能否加强自我检测以加快大流行病中医护人员的安全返回?同时使用两家制造商的 SARS-CoV-2 侧流装置和巢式病毒培养研究的随机顺序、开放标签试验。

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES BMC Infectious Diseases Pub Date : 2024-11-11 DOI:10.1186/s12879-024-10155-z
Xingna Zhang, Christopher P Cheyne, Christopher Jones, Michael Humann, Gary Leeming, Claire Smith, David M Hughes, Girvan Burnside, Susanna Dodd, Rebekah Penrice-Randal, Xiaofeng Dong, Malcolm G Semple, Tim Neal, Sarah Tunkel, Tom Fowler, Lance Turtle, Marta García-Fiñana, Iain E Buchan
{"title":"能否加强自我检测以加快大流行病中医护人员的安全返回?同时使用两家制造商的 SARS-CoV-2 侧流装置和巢式病毒培养研究的随机顺序、开放标签试验。","authors":"Xingna Zhang, Christopher P Cheyne, Christopher Jones, Michael Humann, Gary Leeming, Claire Smith, David M Hughes, Girvan Burnside, Susanna Dodd, Rebekah Penrice-Randal, Xiaofeng Dong, Malcolm G Semple, Tim Neal, Sarah Tunkel, Tom Fowler, Lance Turtle, Marta García-Fiñana, Iain E Buchan","doi":"10.1186/s12879-024-10155-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Covid-19 healthcare worker testing, isolation and quarantine policies had to balance risks to patients from the virus and from staff absence. The emergence of the Omicron variant led to dangerous levels of key-worker absence globally. We evaluated whether using two manufacturers' lateral flow tests (LFTs) concurrently improved SARS-CoV-2 Omicron detection significantly and was acceptable to hospital staff. In a nested study, to understand risks of return to work after a 5-day isolation/quarantine period, we examined virus culture 5-7 days after positive test or significant exposure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Fully-vaccinated Liverpool (UK) University Hospitals staff participated (February-May 2022) in a random-order, open-label trial testing whether dual LFTs improved SARS-CoV-2 detection, and whether dual swabbing was acceptable to users. Participants used nose-throat swab Innova and nose-only swab Orient Gene LFTs in daily randomised order for 10 days. A user-experience questionnaire was administered on exit. Selected participants gave swabs for viral culture on days 5-7 after symptom onset or first positive test. Cultures were considered positive if cytopathic effect was apparent or SARS-CoV-2 N gene sub-genomic RNA was detected.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two hundred and twenty-six individuals reported 1466 pairs of LFT results. Tests disagreed in 127 cases (8.7%). Orient Gene was more likely (78 cf. 49; OR: 2.1, 1.1-4.1; P = 0.03) to be positive. If Innova was swabbed second, it was less likely to agree with a positive Orient Gene result (OR: 2.7, 1.3-5.2; P = 0.005); swabbing first with Innova made no significant difference (OR: 1.1, 0.5-2.3; P = 0.85). Orient Gene positive Innova negative result-pairs became more frequent over time (OR: 1.2, 1.1-1.3; P < 0.001). Of individuals completing the exit questionnaire, 90.7% reported dual swabbing was easy, 57.1% said it was no barrier to their daily routine and 65.6% preferred dual testing. Respondents had more confidence in dual versus single test results. Viral cultures from days 5-7 were positive for 6/31 (19.4%, 7.5%-37.5%) and indeterminate for 11/31 (35.5%, 19.2%-54.6%) LFT-positive participants, indicating they were likely still infectious.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Dual brand testing increased LFT detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen by a small but meaningful margin and was acceptable to hospital workers. Viral cultures demonstrated that policies recommending safe return to work ~ 5 days after Omicron infection/exposure were flawed. Key-workers should be prepared for dynamic self-testing protocols in future pandemics.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN47058442 (26 January 2022).</p>","PeriodicalId":8981,"journal":{"name":"BMC Infectious Diseases","volume":"24 1","pages":"1276"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11555827/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can self-testing be enhanced to hasten safe return of healthcare workers in pandemics? Random order, open label trial using two manufacturers' SARS-CoV-2 lateral flow devices concurrently and nested viral culture study.\",\"authors\":\"Xingna Zhang, Christopher P Cheyne, Christopher Jones, Michael Humann, Gary Leeming, Claire Smith, David M Hughes, Girvan Burnside, Susanna Dodd, Rebekah Penrice-Randal, Xiaofeng Dong, Malcolm G Semple, Tim Neal, Sarah Tunkel, Tom Fowler, Lance Turtle, Marta García-Fiñana, Iain E Buchan\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12879-024-10155-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Covid-19 healthcare worker testing, isolation and quarantine policies had to balance risks to patients from the virus and from staff absence. The emergence of the Omicron variant led to dangerous levels of key-worker absence globally. We evaluated whether using two manufacturers' lateral flow tests (LFTs) concurrently improved SARS-CoV-2 Omicron detection significantly and was acceptable to hospital staff. In a nested study, to understand risks of return to work after a 5-day isolation/quarantine period, we examined virus culture 5-7 days after positive test or significant exposure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Fully-vaccinated Liverpool (UK) University Hospitals staff participated (February-May 2022) in a random-order, open-label trial testing whether dual LFTs improved SARS-CoV-2 detection, and whether dual swabbing was acceptable to users. Participants used nose-throat swab Innova and nose-only swab Orient Gene LFTs in daily randomised order for 10 days. A user-experience questionnaire was administered on exit. Selected participants gave swabs for viral culture on days 5-7 after symptom onset or first positive test. Cultures were considered positive if cytopathic effect was apparent or SARS-CoV-2 N gene sub-genomic RNA was detected.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two hundred and twenty-six individuals reported 1466 pairs of LFT results. Tests disagreed in 127 cases (8.7%). Orient Gene was more likely (78 cf. 49; OR: 2.1, 1.1-4.1; P = 0.03) to be positive. If Innova was swabbed second, it was less likely to agree with a positive Orient Gene result (OR: 2.7, 1.3-5.2; P = 0.005); swabbing first with Innova made no significant difference (OR: 1.1, 0.5-2.3; P = 0.85). Orient Gene positive Innova negative result-pairs became more frequent over time (OR: 1.2, 1.1-1.3; P < 0.001). Of individuals completing the exit questionnaire, 90.7% reported dual swabbing was easy, 57.1% said it was no barrier to their daily routine and 65.6% preferred dual testing. Respondents had more confidence in dual versus single test results. Viral cultures from days 5-7 were positive for 6/31 (19.4%, 7.5%-37.5%) and indeterminate for 11/31 (35.5%, 19.2%-54.6%) LFT-positive participants, indicating they were likely still infectious.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Dual brand testing increased LFT detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen by a small but meaningful margin and was acceptable to hospital workers. Viral cultures demonstrated that policies recommending safe return to work ~ 5 days after Omicron infection/exposure were flawed. Key-workers should be prepared for dynamic self-testing protocols in future pandemics.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN47058442 (26 January 2022).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8981,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Infectious Diseases\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"1276\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11555827/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Infectious Diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-024-10155-z\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-024-10155-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:Covid-19 医护人员检测、隔离和检疫政策必须平衡病毒对患者造成的风险和工作人员缺勤造成的风险。Omicron 变体的出现导致全球关键员工缺勤达到危险水平。我们评估了同时使用两家制造商的侧流试验(LFT)是否能显著提高 SARS-CoV-2 Omicron 的检测率,以及医院员工是否能接受。在一项嵌套研究中,为了了解 5 天隔离/检疫期后重返工作岗位的风险,我们在检测结果呈阳性或明显暴露后 5-7 天对病毒培养进行了检查:完全接种疫苗的英国利物浦大学医院员工(2022 年 2 月至 5 月)参加了一项随机排序、开放标签试验,测试双 LFT 是否能提高 SARS-CoV-2 的检测率,以及使用者是否能接受双拭子检测。参与者每天随机使用鼻咽拭子Innova和鼻咽拭子Orient Gene LFTs,为期10天。离开时进行用户体验问卷调查。被选中的参与者在症状出现或首次检测呈阳性后的第 5-7 天提供拭子进行病毒培养。如果细胞病理效应明显或检测到 SARS-CoV-2 N 基因亚基因组 RNA,则认为培养结果呈阳性:226 人报告了 1466 对 LFT 结果。检测结果不一致的有 127 例(8.7%)。东方基因更有可能呈阳性(78 对 49;OR:2.1,1.1-4.1;P = 0.03)。如果先拭子再拭Innova,则与Orient Gene阳性结果一致的可能性较低(OR:2.7,1.3-5.2;P = 0.005);先拭子再拭Innova没有显著差异(OR:1.1,0.5-2.3;P = 0.85)。随着时间的推移,Orient Gene 阳性 Innova 阴性结果对的出现频率越来越高(OR:1.2,1.1-1.3;P 结论:双品牌检测提高了SARS-CoV-2抗原的LFT检测率,虽然幅度很小,但意义重大,医院工作人员可以接受。病毒培养结果表明,建议在感染/接触 Omicron 后 ~5 天安全返回工作岗位的政策是错误的。在未来的大流行中,主要工作人员应做好动态自我检测方案的准备。试验注册:https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN47058442(2022年1月26日)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Can self-testing be enhanced to hasten safe return of healthcare workers in pandemics? Random order, open label trial using two manufacturers' SARS-CoV-2 lateral flow devices concurrently and nested viral culture study.

Background: Covid-19 healthcare worker testing, isolation and quarantine policies had to balance risks to patients from the virus and from staff absence. The emergence of the Omicron variant led to dangerous levels of key-worker absence globally. We evaluated whether using two manufacturers' lateral flow tests (LFTs) concurrently improved SARS-CoV-2 Omicron detection significantly and was acceptable to hospital staff. In a nested study, to understand risks of return to work after a 5-day isolation/quarantine period, we examined virus culture 5-7 days after positive test or significant exposure.

Methods: Fully-vaccinated Liverpool (UK) University Hospitals staff participated (February-May 2022) in a random-order, open-label trial testing whether dual LFTs improved SARS-CoV-2 detection, and whether dual swabbing was acceptable to users. Participants used nose-throat swab Innova and nose-only swab Orient Gene LFTs in daily randomised order for 10 days. A user-experience questionnaire was administered on exit. Selected participants gave swabs for viral culture on days 5-7 after symptom onset or first positive test. Cultures were considered positive if cytopathic effect was apparent or SARS-CoV-2 N gene sub-genomic RNA was detected.

Results: Two hundred and twenty-six individuals reported 1466 pairs of LFT results. Tests disagreed in 127 cases (8.7%). Orient Gene was more likely (78 cf. 49; OR: 2.1, 1.1-4.1; P = 0.03) to be positive. If Innova was swabbed second, it was less likely to agree with a positive Orient Gene result (OR: 2.7, 1.3-5.2; P = 0.005); swabbing first with Innova made no significant difference (OR: 1.1, 0.5-2.3; P = 0.85). Orient Gene positive Innova negative result-pairs became more frequent over time (OR: 1.2, 1.1-1.3; P < 0.001). Of individuals completing the exit questionnaire, 90.7% reported dual swabbing was easy, 57.1% said it was no barrier to their daily routine and 65.6% preferred dual testing. Respondents had more confidence in dual versus single test results. Viral cultures from days 5-7 were positive for 6/31 (19.4%, 7.5%-37.5%) and indeterminate for 11/31 (35.5%, 19.2%-54.6%) LFT-positive participants, indicating they were likely still infectious.

Conclusions: Dual brand testing increased LFT detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen by a small but meaningful margin and was acceptable to hospital workers. Viral cultures demonstrated that policies recommending safe return to work ~ 5 days after Omicron infection/exposure were flawed. Key-workers should be prepared for dynamic self-testing protocols in future pandemics.

Trial registration: https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN47058442 (26 January 2022).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Infectious Diseases
BMC Infectious Diseases 医学-传染病学
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
860
审稿时长
3.3 months
期刊介绍: BMC Infectious Diseases is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of infectious and sexually transmitted diseases in humans, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology.
期刊最新文献
Epidemiological characteristics and spatio-temporal clusters of human brucellosis in Inner Mongolia, 2010-2021. Epidemiological characteristics of five non-COVID respiratory viruses among 37,139 all-age patients during 2018 - 2023 in Weifang, China: a cross-sectional study. HIV phylogenetic clusters point to unmet hiv prevention, testing and treatment needs among men who have sex with men in kenya. Optimizing identification of Lyme disease diagnoses in commercial insurance claims data, United States, 2016-2019. Pre-market health systems barriers and enablers to infectious diseases point-of-care diagnostics in Australia: qualitative interviews with key informants.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1