Search

Background: Hospital infection control policies protect patients and healthcare workers (HCWs) and limit the spread of pathogens, but adherence to COVID-19 guidance varies. We examined hospital HCWs' enactment of social distancing and use of personal protective equipment (PPE) during the COVID-19 pandemic, factors influencing these behaviours, and acceptability and feasibility of strategies to increase social distancing., Methods: An online, cross-sectional survey (n = 86) and semi-structured interviews (n = 22) with HCWs in two English hospitals during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (May-December 2020). The Capability, Opportunity, Motivation (COM-B) model of behaviour change underpinned survey and topic guide questions. Spearman Rho correlations examined associations between COM-B domains and behaviours. Interviews were analysed using inductive and deductive thematic analysis. Potential strategies to improve social distancing were selected using the Behaviour Change Wheel and discussed in a stakeholder workshop (n = 8 participants)., Results: Social distancing enactment was low, with 85% of participants reporting very frequently or always being in close contact with others in communal areas. PPE use was high (88% very frequently or always using PPE in typical working day). Social distancing was associated with Physical Opportunity (e.g., size of physical space), Psychological Capability (e.g., clarity of guidance), and Social Opportunity (e.g., support from managers). Use of PPE was associated with Psychological Capability (e.g., training), Physical Opportunity (e.g., availability), Social Opportunity (e.g., impact on interactions with patients), and Reflective Motivation (e.g., beliefs that PPE is effective). Local champions and team competition were viewed as feasible strategies to improve social distancing., Conclusions: It is valuable to understand and compare the drivers of individual protective behaviours; when faced with the same level of perceived threat, PPE use was high whereas social distancing was rarely enacted. Identified influences represent targets for intervention strategies in response to future infectious disease outbreaks., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Meyer et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has caused an unprecedented strain on healthcare systems worldwide, including the United Kingdom National Health Service (NHS). We conducted an observational cohort study of SARS-CoV-2 infection in frontline healthcare workers (HCW) working in an acute NHS Trust during the first wave of the pandemic, to answer emerging questions surrounding SARS-CoV-2 infection, diagnosis, transmission and control., Methods: Using self-collected weekly saliva and twice weekly combined oropharyngeal/nasopharyngeal (OP/NP) samples, in addition to self-assessed symptom profiles and isolation behaviours, we retrospectively compared SARS-CoV-2 detection by RT-qPCR of saliva and OP/NP samples. We report the association with contemporaneous symptoms and isolation behaviour., Results: Over a 12-week period from 30th March 2020, 40·0% (n = 34/85, 95% confidence interval 31·3-51·8%) HCW had evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection by surveillance OP/NP swab and/or saliva sample. Symptoms were reported by 47·1% (n = 40) and self-isolation by 25·9% (n = 22) participants. Only 44.1% (n = 15/34) participants with SARS-CoV-2 infection reported any symptoms within 14 days of a positive result and only 29·4% (n = 10/34) reported self-isolation periods. Overall agreement between paired saliva and OP/NP swabs was 93·4% (n = 211/226 pairs) but rates of positive concordance were low. In paired samples with at least one positive result, 35·0% (n = 7/20) were positive exclusively by OP/NP swab, 40·0% (n = 8/20) exclusively by saliva and in only 25·0% (n = 5/20) were the OP/NP and saliva result both positive., Conclusions: HCW are a potential source of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in hospitals and symptom screening will identify the minority of infections. Without routine asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 screening, it is likely that HCW with SARS-CoV-2 infection would continue to attend work. Saliva, in addition to OP/NP swab testing, facilitated ascertainment of symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections. Combined saliva and OP/NP swab sampling would improve detection of SARS-CoV-2 for surveillance and is recommended for a high sensitivity strategy., Competing Interests: EB and BDG hold Pfizer stock as Pfizer employees. No other relationships or activities exist that could appear to have influenced the submitted work. Sources of grant funding are stated (see Financial Disclosures) and affiliations given for each author., (Copyright: © 2023 Walker et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

BackgroundAlthough recent epidemiological data suggest that pneumococci may contribute to the risk of SARS-CoV-2 disease, cases of coinfection with Streptococcus pneumoniae in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during hospitalization have been reported infrequently. This apparent contradiction may be explained by interactions of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and pneumococci in the upper airway, resulting in the escape of SARS-CoV-2 from protective host immune responses.MethodsHere, we investigated the relationship of these 2 respiratory pathogens in 2 distinct cohorts of health care workers with asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection identified by systematic screening and patients with moderate to severe disease who presented to the hospital. We assessed the effect of coinfection on host antibody, cellular, and inflammatory responses to the virus.ResultsIn both cohorts, pneumococcal colonization was associated with diminished antiviral immune responses, which primarily affected mucosal IgA levels among individuals with mild or asymptomatic infection and cellular memory responses in infected patients.ConclusionOur findings suggest that S. pneumoniae impair host immunity to SARS-CoV-2 and raise the question of whether pneumococcal carriage also enables immune escape of other respiratory viruses and facilitates reinfection.Trial registrationISRCTN89159899 (FASTER study) and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03502291 (LAIV study).

Competing Interests: TW is supported by grants from the Wellcome Trust (209075/Z/17/Z and Joint Global Health Trials, MR/V004832/1), the Medical Research Council (MRC), Department for International Development, the Academy of Medical Sciences, and the Swedish Health Research Council. LEC is supported by grants from the European and Developing Countries Clinical Trial Partnership (EDCTP, DRIA2014-309), the MRC, the TB REACH Initiative of the Stop TB Partnership (STBP/TBREACH//GSA/W5-07), the Wellcome Trust (contract pending), and the Health Protection Research Unit for Emerging and Zoonotic Infections. PM is funded by the Wellcome Trust (206575/Z/17/Z). KAM works on projects funded with UK aid from the UK Government. SBS is supported by the National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit on Lung Health and TB in Africa at the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine (16/136/35) and the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office Research Programme Consortium Leaving no-one behind, transforming gendered pathways to health for TB (LIGHT PO8614). All authors declare no competing interests.