Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34157807›Full record

ArticleSingapore medical journal2022

Healthcare workers as a sentinel surveillance population in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Indumathi Venkatachalam, Edwin Philip Conceicao, May Kyawt Aung, Molly Kue Bien How, Liang En Wee, Jean Xiang Ying Sim, Ban Hock Tan, Moi Lin Ling

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Singapore medical journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 62% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Indumathi VenkatachalamDepartment of Infection Prevention and Epidemiology; Department of Infectious Diseases, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
Edwin Philip ConceicaoDepartment of Infection Prevention and Epidemiology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
May Kyawt AungDepartment of Infection Prevention and Epidemiology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
Molly Kue Bien HowDepartment of Infection Prevention and Epidemiology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
Liang En WeeSingHealth Infectious Diseases Residency Programme, SingHealth, Singapore.
Jean Xiang Ying SimDepartment of Infection Prevention and Epidemiology; Department of Infectious Diseases, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
Ban Hock TanDepartment of Clinical Quality and Performance Management, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
Moi Lin LingDepartment of Infection Prevention and Epidemiology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
Singapore General Hospital · SGSingHealth · SG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Healthcare workers (HCWs) are a critical resource in the effort to control the COVID-19 pandemic. They are also a sentinel surveillance population whose clinical status reflects the effectiveness of the hospital's infection prevention measures in the pandemic. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study conducted in Singapore General Hospital (SGH), a 1,822-bed tertiary hospital. Participants were all HCWs working in SGH during the study period. HCW protection measures included clinical workflows and personal protective equipment developed and adapted to minimise the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission. HCW monitoring comprised staff contact logs in high-risk locations, twice-daily temperature monitoring, assessment of HCWs with acute respiratory illnesses (ARIs) in the staff clinic and, in the event of an exposure, extensive contact tracing, detailed risk assessment and risk-based interventions. HCW surveillance utilised monitoring data and ARI presentations and outcomes. Results: In the ten-week period between 6 January 2020 and 16 March 2020, 333 (17.1%) of 1,946 HCWs at risk of occupational COVID-19 presented with ARI. 32 (9.6%) screened negative for SARS-CoV-2 from throat swabs. Five other HCWs developed COVID-19 attributed to non-clinical exposures. From the nine COVID-19 exposure episodes investigated, 189 HCW contacts were identified, of whom 68 (36.2%) were placed on quarantine and remained well. Conclusion: Early in an emerging infectious disease outbreak, close monitoring of frontline HCWs is essential in ascertaining the effectiveness of infection prevention measures. HCWs are at risk of community disease acquisition and should be monitored and managed to prevent onward transmission.

Indexed as

COVID-19Health PersonnelHumansInfection ControlInfectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-ProfessionalPandemicsRetrospective StudiesSARS-CoV-2Sentinel SurveillanceCOVID-19healthcare worker surveillanceoutbreak

Identifiers

PMID34157807
PMCPMC9728314
OpenAlexW3176811644

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.