Cargando…

Does Every Patient with a Positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Test Require Isolation? A Prospective Analysis

Group Name: CDC Prevention Epicenters Program Background: Reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests are the reference standard for diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection, but false positives can occur and viral RNA may persist for weeks-to-months following recovery. Isolating such pati...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rhee, Chanu, Baker, Meghan, Kanjilal, Sanjat, Tucker, Robert, Vaidya, Vineeta, Badwaik, Amy, Mermel Blaeser, Elizabeth, Coughlin, Cassie, Elloyan, Jennifer, Hsieh, Candace, Holtzman, Meghan, Solem, Ofelia, Klompas, Michael
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cambridge University Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9551591/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ash.2021.15
_version_ 1784806138459455488
author Rhee, Chanu
Baker, Meghan
Kanjilal, Sanjat
Tucker, Robert
Vaidya, Vineeta
Badwaik, Amy
Mermel Blaeser, Elizabeth
Coughlin, Cassie
Elloyan, Jennifer
Hsieh, Candace
Holtzman, Meghan
Solem, Ofelia
Klompas, Michael
author_facet Rhee, Chanu
Baker, Meghan
Kanjilal, Sanjat
Tucker, Robert
Vaidya, Vineeta
Badwaik, Amy
Mermel Blaeser, Elizabeth
Coughlin, Cassie
Elloyan, Jennifer
Hsieh, Candace
Holtzman, Meghan
Solem, Ofelia
Klompas, Michael
author_sort Rhee, Chanu
collection PubMed
description Group Name: CDC Prevention Epicenters Program Background: Reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests are the reference standard for diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection, but false positives can occur and viral RNA may persist for weeks-to-months following recovery. Isolating such patients increases pressure on limited hospital resources and may impede care. Therefore, we quantified the percentage of patients who tested positive by RT-PCR yet were unlikely to be infectious and could be released from isolation. Methods: We prospectively identified all adults hospitalized at Brigham and Women’s Hospital (Boston, MA) who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR (primarily Hologic Panther Fusion or Cepheid Xpert platforms) between December 24, 2020, and January 24, 2021. Each case was assessed by infection control staff for possible discontinuation of isolation using an algorithm that incorporated the patient’s prior history of COVID-19, current symptoms, RT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) values, repeat RT-PCR testing at least 24 hours later, and SARS-CoV-2 serologies (Figure 1). Results: Overall, 246 hospitalized patients (median age, 66 years [interquartile range, 50–74]; 131 [53.3%] male) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR during the study period. Of these, 201 (81.7%) were deemed new diagnoses of active disease on the basis of low Ct values and/or progressive symptoms. Moreover, 44 patients (17.9%) were deemed noninfectious: 35 (14.2%) had prior known resolved infections (n = 21) or unknown prior infection but positive serology (n = 14), high Ct values on initial testing, and negative or stably high Ct values on repeat testing. Also, 5 (2.0%) had recent infection but >10 days had passed since symptom onset and they were clinically improving. In addition, 4 (1.6%) results were deemed false positives based on lack of symptoms and at least 1 negative repeat RT-PCR test (Figure 2). One patient was asymptomatic with Ct value <35 but was discharged before further testing could be obtained. Among the 44 noninfectious patients, isolation was discontinued a median of 3 days (IQR, 2–4) after the first positive test. We did not identify any healthcare worker infections attributable to early discontinuation of isolation in these patients. Conclusions: During the winter COVID-19 second surge in Massachusetts, nearly 1 in 5 hospitalized patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR were deemed noninfectious and eligible for discontinuation of precautions. Most of these cases were consistent with residual RNA from prior known or undiagnosed infections. Active assessments of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests by infection control practitioners using clinical data, Ct values, repeat tests, and serologies can safely validate the release many patients from isolation and thereby conserve resources and facilitate patient care. Funding: No Disclosures: None
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9551591
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Cambridge University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95515912022-10-12 Does Every Patient with a Positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Test Require Isolation? A Prospective Analysis Rhee, Chanu Baker, Meghan Kanjilal, Sanjat Tucker, Robert Vaidya, Vineeta Badwaik, Amy Mermel Blaeser, Elizabeth Coughlin, Cassie Elloyan, Jennifer Hsieh, Candace Holtzman, Meghan Solem, Ofelia Klompas, Michael Antimicrob Steward Healthc Epidemiol Covid-19 Group Name: CDC Prevention Epicenters Program Background: Reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests are the reference standard for diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection, but false positives can occur and viral RNA may persist for weeks-to-months following recovery. Isolating such patients increases pressure on limited hospital resources and may impede care. Therefore, we quantified the percentage of patients who tested positive by RT-PCR yet were unlikely to be infectious and could be released from isolation. Methods: We prospectively identified all adults hospitalized at Brigham and Women’s Hospital (Boston, MA) who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR (primarily Hologic Panther Fusion or Cepheid Xpert platforms) between December 24, 2020, and January 24, 2021. Each case was assessed by infection control staff for possible discontinuation of isolation using an algorithm that incorporated the patient’s prior history of COVID-19, current symptoms, RT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) values, repeat RT-PCR testing at least 24 hours later, and SARS-CoV-2 serologies (Figure 1). Results: Overall, 246 hospitalized patients (median age, 66 years [interquartile range, 50–74]; 131 [53.3%] male) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR during the study period. Of these, 201 (81.7%) were deemed new diagnoses of active disease on the basis of low Ct values and/or progressive symptoms. Moreover, 44 patients (17.9%) were deemed noninfectious: 35 (14.2%) had prior known resolved infections (n = 21) or unknown prior infection but positive serology (n = 14), high Ct values on initial testing, and negative or stably high Ct values on repeat testing. Also, 5 (2.0%) had recent infection but >10 days had passed since symptom onset and they were clinically improving. In addition, 4 (1.6%) results were deemed false positives based on lack of symptoms and at least 1 negative repeat RT-PCR test (Figure 2). One patient was asymptomatic with Ct value <35 but was discharged before further testing could be obtained. Among the 44 noninfectious patients, isolation was discontinued a median of 3 days (IQR, 2–4) after the first positive test. We did not identify any healthcare worker infections attributable to early discontinuation of isolation in these patients. Conclusions: During the winter COVID-19 second surge in Massachusetts, nearly 1 in 5 hospitalized patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR were deemed noninfectious and eligible for discontinuation of precautions. Most of these cases were consistent with residual RNA from prior known or undiagnosed infections. Active assessments of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests by infection control practitioners using clinical data, Ct values, repeat tests, and serologies can safely validate the release many patients from isolation and thereby conserve resources and facilitate patient care. Funding: No Disclosures: None Cambridge University Press 2021-07-29 /pmc/articles/PMC9551591/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ash.2021.15 Text en © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Covid-19
Rhee, Chanu
Baker, Meghan
Kanjilal, Sanjat
Tucker, Robert
Vaidya, Vineeta
Badwaik, Amy
Mermel Blaeser, Elizabeth
Coughlin, Cassie
Elloyan, Jennifer
Hsieh, Candace
Holtzman, Meghan
Solem, Ofelia
Klompas, Michael
Does Every Patient with a Positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Test Require Isolation? A Prospective Analysis
title Does Every Patient with a Positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Test Require Isolation? A Prospective Analysis
title_full Does Every Patient with a Positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Test Require Isolation? A Prospective Analysis
title_fullStr Does Every Patient with a Positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Test Require Isolation? A Prospective Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Does Every Patient with a Positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Test Require Isolation? A Prospective Analysis
title_short Does Every Patient with a Positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Test Require Isolation? A Prospective Analysis
title_sort does every patient with a positive sars-cov-2 rt-pcr test require isolation? a prospective analysis
topic Covid-19
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9551591/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ash.2021.15
work_keys_str_mv AT rheechanu doeseverypatientwithapositivesarscov2rtpcrtestrequireisolationaprospectiveanalysis
AT bakermeghan doeseverypatientwithapositivesarscov2rtpcrtestrequireisolationaprospectiveanalysis
AT kanjilalsanjat doeseverypatientwithapositivesarscov2rtpcrtestrequireisolationaprospectiveanalysis
AT tuckerrobert doeseverypatientwithapositivesarscov2rtpcrtestrequireisolationaprospectiveanalysis
AT vaidyavineeta doeseverypatientwithapositivesarscov2rtpcrtestrequireisolationaprospectiveanalysis
AT badwaikamy doeseverypatientwithapositivesarscov2rtpcrtestrequireisolationaprospectiveanalysis
AT mermelblaeserelizabeth doeseverypatientwithapositivesarscov2rtpcrtestrequireisolationaprospectiveanalysis
AT coughlincassie doeseverypatientwithapositivesarscov2rtpcrtestrequireisolationaprospectiveanalysis
AT elloyanjennifer doeseverypatientwithapositivesarscov2rtpcrtestrequireisolationaprospectiveanalysis
AT hsiehcandace doeseverypatientwithapositivesarscov2rtpcrtestrequireisolationaprospectiveanalysis
AT holtzmanmeghan doeseverypatientwithapositivesarscov2rtpcrtestrequireisolationaprospectiveanalysis
AT solemofelia doeseverypatientwithapositivesarscov2rtpcrtestrequireisolationaprospectiveanalysis
AT klompasmichael doeseverypatientwithapositivesarscov2rtpcrtestrequireisolationaprospectiveanalysis