which extent presymptomatic residents and staff contribute to the spread of the virus. Aims To assess the contribution of asymptomatic and presymptomatic residents and staff in SARS-CoV-2 transmission during a large outbreak in a Dutch NH. Methods Observational study in a 185-bed NH with two consecutive testing strategies: testing of symptomatic cases only, followed by weekly facility-wide testing of staff and residents regardless of symptoms. Nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal testing with RT-PCR for SARs-CoV-2, including sequencing of positive samples, was conducted with a standardised symptom assessment. Results 185 residents and 244 staff participated. Sequencing identified one cluster. In the symptom-based test strategy period, 3/39 residents were presymptomatic versus 38/74 residents in the period of weekly facility-wide testing (P -value < 0.001). In total, 51/59 (91.1%) of SARS-CoV-2 positive staff was symptomatic, with no difference between both testing strategies (P -value 0.763). Loss of smell and taste, sore throat, headache or myalga was hardly reported in residents compared to staff (P -value <0.001). Median Ct-value of presymptomatic residents was 21.3, which did not differ from symptomatic (20.8) or asymptomatic (20.5) residents (P -value 0.624). Conclusions Symptoms in residents and staff are insufficiently recognised, reported or attributed to a possible SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, residents without (recognised) symptoms showed the same potential for viral shedding as residents with symptoms. Weekly testing was an effective strategy for early identification of SARS-Cov-2 cases, resulting in fast mitigation of the outbreak. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Previous investigations have identified high rates of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among residents and staff in care homes reporting an outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We investigated care homes reporting a single suspected or confirmed case to assess whether early mass testing might reduce risk of transmission during the peak of the pandemic in London. Methods Between 18 and 27 April 2020, residents and staff in care homes reporting a single case of COVID-19 to Public Health England had a nasal swab to test for SARS-CoV-2 infection by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and subsequent whole-genome sequencing. Residents and staff in two care homes were re-tested 8 days later. Results Four care homes were investigated. SARS-CoV-2 positivity was 20% (65/333) overall, ranging between 3 and 59%. Among residents, positivity ranged between 3 and 76% compared with 3 and 40% in staff. Half of the SARS-CoV-2-positive residents (23/46, 50%) and 63% of staff (12/19) reported symptoms within 14 days before or after testing. Repeat testing 8 days later in two care homes with the highest infection rates identified only two new cases. Genomic analysis demonstrated a small number of introduction of the virus into care homes, and distinct clusters within three of the care homes. Conclusions We found extensive but variable rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection among residents and staff in care homes reporting a single case of COVID-19. Although routine whole-home testing has now been adopted into practice, care homes must remain vigilant and should be encouraged to report a single suspected case, which should trigger appropriate outbreak control measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Frail older persons may have an atypical presentation of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The value of real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) testing for identifying severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nursing homes (NHs) residents is not known. Objective To determine whether (i) atypical symptoms may predict rRT-PCR results and (ii) rRT-PCR results may predict immunisation against SARS-CoV-2 in NH residents. Design A retrospective longitudinal study. Setting Eight NHs with at least 10 rRT-PCR-positive residents. Subjects A total of 456 residents. Methods Typical and atypical symptoms recorded in residents' files during the 14 days before and after rRT-PCR testing were analysed. Residents underwent blood testing for IgG-SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein 6 to 8 weeks after testing. Univariate and multivariate analyses compared symptoms and immunisation rates in rRT-PCR-positive and negative residents. Results A total of 161 residents had a positive rRT-PCR (35.3%), 17.4% of whom were asymptomatic before testing. Temperature >37.8°C, oxygen saturation <90%, unexplained anorexia, behavioural change, exhaustion, malaise and falls before testing were independent predictors of a further positive rRT-PCR. Among the rRT-PCR-positive residents, 95.2% developed SARS-CoV-2 antibodies vs 7.6% in the rRT-PCR-negative residents. Among the residents with a negative rRT-PCR, those who developed SARS-CoV-2 antibodies more often had typical or atypical symptoms (P  = 0.02 and <0.01, respectively). Conclusion This study supports a strategy based on (i) testing residents with typical or unexplained atypical symptoms for an early identification of the first SARS-CoV-2 cases, (ii) rT-PCR testing for identifying COVID-19 residents, (iii) repeated wide-facility testing (including asymptomatic cases) as soon as a resident is tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and (iv) implementing SARS-CoV-2 infection control measures in rRT-PCR-negative residents when they have unexplained typical or atypical symptoms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]