Search

In this retrospective observational study, we have performed a comparative analysis of the demographic, clinical and epidemiological characteristics of the HCWs affected with SARS-CoV-2 infection during first two waves in India. The overall prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs was found to be 15.24% (14.20–16.33) and 23.38% (22.14–25.65) during first and second waves respectively. The second wave showed an adjusted odds ratio of 0.04(0.02–0.07) and 2.09(1.49–2.93) for hospitalization and being symptomatic, respectively. We detected significantly higher level of C-reactive protein (CRP) among admitted HCWs during the second wave (5.10 –14.60 mg/dl) as compared to the first wave (2.00 – 2.80 mg/dl). Our study found the relative risk of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection among HCWs during the second wave to be 0.68 [0.57–0.82, p < 0.001)]. Although, the prevalence of SARS CoV-2 infection and risk of being symptomatic was higher during second wave, the risk of hospitalization was less when compared with the first wave. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The contact tracing and subsequent quarantining of health care workers (HCWs) are essential to minimizing the further transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection and mitigating the shortage of HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic situation. Objective: This study aimed to assess the yield of contact tracing for COVID-19 cases and the risk stratification of HCWs who are exposed to these cases. Methods: This was an analysis of routine data that were collected for the contact tracing of COVID-19 cases at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Bhubaneswar, in Odisha, India. Data from March 19 to August 31, 2020, were considered for this study. COVID-19 cases were admitted patients, outpatients, or HCWs in the hospital. HCWs who were exposed to COVID-19 cases were categorized, per the risk stratification guidelines, as high-risk contacts or low-risk contacts Results: During contact tracing, 3411 HCWs were identified as those who were exposed to 360 COVID-19 cases. Of these 360 cases, 269 (74.7%) were either admitted patients or outpatients, and 91 (25.3%) were HCWs. After the risk stratification of the 3411 HCWs, 890 (26.1%) were categorized as high-risk contacts, and 2521 (73.9%) were categorized as low-risk contacts. The COVID-19 test positivity rates of high-risk contacts and low-risk contacts were 3.8% (34/890) and 1.9% (48/2521), respectively. The average number of high-risk contacts was significantly higher when the COVID-19 case was an admitted patient (number of contacts: mean 6.6) rather than when the COVID-19 case was an HCW (number of contacts: mean 4.0) or outpatient (number of contacts: mean 0.2; P=.009). Similarly, the average number of high-risk contacts was higher when the COVID-19 case was admitted in a non-COVID-19 area (number of contacts: mean 15.8) rather than when such cases were admitted in a COVID-19 area (number of contacts: mean 0.27; P<.001). There was a significant decline in the mean number of high-risk contacts over the study period (P=.003). Conclusions: Contact tracing and risk stratification were effective and helped to reduce the number of HCWs requiring quarantine. There was also a decline in the number of high-risk contacts during the study period. This indicates the role of the implementation of hospital-based, COVID-19--related infection control strategies. The contact tracing and risk stratification approaches that were designed in this study can also be implemented in other health care settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]