Cargando…
Évaluation par RT-PCR du portage nasopharyngé du SARS-Cov-2 chez les personnels de santé symptomatiques suspects de COVID-19 dans un CHU de la banlieue parisienne
INTRODUCTION: A consultation dedicated to symptomatic health professionals was opened at the beginning of the COVID-19 epidemic in order to meet the specific needs of this population. The objective of this work was to estimate the frequency of SARS-Cov-2 nasopharyngeal carriage in symptomatic health...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Société Nationale Française de Médecine Interne (SNFMI). Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7342041/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32680715 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.revmed.2020.06.017 |
Sumario: | INTRODUCTION: A consultation dedicated to symptomatic health professionals was opened at the beginning of the COVID-19 epidemic in order to meet the specific needs of this population. The objective of this work was to estimate the frequency of SARS-Cov-2 nasopharyngeal carriage in symptomatic healthcare workers suspected of having COVID-19 and to determine the factors associated with this carriage. METHODS: Of the 522 consultants, 308 worked in the Hospital and 214 outside. They had mild forms of COVID-19 and non-specific clinical signs with the exception of agueusia/anosmia, which was significantly more common in those with positive RT-PCR. The rate of RT-PCR positivity was 38% overall, without significant difference according to profession. It was higher among external consultants (47% versus 31%). In the hospital, this rate was significantly lower for symptomatic staff in the care sectors, compared to staff in the technical platforms and laboratories (24%, versus 45%, p = 0.006 and 54%, respectively, p < 0.001), but did not differ between staff in COVID units and other care sectors (30% versus 28%). Among the external consultants, the positivity rates of nursing home and private practices staff (53% and 55% respectively) were more than double that of acute care hospital staff (24%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: These data confirm the strong impact of COVID-19 on health professionals. The higher positivity rates among symptomatic professionals working outside the hospital compared to those working in hospital may be explained in part by a shortage of protective equipment and by difficulties in accessing virological diagnosis, which were greater outside the hospital when the epidemic began. |
---|