Cross-sectional study evaluating the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among healthcare workers and factors associated with exposure during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in New York

Bryan, Alexander D.; Tatem, Kathleen; Diuguid-Gerber, Jillian; Cooke, Caroline; Romanoff, Anya; Choudhury, Nandini; Scanlon, Michael; Kishore, Preeti; Sydney, Elana; Masci, Joseph R.; Bakshi, Parampreet; Pemmasani, Sahithi; Davis, Nichola; Maru, Duncan

doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053158

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The 42% seroprevalence for SARS-CoV-2 on the first maternal blood sample obtained from October 2021 to January 2022 was higher than the 20–30% prevalence previously reported in U.S. healthcare workers, although these studies were prior to the U.S. Delta wave [ 31 – 33 ]. While anti-NP positive women were more likely to be positive for IgG in their milk prior to booster, we did not see other differences in blood or milk GMT before or after booster by maternal NP status.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 64%

Impact of maternal SARS-CoV-2 booster vaccination on blood and breastmilk antibodies

Rick

Lentscher

et al. 2023

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Maternal COVID-19 vaccination could protect infants who are ineligible for vaccine through antibody transfer during pregnancy and lactation. We measured the quantity and durability of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in human milk and infant blood before and after maternal booster vaccination. Prospective cohort of lactating women immunized with primary and booster COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy or lactation and their infants. Milk and blood samples from October 2021 to April 2022 were included. Anti-nucleoprotein (NP) and anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) IgG and IgA in maternal milk and maternal and infant blood were measured and compared longitudinally after maternal booster vaccine. Forty-five lactating women and their infants provided samples. 58% of women were anti-NP negative and 42% were positive on their first blood sample prior to booster vaccine. Anti-RBD IgG and IgA in milk remained significantly increased through 120–170 days after booster vaccine and did not differ by maternal NP status. Anti-RBD IgG and IgA did not increase in infant blood after maternal booster. Of infants born to women vaccinated in pregnancy, 74% still had positive serum anti-RBD IgG measured on average 5 months after delivery. Infant to maternal IgG ratio was highest for infants exposed to maternal primary vaccine during the second trimester compared to third trimester (0.85 versus 0.29; p<0.001). Maternal COVID-19 primary and booster vaccine resulted in robust and long-lasting transplacental and milk antibodies. These antibodies may provide important protection against SARS-CoV-2 during the first six months of life.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 64%

Impact of maternal SARS-CoV-2 booster vaccination on blood and breastmilk antibodies

Rick

Lentscher

et al. 2023

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Venugopal et al [33] assessed seroprevalence among healthcare workers in a New York City hospital and found 27% positivity for the SARS-CoV-2 antibody. Bryan et al [34] reported 29% positive cases for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies also in New York City. Gomez-Ochoa et al [23] showed that seropositivity in health professionals was 7%.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in hospital workers in the southern region of Minas Gerais state in Brazil: An analysis of the pre-vaccine period

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection seroprevalence can be performed by detecting anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. The survey is essential to understand the disease transmission's dynamic in the studied population. This study aimed to carry out a seroepidemiological survey of SARS-CoV-2 in three hospitals located in the south of Minas Gerais state, Brazil. 859 samples were collected from August to December 2020 when SARS-CoV-2 vaccines were still not available and Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) were performed on participants sera. The average age of participants was 38 years, and most were women (71.4%). Likewise, most participants were classified as health professionals with direct or indirect contact with patients with COVID-19 (74.5%). The other participants tested belonged to other sectors, such as the administrative one (11,6%). Considering clinical symptoms, 15.8% of participants reported diarrhoea, 6.4% fever, 5.8% respiratory distress, and 7.0% loss of smell and taste. Many participants reported contact with infected patients (63.35%). Regarding the ELISA tests, 21.6% of the participants had positive results and hospital 3 had the highest positivity (21.7%), followed by hospital 2 (21.6%) and hospital 1 (20.3%). The prevalence was higher in women compared to men (22,8% and 18,7%, respectively). Regarding the area of expertise, the highest positivity (20.9%) was observed among health professionals. However, professionals who worked exclusively with COVID-19 had lower positivity when compared to professionals who did not work directly with respectively). When analysing the correlation between the ELISA tests with the other variables, a significant association was detected with these previous serological variables, previous contact with COVID-19 and the presence of fever symptoms, loss of smell and taste. Clinical symptoms associated with serological tests are important tools for monitoring the disease among health professionals.

show abstract

“…This finding is consistent with current literature, which has shown that community transmission is a dominant source of infection. [4][5][6][7][8] This is unsurprising given that masks are more easily mandated and enforced in the hospital setting than the home setting. Also, positive tests among TMC employees correspond temporally with known COVID-19 surges in Boston-Suffolk County, 28,29 indicating that community trends are important when evaluating employee risk.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…significant driver of employee infection. 12,[14][15][16] Prior studies have been limited in that most investigated patient-facing job roles [17][18][19] as potential risk factors and relatively few considered the potential contribution of transmission from coworkers. [20][21][22] Additionally, mask use was investigated in some studies 9,10,14,17 but not in others.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…12,[14][15][16] Prior studies have been limited in that most investigated patient-facing job roles [17][18][19] as potential risk factors and relatively few considered the potential contribution of transmission from coworkers. [20][21][22] Additionally, mask use was investigated in some studies 9,10,14,17 but not in others. 14,21,23 Universal masking of both healthcare workers and patients has been associated with a lower rate of SARS-CoV-2 positivity among healthcare workers.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sources of exposure and risk among employees infected with severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in a large, urban, tertiary-care hospital in the United States

Boomsma

Poplausky

Jasper

et al. 2023

ASHE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Hospital employees are at risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection through transmission in 3 settings: (1) the community, (2) within the hospital from patient care, and (3) within the hospital from other employees. We evaluated probable sources of infection among hospital employees based on reported exposures before infection. Design: A structured survey was distributed to participants to evaluate presumed COVID-19 exposures (ie, close contacts with people with known or probable COVID-19) and mask usage. Participants were stratified into high, medium, low, and unknown risk categories based on exposure characteristics and personal protective equipment. Setting: Tertiary-care hospital in Boston, Massachusetts. Participants: Hospital employees with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test result between March 2020 and January 2021. During this period, 573 employees tested positive, of whom 187 (31.5%) participated. Results: We did not detect a statistically significant difference in the proportion of employees who reported any exposure (ie, close contacts at any risk level) in the community compared with any exposure in the hospital, from either patients or employees. In total, 131 participants (70.0%) reported no known high-risk exposure (ie, unmasked close contacts) in any setting. Among those who could identify a high-risk exposure, employees were more likely to have had a high-risk exposure in the community than in both hospital settings combined (odds ratio, 1.89; P = .03). Conclusions: Hospital employees experienced exposure risks in both community and hospital settings. Most employees were unable to identify high-risk exposures prior to infection. When respondents identified high-risk exposures, they were more likely to have occurred in the community.

show abstract

Cross-sectional study evaluating the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among healthcare workers and factors associated with exposure during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in New York

Cited by 7 publications

References 20 publications

Impact of maternal SARS-CoV-2 booster vaccination on blood and breastmilk antibodies

Impact of maternal SARS-CoV-2 booster vaccination on blood and breastmilk antibodies

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in hospital workers in the southern region of Minas Gerais state in Brazil: An analysis of the pre-vaccine period

Sources of exposure and risk among employees infected with severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in a large, urban, tertiary-care hospital in the United States

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About