IMPORTANCE On February 27, 2020, the first patient with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was reported in the Netherlands. During the following weeks, at 2 Dutch teaching hospitals, 9 health care workers (HCWs) received a diagnosis of COVID-19, 8 of whom had no history of travel to China or northern Italy, raising the question of whether undetected community circulation was occurring. OBJECTIVE To determine the prevalence and clinical presentation of COVID-19 among HCWs with self-reported fever or respiratory symptoms. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cross-sectional study was performed in 2 teaching hospitals in the southern part of the Netherlands in March 2020, during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Health care workers employed in the participating hospitals who experienced fever or respiratory symptoms were asked to voluntarily participate in a screening for infection with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Data analysis was performed in March 2020. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The prevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection was determined by semiquantitative real-time reverse transcriptasepolymerase chain reaction on oropharyngeal samples. Structured interviews were conducted to document symptoms for all HCWs with confirmed COVID-19. RESULTS Of 9705 HCWs employed (1722 male [18%]), 1353 (14%) reported fever or respiratory symptoms and were tested. Of those, 86 HCWs (6%) were infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (median age, 49 years [range, 22-66 years]; 15 [17%] male), representing 1% of all HCWs employed. Most HCWs experienced mild disease, and only 46 (53%) reported fever. Eighty HCWs (93%) met a case definition of fever and/or coughing and/or shortness of breath. Only 3 (3%) of the HCWs identified through the screening had a history of travel to China or northern Italy, and 3 (3%) reported having been exposed to an inpatient with a known diagnosis of COVID-19 before the onset of symptoms. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Within 2 weeks after the first Dutch case was detected, a substantial proportion of HCWs with self-reported fever or respiratory symptoms were infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, likely as a result of acquisition of the virus in the community during the early phase of local spread. The high prevalence of mild clinical presentations, frequently not including fever, suggests that the currently recommended case definition for suspected COVID-19 should be used less stringently.

Background 10 days after the first reported case of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in the Netherlands (on Feb 27, 2020), 55 (4%) of 1497 health-care workers in nine hospitals located in the south of the Netherlands had tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA. We aimed to gain insight in possible sources of infection in health-care workers.Methods We did a cross-sectional study at three of the nine hospitals located in the south of the Netherlands. We screened health-care workers at the participating hospitals for SARS-CoV-2 infection, based on clinical symptoms (fever or mild respiratory symptoms) in the 10 days before screening. We obtained epidemiological data through structured interviews with health-care workers and combined this information with data from whole-genome sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 in clinical samples taken from health-care workers and patients. We did an in-depth analysis of sources and modes of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in health-care workers and patients. FindingsBetween March 2 and March 12, 2020, 1796 (15%) of 12 022 health-care workers were screened, of whom 96 (5%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. We obtained complete and near-complete genome sequences from 50 healthcare workers and ten patients. Most sequences were grouped in three clusters, with two clusters showing local circulation within the region. The noted patterns were consistent with multiple introductions into the hospitals through community-acquired infections and local amplification in the community.Interpretation Although direct transmission in the hospitals cannot be ruled out, our data do not support widespread nosocomial transmission as the source of infection in patients or health-care workers.

, a cluster of cases of pneumonia of unknown etiology were reported linked to a market in Wuhan, China 1. The causative agent was identified as the species Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus and was named SARS-CoV-2 (ref. 2). By 16 April the virus had spread to 185 different countries, infected over 2,000,000 people and resulted in over 130,000 deaths 3. In the Netherlands, the first case of SARS-CoV-2 was notified on 27 February. The outbreak started with several different introductory events from Italy, Austria, Germany and France followed by local amplification in, and later also outside, the south of the Netherlands. The combination of near to real-time whole-genome sequence analysis and epidemiology resulted in reliable assessments of the extent of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the community, facilitating early decision-making to control local transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the Netherlands. We demonstrate how these data were generated and analyzed, and how SARS-CoV-2 whole-genome sequencing, in combination with epidemiological data, was used to inform public health decision-making in the Netherlands. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) is a powerful tool to understand the transmission dynamics of outbreaks and inform outbreak control decisions 4-7. Evidence of this was seen during the 2014-2016 West African Ebola outbreak when real-time WGS was used to help public health decision-making, a strategy dubbed 'precision public health pathogen genomics' 8,9. Immediate sharing and analysis of data during outbreaks is now recommended as an integral part of outbreak response 10-12. Feasibility of real-time WGS requires access to sequence platforms that provide reliable sequences, access to metadata for interpretation, and data analysis at high speed and low cost. Therefore, WGS for outbreak support is an active area of research. Nanopore sequencing has been employed in recent outbreaks of Usutu, Ebola, Zika and yellow fever virus owing to the ease of use and relatively low start-up cost 4-7. The robustness of this method has recently been validated using Usutu virus 13,14. In the Netherlands, the first COVID-19 case was confirmed on 27 February and WGS was performed in near to real-time using an amplicon-based sequencing approach. From 22 January, symptomatic travelers from countries where SARS-CoV-2 was known to circulate were routinely tested. The first case of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the Netherlands was identified on 27 February in a person with recent travel history to Italy and an additional case was identified one day later, also in a person with recent travel history to Italy. The genomes of these first two positive samples were generated and analyzed by 29 February. These two viruses clustered differently in the phylogenetic tree, confirming separate introductions (Fig. 1a). The advice to test hospitalized patients with serious respiratory infections was issued on 24 February and subsequent attempts to identify possible local transmission chains triggered testing for SARS-CoV-2 on a large scale in h...

In The Netherlands, patients exposed to pigs or veal calves were recently shown to be at high risk of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) carriage. In Amphia Hospital (Breda, The Netherlands), 32% of patients in this risk group were shown to carry MRSA. This resulted in a 3-fold increase in the annual MRSA incidence.

Pre-emptive isolation of suspected methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) carriers is considered essential for controlling the spread of MRSA, but noncolonized patients will be isolated unnecessarily as a result of a delay in diagnosis of 3-5 days with conventional cultures. We determined costs per isolation day avoided, and incremental costs of rapid MRSA screening tests when added to conventional screening, but with decisions on isolation measures based on PCR results. A prospective multicentre study evaluating BD GeneOhm MRSA PCR (`IDI') (BD Diagnostics, San Diego, CA, USA), Xpert MRSA (`GeneXpert') (Cepheid, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) and chromogenic agar (MRSA-ID) (bioMérieux, Marcy-l'Etoile, France) was performed in 14 Dutch hospitals. Among 1764 patients at risk, MRSA prevalence was 3.3% (n=59). Duration of isolation was 19.7 and 16.1 h with IDI and GeneXpert, respectively, and would have been 30.0 and 76.2 h when based on chromogenic agar and conventional cultures, respectively. Negative predictive values (at a patient level) were 99.5%, 99.1% and 99.5% for IDI, GeneXpert and chromogenic agar, respectively. Numbers of isolation days were reduced by 60% and 47% with PCR-based and chromogenic agar-based screening, respectively. The cost per test was €56.22 for IDI, €69.62 for GeneXpert and €2.08 for chromogenic agar, and additional costs per extra isolation day were €26.34. Costs per isolation day avoided were €95.77 (IDI) and €125.43 (GeneXpert). PCR-based decision-making added €153.64 (IDI) and €193.84 (GeneXpert) per patient to overall costs and chromogenic testing would have saved €30.79 per patient. Rapid diagnostic testing safely reduces the number of unnecessary isolation days, but only chromogenic screening, and not PCR-based screening, can be considered as cost saving.