10 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
SARS-CoV-2 PCR and antibody testing for an entire rural community: methods and feasibility of high-throughput testing procedures.
BackgroundEarly in the pandemic, inadequate SARS-CoV-2 testing limited understanding of transmission. Chief among barriers to large-scale testing was unknown feasibility, particularly in non-urban areas. Our objective was to report methods of high-volume, comprehensive SARS-CoV-2 testing, offering one model to augment disease surveillance in a rural community.MethodsA community-university partnership created an operational site used to test most residents of Bolinas, California regardless of symptoms in 4 days (April 20th - April 23rd, 2020). Prior to testing, key preparatory elements included community mobilization, pre-registration, volunteer recruitment, and data management. On day of testing, participants were directed to a testing lane after site entry. An administrator viewed the lane-specific queue and pre-prepared test kits, linked to participants' records. Medical personnel performed sample collection, which included finger prick with blood collection to run laboratory-based antibody testing and respiratory specimen collection for polymerase chain reaction (PCR).ResultsUsing this 4-lane model, 1,840 participants were tested in 4 days. A median of 57 participants (IQR 47-67) were tested hourly. The fewest participants were tested on day 1 (n = 338 participants), an intentionally lower volume day, increasing to n = 571 participants on day 4. The number of testing teams was also increased to two per lane to allow simultaneous testing of multiple participants on days 2-4. Consistent staffing on all days helped optimize proficiency, and strong community partnership was essential from planning through execution.ConclusionsHigh-volume ascertainment of SARS-CoV-2 prevalence by PCR and antibody testing was feasible when conducted in a community-led, drive-through model in a non-urban area
Recommended from our members
The COVID-19 Symptom to Isolation Cascade in a Latinx Community: A Call to Action.
BackgroundRapid coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnosis and isolation of infectious persons are critical to stopping forward transmission, and the care cascade framework can identify gaps in the COVID-19 response.MethodsWe described a COVID-19 symptom to isolation cascade and barriers among symptomatic persons who tested polymerase chain reaction positive for severe acute respiratory disease coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) at a low-barrier testing site serving a low-income Latinx community in San Francisco. Steps in the cascade are defined as days from symptom onset to test, test to result, and result to counseling on self-isolation. We examined SARS-CoV-2 cycle threshold (Ct) values to assess the likelihood of infectiousness on the day of testing and during missed isolation days.ResultsAmong 145 persons, 97% were Latinx and 81% had an income of <$50 000. The median time from symptom onset to isolation (interquartile range [IQR]) was 7 (5-10) days, leaving a median (IQR) of 3 (0-6) days of isolation. Eighty-three percent had moderate to high levels of virus (Ct <33), but by disclosure 23% were out of their isolation period. The longest intervals were symptom onset to test (median [IQR], 4 [2-9] days) and test to results notification (median [IQR], 3 [2-4] days). Access to a test site was the most common barrier to testing, and food and income loss was the most common barrier to isolation.ConclusionsOver half of the 10-day isolation period passed by the time of disclosure, and over a fifth of people were likely outside the window of infectiousness by the time they received results. Improvements in test access and turnaround time, plus support for isolation, are needed for epidemic control of SARS-CoV-2 in highly impacted communities
Recommended from our members
The COVID-19 Symptom to Isolation Cascade in a Latinx Community: A Call to Action.
BackgroundRapid coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnosis and isolation of infectious persons are critical to stopping forward transmission, and the care cascade framework can identify gaps in the COVID-19 response.MethodsWe described a COVID-19 symptom to isolation cascade and barriers among symptomatic persons who tested polymerase chain reaction positive for severe acute respiratory disease coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) at a low-barrier testing site serving a low-income Latinx community in San Francisco. Steps in the cascade are defined as days from symptom onset to test, test to result, and result to counseling on self-isolation. We examined SARS-CoV-2 cycle threshold (Ct) values to assess the likelihood of infectiousness on the day of testing and during missed isolation days.ResultsAmong 145 persons, 97% were Latinx and 81% had an income of <$50 000. The median time from symptom onset to isolation (interquartile range [IQR]) was 7 (5-10) days, leaving a median (IQR) of 3 (0-6) days of isolation. Eighty-three percent had moderate to high levels of virus (Ct <33), but by disclosure 23% were out of their isolation period. The longest intervals were symptom onset to test (median [IQR], 4 [2-9] days) and test to results notification (median [IQR], 3 [2-4] days). Access to a test site was the most common barrier to testing, and food and income loss was the most common barrier to isolation.ConclusionsOver half of the 10-day isolation period passed by the time of disclosure, and over a fifth of people were likely outside the window of infectiousness by the time they received results. Improvements in test access and turnaround time, plus support for isolation, are needed for epidemic control of SARS-CoV-2 in highly impacted communities
Recommended from our members
Community Transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Disproportionately Affects the Latinx Population During Shelter-in-Place in San Francisco.
BackgroundThere is an urgent need to understand the dynamics and risk factors driving ongoing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission during shelter-in-place mandates.MethodsWe offered SARS-CoV-2 reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and antibody (Abbott ARCHITECT IgG) testing, regardless of symptoms, to all residents (aged ≥4 years) and workers in a San Francisco census tract (population: 5174) at outdoor, community-mobilized events over 4 days. We estimated SARS-CoV-2 point prevalence (PCR positive) and cumulative incidence (antibody or PCR positive) in the census tract and evaluated risk factors for recent (PCR positive/antibody negative) vs prior infection (antibody positive/PCR negative). SARS-CoV-2 genome recovery and phylogenetics were used to measure viral strain diversity, establish viral lineages present, and estimate number of introductions.ResultsWe tested 3953 persons (40% Latinx; 41% White; 9% Asian/Pacific Islander; and 2% Black). Overall, 2.1% (83/3871) tested PCR positive: 95% were Latinx and 52% were asymptomatic when tested; 1.7% of census tract residents and 6.0% of workers (non-census tract residents) were PCR positive. Among 2598 tract residents, estimated point prevalence of PCR positives was 2.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2%-3.8%): 3.9% (95% CI, 2.0%-6.4%) among Latinx persons vs 0.2% (95% CI, .0-.4%) among non-Latinx persons. Estimated cumulative incidence among residents was 6.1% (95% CI, 4.0%-8.6%). Prior infections were 67% Latinx, 16% White, and 17% other ethnicities. Among recent infections, 96% were Latinx. Risk factors for recent infection were Latinx ethnicity, inability to shelter in place and maintain income, frontline service work, unemployment, and household income <$50 000/year. Five SARS-CoV-2 phylogenetic lineages were detected.ConclusionsSARS-CoV-2 infections from diverse lineages continued circulating among low-income, Latinx persons unable to work from home and maintain income during San Francisco's shelter-in-place ordinance
Recommended from our members
Community Transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Disproportionately Affects the Latinx Population During Shelter-in-Place in San Francisco.
BackgroundThere is an urgent need to understand the dynamics and risk factors driving ongoing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission during shelter-in-place mandates.MethodsWe offered SARS-CoV-2 reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and antibody (Abbott ARCHITECT IgG) testing, regardless of symptoms, to all residents (aged ≥4 years) and workers in a San Francisco census tract (population: 5174) at outdoor, community-mobilized events over 4 days. We estimated SARS-CoV-2 point prevalence (PCR positive) and cumulative incidence (antibody or PCR positive) in the census tract and evaluated risk factors for recent (PCR positive/antibody negative) vs prior infection (antibody positive/PCR negative). SARS-CoV-2 genome recovery and phylogenetics were used to measure viral strain diversity, establish viral lineages present, and estimate number of introductions.ResultsWe tested 3953 persons (40% Latinx; 41% White; 9% Asian/Pacific Islander; and 2% Black). Overall, 2.1% (83/3871) tested PCR positive: 95% were Latinx and 52% were asymptomatic when tested; 1.7% of census tract residents and 6.0% of workers (non-census tract residents) were PCR positive. Among 2598 tract residents, estimated point prevalence of PCR positives was 2.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2%-3.8%): 3.9% (95% CI, 2.0%-6.4%) among Latinx persons vs 0.2% (95% CI, .0-.4%) among non-Latinx persons. Estimated cumulative incidence among residents was 6.1% (95% CI, 4.0%-8.6%). Prior infections were 67% Latinx, 16% White, and 17% other ethnicities. Among recent infections, 96% were Latinx. Risk factors for recent infection were Latinx ethnicity, inability to shelter in place and maintain income, frontline service work, unemployment, and household income <$50 000/year. Five SARS-CoV-2 phylogenetic lineages were detected.ConclusionsSARS-CoV-2 infections from diverse lineages continued circulating among low-income, Latinx persons unable to work from home and maintain income during San Francisco's shelter-in-place ordinance
Anti-nucleocapsid antibody levels and pulmonary comorbid conditions are linked to post-COVID-19 syndrome.
BACKGROUNDProlonged symptoms after SARS-CoV-2 infection are well documented. However, which factors influence development of long-term symptoms, how symptoms vary across ethnic groups, and whether long-term symptoms correlate with biomarkers are points that remain elusive.METHODSAdult SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription PCR-positive (RT-PCR-positive) patients were recruited at Stanford from March 2020 to February 2021. Study participants were seen for in-person visits at diagnosis and every 1-3 months for up to 1 year after diagnosis; they completed symptom surveys and underwent blood draws and nasal swab collections at each visit.RESULTSOur cohort (n = 617) ranged from asymptomatic to critical COVID-19 infections. In total, 40% of participants reported at least 1 symptom associated with COVID-19 six months after diagnosis. Median time from diagnosis to first resolution of all symptoms was 44 days; median time from diagnosis to sustained symptom resolution with no recurring symptoms for 1 month or longer was 214 days. Anti-nucleocapsid IgG level in the first week after positive RT-PCR test and history of lung disease were associated with time to sustained symptom resolution. COVID-19 disease severity, ethnicity, age, sex, and remdesivir use did not affect time to sustained symptom resolution.CONCLUSIONWe found that all disease severities had a similar risk of developing post-COVID-19 syndrome in an ethnically diverse population. Comorbid lung disease and lower levels of initial IgG response to SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antigen were associated with longer symptom duration.TRIAL REGISTRATIONClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04373148.FUNDINGNIH UL1TR003142 CTSA grant, NIH U54CA260517 grant, NIEHS R21 ES03304901, Sean N Parker Center for Allergy and Asthma Research at Stanford University, Chan Zuckerberg Biohub, Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Sunshine Foundation, Crown Foundation, and Parker Foundation
Recommended from our members
Clinical features, diagnostics, and outcomes of patients presenting with acute respiratory illness: a comparison of patients with and without COVID-19.
BACKGROUND:Emerging data on the clinical presentation, diagnostics, and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 have largely been presented as case series. Few studies have compared these clinical features and outcomes of COVID-19 to other acute respiratory illnesses. METHODS:We examined all patients presenting to an emergency department in San Francisco, California between February 3 and March 31, 2020 with an acute respiratory illness who were tested for SARS-CoV-2. We determined COVID-19 status by PCR and metagenomic next generation sequencing (mNGS). We compared demographics, comorbidities, symptoms, vital signs, and laboratory results including viral diagnostics using PCR and mNGS. Among those hospitalized, we determined differences in treatment (antibiotics, antivirals, respiratory support) and outcomes (ICU admission, ICU interventions, acute respiratory distress syndrome, cardiac injury). FINDINGS:In a cohort of 316 patients, 33 (10%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2; 31 patients, all without COVID-19, tested positive for another respiratory virus (16%). Among patients with additional viral testing, no co-infections with SARS-CoV-2 were identified by PCR or mNGS. Patients with COVID-19 reported longer symptoms duration (median 7 vs. 3 days), and were more likely to report fever (82% vs. 44%), fatigue (85% vs. 50%), and myalgias (61% vs 27%); p<0.001 for all comparisons. Lymphopenia (55% vs 34%, p=0.018) and bilateral opacities on initial chest radiograph (55% vs. 24%, p=0.001) were more common in patients with COVID-19. Patients with COVID-19 were more often hospitalized (79% vs. 56%, p=0.014). Of 186 hospitalized patients, patients with COVID-19 had longer hospitalizations (median 10.7d vs. 4.7d, p<0.001) and were more likely to develop ARDS (23% vs. 3%, p<0.001). Most comorbidities, home medications, signs and symptoms, vital signs, laboratory results, treatment, and outcomes did not differ by COVID-19 status. INTERPRETATION:While we found differences in clinical features of COVID-19 compared to other acute respiratory illnesses, there was significant overlap in presentation and comorbidities. Patients with COVID-19 were more likely to be admitted to the hospital, have longer hospitalizations and develop ARDS, and were unlikely to have co-existent viral infections. These findings enhance understanding of the clinical characteristics of COVID-19 in comparison to other acute respiratory illnesses.  
Recommended from our members
Clinical features, diagnostics, and outcomes of patients presenting with acute respiratory illness: a comparison of patients with and without COVID-19.
BACKGROUND:Emerging data on the clinical presentation, diagnostics, and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 have largely been presented as case series. Few studies have compared these clinical features and outcomes of COVID-19 to other acute respiratory illnesses. METHODS:We examined all patients presenting to an emergency department in San Francisco, California between February 3 and March 31, 2020 with an acute respiratory illness who were tested for SARS-CoV-2. We determined COVID-19 status by PCR and metagenomic next generation sequencing (mNGS). We compared demographics, comorbidities, symptoms, vital signs, and laboratory results including viral diagnostics using PCR and mNGS. Among those hospitalized, we determined differences in treatment (antibiotics, antivirals, respiratory support) and outcomes (ICU admission, ICU interventions, acute respiratory distress syndrome, cardiac injury). FINDINGS:In a cohort of 316 patients, 33 (10%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2; 31 patients, all without COVID-19, tested positive for another respiratory virus (16%). Among patients with additional viral testing, no co-infections with SARS-CoV-2 were identified by PCR or mNGS. Patients with COVID-19 reported longer symptoms duration (median 7 vs. 3 days), and were more likely to report fever (82% vs. 44%), fatigue (85% vs. 50%), and myalgias (61% vs 27%); p<0.001 for all comparisons. Lymphopenia (55% vs 34%, p=0.018) and bilateral opacities on initial chest radiograph (55% vs. 24%, p=0.001) were more common in patients with COVID-19. Patients with COVID-19 were more often hospitalized (79% vs. 56%, p=0.014). Of 186 hospitalized patients, patients with COVID-19 had longer hospitalizations (median 10.7d vs. 4.7d, p<0.001) and were more likely to develop ARDS (23% vs. 3%, p<0.001). Most comorbidities, home medications, signs and symptoms, vital signs, laboratory results, treatment, and outcomes did not differ by COVID-19 status. INTERPRETATION:While we found differences in clinical features of COVID-19 compared to other acute respiratory illnesses, there was significant overlap in presentation and comorbidities. Patients with COVID-19 were more likely to be admitted to the hospital, have longer hospitalizations and develop ARDS, and were unlikely to have co-existent viral infections. These findings enhance understanding of the clinical characteristics of COVID-19 in comparison to other acute respiratory illnesses.  
Clinical features, diagnostics, and outcomes of patients presenting with acute respiratory illness: A retrospective cohort study of patients with and without COVID-19
BackgroundMost data on the clinical presentation, diagnostics, and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 have been presented as case series without comparison to patients with other acute respiratory illnesses.MethodsWe examined emergency department patients between February 3 and March 31, 2020 with an acute respiratory illness who were tested for SARS-CoV-2. We determined COVID-19 status by PCR and metagenomic next generation sequencing (mNGS). We compared clinical presentation, diagnostics, treatment, and outcomes.FindingsAmong 316 patients, 33 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2; 31 without COVID-19 tested positive for another respiratory virus. Among patients with additional viral testing (27/33), no SARS-CoV-2 co-infections were identified. Compared to those who tested negative, patients with COVID-19 reported longer symptoms duration (median 7d vs. 3d, p < 0.001). Patients with COVID-19 were more often hospitalized (79% vs. 56%, p = 0.014). When hospitalized, patients with COVID-19 had longer hospitalizations (median 10.7d vs. 4.7d, p < 0.001) and more often developed ARDS (23% vs. 3%, p < 0.001). Most comorbidities, medications, symptoms, vital signs, laboratories, treatments, and outcomes did not differ by COVID-19 status.InterpretationWhile we found differences in clinical features of COVID-19 compared to other acute respiratory illnesses, there was significant overlap in presentation and comorbidities. Patients with COVID-19 were more likely to be admitted to the hospital, have longer hospitalizations and develop ARDS, and were unlikely to have co-existent viral infections.FundingNational Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Heart Lung Blood Institute, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Chan Zuckerberg Biohub, Chan Zuckerberg Initiative