Risk of COVID-19 in health-care workers in Denmark: an observational cohort study.

Adult Antibodies, Viral / blood Blood Donors / statistics & numerical data COVID-19 / diagnosis Cohort Studies Denmark / epidemiology Female Health Personnel / classification Humans Immunoglobulin G / blood Immunoglobulin M / blood Male Middle Aged Occupational Health / statistics & numerical data Point-of-Care Testing SARS-CoV-2 / immunology Seroconversion Seroepidemiologic Studies

Journal

The Lancet. Infectious diseases

ISSN: 1474-4457

Titre abrégé: Lancet Infect Dis

Pays: United States

ID NLM: 101130150

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
12 2020

Historique:

received: 12 06 2020

revised: 23 06 2020

accepted: 01 07 2020

pubmed: 8 8 2020

medline: 15 12 2020

entrez: 8 8 2020

Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Health-care workers are thought to be highly exposed to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We aimed to investigate the prevalence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in health-care workers and the proportion of seroconverted health-care workers with previous symptoms of COVID-19. In this observational cohort study, screening was offered to health-care workers in the Capital Region of Denmark, including medical, nursing, and other students who were associated with hospitals in the region. Screening included point-of-care tests for IgM and IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Test results and participant characteristics were recorded. Results were compared with findings in blood donors in the Capital Region in the study period. Between April 15 and April 23, 2020, we screened 29 295 health-care workers, of whom 28 792 (98·28%) provided their test results. We identified 1163 (4·04% [95% CI 3·82-4·27]) seropositive health-care workers. Seroprevalence was higher in health-care workers than in blood donors (142 [3·04%] of 4672; risk ratio [RR] 1·33 [95% CI 1·12-1·58]; p<0·001). Seroprevalence was higher in male health-care workers (331 [5·45%] of 6077) than in female health-care workers (832 [3·66%] of 22 715; RR 1·49 [1·31-1·68]; p<0·001). Frontline health-care workers working in hospitals had a significantly higher seroprevalence (779 [4·55%] of 16 356) than health-care workers in other settings (384 [3·29%] of 11 657; RR 1·38 [1·22-1·56]; p<0·001). Health-care workers working on dedicated COVID-19 wards (95 [7·19%] of 1321) had a significantly higher seroprevalence than other frontline health-care workers working in hospitals (696 [4·35%] of 15 983; RR 1·65 [1·34-2·03]; p<0·001). 622 [53·5%] of 1163 seropositive participants reported symptoms attributable to SARS-CoV-2. Loss of taste or smell was the symptom that was most strongly associated with seropositivity (377 [32·39%] of 1164 participants with this symptom were seropositive vs 786 [2·84%] of 27 628 without this symptom; RR 11·38 [10·22-12·68]). The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04346186. The prevalence of health-care workers with antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 was low but higher than in blood donors. The risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in health-care workers was related to exposure to infected patients. More than half of seropositive health-care workers reported symptoms attributable to COVID-19. Lundbeck Foundation.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND

METHODS

In this observational cohort study, screening was offered to health-care workers in the Capital Region of Denmark, including medical, nursing, and other students who were associated with hospitals in the region. Screening included point-of-care tests for IgM and IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Test results and participant characteristics were recorded. Results were compared with findings in blood donors in the Capital Region in the study period.

FINDINGS

Between April 15 and April 23, 2020, we screened 29 295 health-care workers, of whom 28 792 (98·28%) provided their test results. We identified 1163 (4·04% [95% CI 3·82-4·27]) seropositive health-care workers. Seroprevalence was higher in health-care workers than in blood donors (142 [3·04%] of 4672; risk ratio [RR] 1·33 [95% CI 1·12-1·58]; p<0·001). Seroprevalence was higher in male health-care workers (331 [5·45%] of 6077) than in female health-care workers (832 [3·66%] of 22 715; RR 1·49 [1·31-1·68]; p<0·001). Frontline health-care workers working in hospitals had a significantly higher seroprevalence (779 [4·55%] of 16 356) than health-care workers in other settings (384 [3·29%] of 11 657; RR 1·38 [1·22-1·56]; p<0·001). Health-care workers working on dedicated COVID-19 wards (95 [7·19%] of 1321) had a significantly higher seroprevalence than other frontline health-care workers working in hospitals (696 [4·35%] of 15 983; RR 1·65 [1·34-2·03]; p<0·001). 622 [53·5%] of 1163 seropositive participants reported symptoms attributable to SARS-CoV-2. Loss of taste or smell was the symptom that was most strongly associated with seropositivity (377 [32·39%] of 1164 participants with this symptom were seropositive vs 786 [2·84%] of 27 628 without this symptom; RR 11·38 [10·22-12·68]). The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04346186.

INTERPRETATION

The prevalence of health-care workers with antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 was low but higher than in blood donors. The risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in health-care workers was related to exposure to infected patients. More than half of seropositive health-care workers reported symptoms attributable to COVID-19.

FUNDING

Lundbeck Foundation.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30589-2 PMID: 32758438 PMC: PMC7398038

pubmed: 32758438

pii: S1473-3099(20)30589-2

doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30589-2

pmc: PMC7398038

pii:

doi:

Substances chimiques

Antibodies, Viral 0

Immunoglobulin G 0

Immunoglobulin M 0

Banques de données

ClinicalTrials.gov

['NCT04346186']

Types de publication

Journal Article Observational Study Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

Pagination

1401-1408

Commentaires et corrections

Type : ErratumIn

Type : CommentIn

Informations de copyright

Références

J Biomed Inform. 2009 Apr;42(2):377-81

pubmed: 18929686

N Engl J Med. 2020 Mar 26;382(13):1194-1196

pubmed: 32074416

Lancet. 2020 Apr 11;395(10231):1225-1228

pubmed: 32178769

MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020 Apr 10;69(14):416-418

pubmed: 32271726

Nat Med. 2020 Jun;26(6):845-848

pubmed: 32350462

Elife. 2020 May 11;9:

pubmed: 32392129

J Infect. 2020 Jun;80(6):e32-e33

pubmed: 32209383

Euro Surveill. 2020 Apr;25(14):

pubmed: 32290904

BMJ. 2020 Apr 2;369:m1375

pubmed: 32241884

JAMA. 2020 Jun 2;323(21):2191-2192

pubmed: 32338732

N Engl J Med. 2020 May 28;382(22):2163-2164

pubmed: 32283004

Am J Epidemiol. 1978 Jan;107(1):71-6

pubmed: 623091

J Biomed Inform. 2019 Jul;95:103208

pubmed: 31078660

Lancet. 2020 May 2;395(10234):e77-e78

pubmed: 32333843

JAMA. 2020 May 12;323(18):1843-1844

pubmed: 32159775

Euro Surveill. 2020 Apr;25(16):

pubmed: 32347200