Occupational Post-exposure Prophylaxis after Blood and Body Fluids Exposure among Healthcare Workers in Siriraj Hospital

Objective: The present study aimed to describe the characteristics of occupational exposure to bloodborne pathogens and occupational post-exposure prophylaxis (oPEP) in Siriraj Hospital. Materials and Methods: A descriptive, retrospective cohort study was performed of healthcare workers (HCWs) who had experienced occupational injury in Siriraj Hospital in 2015. Data were extracted from the hospital database. Results: In total, 389 injury episodes were described; of which 293 (75.3%) involved female staff, and 112 (28.8%) involved nurses. The highest number of accidents (112, 28.8%) occurred in the operation room. Needlestick injury (210, 54%) was the most common injury. Overall, 94 (24.1%) HCWs received oPEP; 67 (71.2%) events carried a risk of HIV acquisition, and in 27 (28.7%) cases, the patients decided to take oPEP. Common oPEP regimens were TDF/XTC/LPV/r (33, 35.1%) and TDF/XTC/RPV (32, 34%). Nearly half of the HCWs who received an LPV/r-based oPEP regimen had gastrointestinal intolerance and switched to second-line regimens. Among those who received oPEP, 52 (77.6%) returned at 1 month and 26 (38.8%) returned at 3 months after exposure for a serology test. There was no seroconversion in this cohort. Conclusion: Occupational exposure to bloodborne pathogens is a common and increasing risk of infection among HCWs. oPEP with effective antiretroviral drugs within 72 hours after exposure is the main strategy for HIV prevention. The selection of an oPEP regimen with less toxic pills should be considered for efficacy, safety, and adherence. Interventions such as a tracking system or message reminders should be implemented to improve the follow-up rate among HCWs

A Risk Prediction Model and Risk Score of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Following Healthcare-Related Exposure

Hospital workers are at high risk of contact with COVID-19 patients. Currently, there is no evidence-based, comprehensive risk assessment tool for healthcare-related exposure; so, we aimed to identify independent factors related to COVID-19 infection in hospital workers following workplace exposure(s) and construct a risk prediction model. We analyzed the COVID-19 contact tracing dataset from 15 July to 31 December 2021 using multiple logistic regression analysis, considering exposure details, demographics, and vaccination history. Of 7146 included exposures to confirmed COVID-19 patients, 229 (4.2%) had subsequently tested positive via RT-PCR. Independent risk factors for a positive test were having symptoms (adjusted odds ratio 4.94, 95%CI 3.83–6.39), participating in an unprotected aerosol-generating procedure (aOR 2.87, 1.66–4.96), duration of exposure >15 min (aOR 2.52, 1.82–3.49), personnel who did not wear a mask (aOR 2.49, 1.75–3.54), exposure to aerodigestive secretion (aOR 1.5, 1.03–2.17), index patient not wearing a mask (aOR 1.44, 1.01–2.07), and exposure distance <1 m without eye protection (aOR 1.39, 1.02–1.89). High-potency vaccines and high levels of education protected against infection. A risk model and scoring system with good discrimination power were built. Having symptoms, unprotected exposure, lower education level, and receiving low potency vaccines increased the risk of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 following healthcare-related exposure events