The Seroprevalence and Protective Effect of SARS-COV-2 Antibodies in Scottish Healthcare Workers

H. Abo-Leyah, S. Gallant, D. Cassidy, Y. H. Giam, J. Killick, B. Marshall, G. Hay, T. Pembridge, R. Strachan, N. Gallant, B. Parcell, C. Snowden, E. Hothersall, J. George, E. Furrie, J. Chalmers
{"title":"The Seroprevalence and Protective Effect of SARS-COV-2 Antibodies in Scottish Healthcare Workers","authors":"H. Abo-Leyah, S. Gallant, D. Cassidy, Y. H. Giam, J. Killick, B. Marshall, G. Hay, T. Pembridge, R. Strachan, N. Gallant, B. Parcell, C. Snowden, E. Hothersall, J. George, E. Furrie, J. Chalmers","doi":"10.1164/AJRCCM-CONFERENCE.2021.203.1_MEETINGABSTRACTS.A1280","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"RATIONALE: Healthcare workers (HCW) are believed to be at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The extent of that increased risk compared to the general population and the groups most at risk have not been extensively studied. It is also not known to what extent the natural production of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 is protective against re-infection. Methods: A prospective observational study of health and social care workers in NHS Tayside (Scotland, UK) from May to September 2020. The Siemens SARS-CoV-2 total antibody assay was used to establish seroprevalence in this cohort. Patients provided clinical information including demographics and workplace. Controls, matched for age and sex to the general Tayside population, were studied for comparison. New laboratory confirmed infections post September 2020 were recorded to determine if the presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies protect against re-infection. Results: A total of 2063 health and social care workers were recruited for this study. The participants were predominantly female (81.7%) and 95.5% were white. 300 healthcare workers had a positive antibody test (14.5%). 11 out of 231 control sera tested positive (4.8%). Healthcare workers therefore had an increased likelihood of a positive test (Odds ratio 3.4 95% CI 1.85-6.16, p<0.0001). Dentists, healthcare assistants and porters were the job roles most likely to test positive. Those working in front-line roles with COVID-19 patients were more likely to test positive (17.4% vs. 13.4%, p=0.02). 97.3% of patients who had previously tested positive for SARSCoV-2 by RT-PCR had positive antibodies, compared to 10.9% of individuals with a symptomatic illness who had tested negative. 18.7% of HCW had an asymptomatic infection. Anosmia was the symptom most associated with the presence of detectable antibodies. There were 38 new infections with SARS-CoV-2 in HCW who were previously antibody negative and 1 symptomatic RT-PCR positive re-infection in a HCW who had detectable antibodies 76 days prior to re-infection. The presence of antibodies was 85% protective against re-infection with SARS-CoV-2 (HR 0.15, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.35, p=0.03). Conclusion: In this study, healthcare workers were three times more likely to test positive for SARS-CoV-2 than the general population. Almost all of the infected individuals developed an antibody response and this was 85% effective in protecting against reinfection with SARS-CoV-2.","PeriodicalId":320542,"journal":{"name":"TP3. TP003 COVID-19 INFECTIONS, MECHANISMS, AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TP3. TP003 COVID-19 INFECTIONS, MECHANISMS, AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1164/AJRCCM-CONFERENCE.2021.203.1_MEETINGABSTRACTS.A1280","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

RATIONALE: Healthcare workers (HCW) are believed to be at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The extent of that increased risk compared to the general population and the groups most at risk have not been extensively studied. It is also not known to what extent the natural production of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 is protective against re-infection. Methods: A prospective observational study of health and social care workers in NHS Tayside (Scotland, UK) from May to September 2020. The Siemens SARS-CoV-2 total antibody assay was used to establish seroprevalence in this cohort. Patients provided clinical information including demographics and workplace. Controls, matched for age and sex to the general Tayside population, were studied for comparison. New laboratory confirmed infections post September 2020 were recorded to determine if the presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies protect against re-infection. Results: A total of 2063 health and social care workers were recruited for this study. The participants were predominantly female (81.7%) and 95.5% were white. 300 healthcare workers had a positive antibody test (14.5%). 11 out of 231 control sera tested positive (4.8%). Healthcare workers therefore had an increased likelihood of a positive test (Odds ratio 3.4 95% CI 1.85-6.16, p<0.0001). Dentists, healthcare assistants and porters were the job roles most likely to test positive. Those working in front-line roles with COVID-19 patients were more likely to test positive (17.4% vs. 13.4%, p=0.02). 97.3% of patients who had previously tested positive for SARSCoV-2 by RT-PCR had positive antibodies, compared to 10.9% of individuals with a symptomatic illness who had tested negative. 18.7% of HCW had an asymptomatic infection. Anosmia was the symptom most associated with the presence of detectable antibodies. There were 38 new infections with SARS-CoV-2 in HCW who were previously antibody negative and 1 symptomatic RT-PCR positive re-infection in a HCW who had detectable antibodies 76 days prior to re-infection. The presence of antibodies was 85% protective against re-infection with SARS-CoV-2 (HR 0.15, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.35, p=0.03). Conclusion: In this study, healthcare workers were three times more likely to test positive for SARS-CoV-2 than the general population. Almost all of the infected individuals developed an antibody response and this was 85% effective in protecting against reinfection with SARS-CoV-2.
苏格兰医护人员SARS-COV-2抗体的血清阳性率及保护作用
理由:据信卫生保健工作者(HCW)感染SARS-CoV-2的风险增加。与一般人群和风险最高的人群相比,这种风险增加的程度尚未得到广泛研究。目前还不清楚自然产生的SARS-CoV-2抗体在多大程度上可以防止再次感染。方法:2020年5月至9月对英国苏格兰泰赛德NHS的卫生和社会护理工作者进行前瞻性观察研究。采用Siemens SARS-CoV-2总抗体测定法确定该队列的血清阳性率。患者提供了包括人口统计和工作场所在内的临床信息。对照,年龄和性别匹配一般泰赛德人口,进行研究比较。记录2020年9月后新的实验室确诊感染,以确定SARS-CoV-2抗体的存在是否可以防止再次感染。结果:本研究共招募了2063名卫生和社会护理工作者。参与者主要是女性(81.7%),95.5%是白人。300名医护人员抗体检测阳性(14.5%)。231份对照血清中有11份检测呈阳性(4.8%)。因此,医护人员检测阳性的可能性增加(优势比3.4,95% CI 1.85-6.16, p<0.0001)。牙医、医疗助理和搬运工是最有可能检测呈阳性的工作角色。与新冠肺炎患者在一线工作的人更容易检测出阳性(17.4%比13.4%,p=0.02)。先前通过RT-PCR检测SARSCoV-2阳性的患者中有97.3%抗体阳性,而有症状的疾病患者中有10.9%抗体阴性。18.7%的HCW无症状感染。嗅觉缺失是与可检测抗体存在最相关的症状。先前抗体阴性的HCW中有38例新发SARS-CoV-2感染,在再次感染前76天可检测到抗体的HCW中有1例症状性RT-PCR阳性再感染。抗体的存在对SARS-CoV-2再次感染有85%的保护作用(HR 0.15, 95% CI 0.06 ~ 0.35, p=0.03)。结论:在本研究中,医护人员的SARS-CoV-2检测阳性的可能性是一般人群的三倍。几乎所有受感染的个体都产生了抗体反应,这在防止SARS-CoV-2再次感染方面有85%的有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信