Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34226231›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in healthcare workers of a Swiss tertiary care centre at the end of the first wave: a cross-sectional study.

Sylvain Meylan, Urania Dafni, Frederic Lamoth, Zoi Tsourti, Michael A Lobritz, Jean Regina, Philippe Bressin, Laurence Senn, Bruno Grandbastien, Cyril Andre and 10 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Association between household exposure and cycle threshold in COVID-19 infected health care workers.Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England) · 2021
    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

20 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Sylvain MeylanInfectious Diseases Service, Internal Medicine, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland sylvain.meylan@chuv.ch.ORCID 0000-0001-6319-2423
Urania DafniLaboratory of Biostatistics, School of Health Sciences, Frontier Science Foundation-Hellas and University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Frederic LamothInfectious Diseases Service, Internal Medicine, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Zoi TsourtiLaboratory of Biostatistics, School of Health Sciences, Frontier Science Foundation-Hellas and University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Michael A LobritzRoche Biomedical, Basel, Switzerland.
Jean ReginaInfectious Diseases Service, Internal Medicine, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Philippe BressinOccupational Health Service, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Laurence SennService of Hospital Preventive Medicine, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Bruno GrandbastienService of Hospital Preventive Medicine, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Cyril AndreImmunology Service, Department of Medicine, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Craig FenwickInstitute of Microbiology, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Valerie D'AcremontDepartment of Ambulatory Care and Community Medicine, Centre for Primary Care and Public Health (Unisanté), Lausanne, Switzerland.
Antony CroxattoInstitute of Microbiology, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Isabelle GuilleretClinical Trial Unit, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Gilbert GreubInstitute of Microbiology, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Oriol ManuelInfectious Diseases Service, Internal Medicine, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Thierry CalandraInfectious Diseases Service, Internal Medicine, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Giuseppe PantaleoImmunology Service, Department of Medicine, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Catherine Lazor-BlanchetOccupational Health Service, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
COVID-19 MISS group
University of Lausanne · CHNational and Kapodistrian University of Athens · GRCentre universitaire de médecine générale et santé publique, Lausanne · CHRoche (Switzerland) · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the SARS-CoV-2 transmission in healthcare workers (HCWs) using seroprevalence as a surrogate marker of infection in our tertiary care centre according to exposure.

designSeroprevalence cross-sectional study.

settingSingle centre at the end of the first COVID-19 wave in Lausanne, Switzerland.

participants1874 of 4074 responders randomly selected (46% response rate), stratified by work category among the 13 474 (13.9%) HCWs.

main outcome measuresEvaluation of SARS-CoV-2 serostatus paired with a questionnaire of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition risk factors internal and external to the workplace.

resultsThe overall SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence rate among HCWs was 10.0% (95% CI 8.7% to 11.5%). HCWs with daily patient contact did not experience increased rates of seropositivity relative to those without (10.3% vs 9.6%, respectively, p=0.64). HCWs with direct contact with patients with COVID-19 or working in COVID-19 units did not experience increased seropositivity rates relative to their counterparts (10.4% vs 9.8%, p=0.69 and 10.6% vs 9.9%, p=0.69, respectively). However, specific locations of contact with patients irrespective of COVID-19 status-in patient rooms or reception areas-did correlate with increased rates of seropositivity (11.9% vs 7.5%, p=0.019 and 14.3% vs 9.2%, p=0.025, respectively). In contrast, HCWs with a suspected or proven SARS-CoV-2-infected household contact had significantly higher seropositivity rates than those without such contacts (19.0% vs 8.7%, p<0.001 and 42.1% vs 9.4%, p<0.001, respectively). Finally, consistent use of a mask on public transportation correlated with decreased seroprevalence (5.3% for mask users vs 11.2% for intermittent or no mask use, p=0.030).

conclusionsThe overall seroprevalence was 10% without significant differences in seroprevalence between HCWs exposed to patients with COVID-19 and HCWs not exposed. This suggests that, once fully in place, protective measures limited SARS-CoV-2 occupational acquisition within the hospital environment. SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion among HCWs was associated primarily with community risk factors, particularly household transmission.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2Cross-Sectional StudiesHealth PersonnelHumansSeroepidemiologic StudiesSwitzerlandTertiary Care CentersCOVID-19epidemiologyinfection controloccupational & industrial medicinepreventive medicinevirology

Identifiers

PMID34226231
PMCPMC8260307
OpenAlexW3179640068

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.