IMPORTANCE Solid estimates of the risk of developing symptoms and of progressing to critical disease in individuals infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are key to interpreting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) dynamics, identifying the settings and the segments of the population where transmission is more likely to remain undetected, and defining effective control strategies. OBJECTIVE To estimate the association of age with the likelihood of developing symptoms and the association of age with the likelihood of progressing to critical illness after SARS-CoV-2 infection. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cohort study analyzed quarantined case contacts, identified between February 20 and April 16, 2020, in the Lombardy region of Italy. Contacts were monitored daily for symptoms and tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection, by either real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction using nasopharyngeal swabs or retrospectively via IgG serological assays. Close contacts of individuals with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 were selected as those belonging to clusters (ie, groups of contacts associated with an index case) where all individuals were followed up for symptoms and tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Data were analyzed from February to June 2020. EXPOSURE Close contact with individuals with confirmed COVID-19 cases as identified by contact tracing operations. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Age-specific estimates of the risk of developing respiratory symptoms or fever greater than or equal to 37.5°C and of experiencing critical disease (defined as requiring intensive care or resulting in death) in SARS-CoV-2-infected case contacts. RESULTS In total, 5484 case contacts (median [interquartile range] age, 50 [30-61] years; 3086 female contacts [56.3%]) were analyzed, 2824 of whom (51.5%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (median [interquartile range] age, 53 [34-64] years; 1604 female contacts [56.8%]). The proportion of infected persons who developed symptoms ranged from 18.1% (95% CI, 13.9%-22.9%) among participants younger than 20 years to 64.6% (95% CI, 56.6%-72.0%) for those aged 80 years or older. Most infected contacts (1948 of 2824 individuals [69.0%]) did not develop respiratory symptoms or fever greater than or equal to 37.5°C. Only 26.1% (95% CI, 24.1%-28.2%) of infected individuals younger than 60 years developed respiratory symptoms or fever greater than or equal to 37.5°C; among infected participants older than 60 years, 6.6% (95% CI, 5.1%-8.3%) developed critical disease. Female patients were 52.7% (95% CI, 24.4%-70.7%) less likely than male patients to develop critical disease after SARS-CoV-2 infection. (continued) Key Points Question What is the association of age Open Access. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License.

IMPORTANCE Identifying health care settings and professionals at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection is crucial to defining appropriate strategies, resource allocation, and protocols to protect health care workers (HCWs) and patients. Moreover, such information is crucial to decrease the risk that HCWs and health care facilities become amplifiers for SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the community. OBJECTIVE To assess the association of different health care professional categories and operational units, including in-hospital wards, outpatient facilities, and territorial care departments, with seroprevalence and odds of SARS-CoV-2 infection. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cross-sectional study was conducted using IgG serological tests collected from April 1 through May 26, 2020, in the Lombardy region in Italy. Voluntary serological screening was offered to all clinical and nonclinical staff providing any health care services or support to health care services in the region. Data were analyzed from June 2020 through April 2021. EXPOSURES Employment in the health care sector. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Seroprevalence of positive IgG antibody tests for SARS-CoV-2 was collected, and odds ratios of experiencing infection were calculated. RESULTS A total of 140 782 professionals employed in the health sector were invited to participate in IgG serological screening, among whom 82 961 individuals (59.0% response rate) were tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, with median (interquartile range [IQR]; range) age, 50 (40-56; 19-83) years and 59 839 (72.1%) women. Among these individuals, 10 115 HCWs (12.2%; 95% CI, 12.0%-12.4%) had positive results (median [IQR; range] age, 50 [39-55; 20-80] years; 7298 [72.2%] women).

Background-This study sought to validate the ability of amplitude spectrum area (AMSA) to predict defibrillation success and long-term survival in a large population of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests. Methods and Results-ECGs recorded by automated external defibrillators from different manufacturers were obtained from patients with cardiac arrests occurring in 8 city areas. A database, including 2447 defibrillations from 1050 patients, was used as the derivation group, and an additional database, including 1381 defibrillations from 567 patients, served as validation. A 2-second ECG window before defibrillation was analyzed, and AMSA was calculated. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve were used for associations between AMSA and study end points: defibrillation success, sustained return of spontaneous circulation, and long-term survival. Among the 2447 defibrillations of the derivation database, 26.2% were successful. AMSA was significantly higher before a successful defibrillation than a failing one (13±5 versus 6.8±3.5 mV-Hz) and was an independent predictor of defibrillation success (odds ratio, 1.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.20-1.37) and sustained return of spontaneous circulation (odds ratio, 1.22; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-1.26). Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for defibrillation success prediction was 0.86 (95% confidence interval, 0.85-0.88). AMSA was also significantly associated with long-term survival. The following AMSA thresholds were identified: 15.5 mV-Hz for defibrillation success and 6.5 mV-Hz for defibrillation failure. In the validation database, AMSA ≥15.5 mV-Hz had a positive predictive value of 84%, whereas AMSA ≤6.5 mV-Hz had a negative predictive value of 98%. Conclusions-In this large derivation-validation study, AMSA was validated as an accurate predictor of defibrillation success. AMSA also appeared as a predictor of long-term survival. (Circulation. 2015;131:478-487.