Post-exposure testing at healthcare facilities with SARS-CoV-2 transmission: A rapid review.

IF 0.6 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Journal of Public Health in Africa Pub Date : 2025-02-23 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.4102/jphia.v16i2.623
Emmanuel E Effa, Okokon Ita, Joshua Mwankon, Funmi Siyanbade, Francis Iwomi, Eleanor Ochodo, Gemma Villanueva, Martin M Meremikwu
{"title":"Post-exposure testing at healthcare facilities with SARS-CoV-2 transmission: A rapid review.","authors":"Emmanuel E Effa, Okokon Ita, Joshua Mwankon, Funmi Siyanbade, Francis Iwomi, Eleanor Ochodo, Gemma Villanueva, Martin M Meremikwu","doi":"10.4102/jphia.v16i2.623","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Post-exposure severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing following health facility outbreaks may control the spread of infection.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study aimed to assess the impact of testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection on health outcomes during healthcare facility outbreaks.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>This review included studies conducted at skilled nursing facilities, a cancer centre, and a geriatric psychiatric facility.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We followed the methods for conducting rapid systematic reviews, searched databases from December 2019 to August 2022, assessed the risk of bias using the modified Newcastle Ottawa scale, and graded the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. We pooled the prevalence, mortality, and hospitalisation results as appropriate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 3055 articles from database search, no study was eligible for inclusion as outlined in the protocol. However, eight non-comparative reports (case series) in skilled nursing facilities were included. The pooled prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among residents of care homes and patients were 38% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 25% - 51%; 5 studies, 2044 participants; <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 94%, very low certainty evidence) and was 12% (95% CI = 6% - 19%; 5 studies, 2312 participants; <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 94%, very low certainty evidence) for exposed healthcare workers. The pooled mortality estimate and hospitalisation rate were 17% and 24%, respectively, (very low certainty evidence).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is no identified evidence for or against testing of people in healthcare facilities where there is ongoing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection.</p><p><strong>Contribution: </strong>The evaluation of the effectiveness of testing strategies during SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks need baseline and follow-up data from well-designed before and after studies appropriate for the setting.</p>","PeriodicalId":44723,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Health in Africa","volume":"16 2","pages":"623"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11905177/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Health in Africa","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/jphia.v16i2.623","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Post-exposure severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing following health facility outbreaks may control the spread of infection.

Aim: This study aimed to assess the impact of testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection on health outcomes during healthcare facility outbreaks.

Setting: This review included studies conducted at skilled nursing facilities, a cancer centre, and a geriatric psychiatric facility.

Methods: We followed the methods for conducting rapid systematic reviews, searched databases from December 2019 to August 2022, assessed the risk of bias using the modified Newcastle Ottawa scale, and graded the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. We pooled the prevalence, mortality, and hospitalisation results as appropriate.

Results: Of the 3055 articles from database search, no study was eligible for inclusion as outlined in the protocol. However, eight non-comparative reports (case series) in skilled nursing facilities were included. The pooled prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among residents of care homes and patients were 38% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 25% - 51%; 5 studies, 2044 participants; I 2 = 94%, very low certainty evidence) and was 12% (95% CI = 6% - 19%; 5 studies, 2312 participants; I 2 = 94%, very low certainty evidence) for exposed healthcare workers. The pooled mortality estimate and hospitalisation rate were 17% and 24%, respectively, (very low certainty evidence).

Conclusion: There is no identified evidence for or against testing of people in healthcare facilities where there is ongoing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Contribution: The evaluation of the effectiveness of testing strategies during SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks need baseline and follow-up data from well-designed before and after studies appropriate for the setting.

在SARS-CoV-2传播的医疗机构进行接触后检测:快速回顾
背景:在卫生机构暴发严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2 (SARS-CoV-2)暴露后检测可控制感染的传播。目的:本研究旨在评估SARS-CoV-2感染检测对医疗机构疫情期间健康结果的影响。环境:本综述包括在专业护理机构、癌症中心和老年精神病院进行的研究。方法:我们采用快速系统评价的方法,检索2019年12月至2022年8月的数据库,使用改进的纽卡斯尔渥太华量表评估偏倚风险,并使用推荐、评估、发展和评估分级(GRADE)方法对证据的确定性进行分级。我们酌情汇总了患病率、死亡率和住院结果。结果:在数据库检索的3055篇文章中,没有研究符合方案中概述的纳入条件。然而,8个非比较报告(病例系列)在熟练的护理机构被纳入。养老院居民和患者中SARS-CoV-2感染的总流行率为38%(95%置信区间[CI] = 25% - 51%;5项研究,2044名受试者;i2 = 94%,极低确定性证据)和12% (95% CI = 6% - 19%;5项研究,2312名受试者;(2 = 94%,极低确定性证据)。合并死亡率估计值和住院率分别为17%和24%(极低确定性证据)。结论:没有明确的证据支持或反对在正在传播SARS-CoV-2感染的医疗机构中对人员进行检测。贡献:评估SARS-CoV-2疫情期间检测策略的有效性需要来自设计良好、适合该环境的前后研究的基线和随访数据。
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
Journal of Public Health in Africa
Journal of Public Health in Africa PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
82
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Public Health in Africa (JPHiA) is a peer-reviewed, academic journal that focuses on health issues in the African continent. The journal editors seek high quality original articles on public health related issues, reviews, comments and more. The aim of the journal is to move public health discourse from the background to the forefront. The success of Africa’s struggle against disease depends on public health approaches.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信