BackgroundStrategies to minimize the risk of transmission and acquisition of COVID-19 infection in patients with ESKD receiving in-center hemodialysis have been rapidly implemented across the globe. Despite these interventions, confirmed COVID-19 infection rates have been high in the United Kingdom. Prevalence of asymptomatic disease in an adult hemodialysis population has not been reported. Also, to our knowledge, the development of humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 has not been previously reported in this population. Although serologic testing does not provide information on the infectivity of patients, seroprevalence studies may enable investigation of exposure within dialysis units and hence, assessment of current screening strategies.MethodsTo investigate the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in a hemodialysis population, we used the Abbott IgG assay with the Architect system to test serum samples from 356 patients receiving in-center hemodialysis for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.ResultsOf 356 patients, 121 had been symptomatic when screened before a dialysis session and received an RT-PCR test; 79 (22.2% of the total study population) tested positive for COVID-19. Serologic testing of all 356 patients found 129 (36.2%) who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Only two patients with PCR-confirmed infection did not seroconvert. Of the 129 patients with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, 52 (40.3%) had asymptomatic disease or undetected disease by PCR testing alone.ConclusionsWe found a high seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in patients receiving in-center hemodialysis. Serologic evidence of previous infection in asymptomatic or PCR-negative patients suggests that current diagnostic screening strategies may be limited in their ability to detect acute infection.

BackgroundOf the global burden of 2.6 million stillbirths, around 1.2 million occur during labour i.e. are intrapartum deaths. In low-/middle-income countries, a significant proportion of women give birth at home, usually in the absence of a skilled birth attendant. This review discusses the impact of skilled birth attendance (SBA) and the provision of Emergency Obstetric Care (EOC) on stillbirths and perinatal mortality.MethodsA systematic literature search was performed on PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Database and the WHO regional libraries. Data of all eligible studies were extracted into a standardized Excel sheet containing variables such as participants’ characteristics, sample size, location, setting, blinding, allocation concealment, intervention and control details and limitations. We undertook a meta-analysis of the impact of SBA on stillbirths. Given the paucity of data from randomized trials or robust quasi-experimental designs, we undertook an expert Delphi consultation to determine impact estimates of provision of Basic and Comprehensive EOC on reducing stillbirths if there would be universal coverage (99%).ResultsThe literature search yielded 871 hits. A total of 21 studies were selected for data abstraction. Our meta-analysis on community-based skilled birth attendance based on two before-after studies showed a 23% significant reduction in stillbirths (RR = 0.77; 95% CI: 0.69 – 0.85). The overall quality grade of available evidence for this intervention on stillbirths was ‘moderate’. The Delphi process supported the estimated reduction in stillbirths by skilled attendance and experts further suggested that the provision of Basic EOC had the potential to avert intrapartum stillbirths by 45% and with provision of Comprehensive EOC this could be reduced by 75%. These estimates are conservative, consistent with historical trends in maternal and perinatal mortality from both developed and developing countries, and are recommended for inclusion in the Lives Saved Tool (LiST) model.ConclusionsBoth Skilled Birth Attendance and Emergency/or Essential Obstetric Care have the potential to reduce the number of stillbirths seen globally. Further evidence is needed to be able to calculate an effect size.