The authors assessed transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and evaluated the adequacy of symptom-based screening in a skilled nursing facility. More than half of residents with positive test results were ...asymptomatic at the time of testing. Infection-control strategies focused solely on symptomatic residents were not sufficient to prevent transmission.
On February 28, 2020, public health officials in the Seattle area were informed of a Covid-19 infection at a long-term care facility. An investigation identified 167 infected persons associated with ...the facility, including residents, health care personnel, and visitors; more than a third of the 101 residents identified died.
Older adults are susceptible to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes as a consequence of their age and, in some cases, underlying health conditions (1). A COVID-19 outbreak in a ...long-term care skilled nursing facility (SNF) in King County, Washington that was first identified on February 28, 2020, highlighted the potential for rapid spread among residents of these types of facilities (2). On March 1, a health care provider at a second long-term care skilled nursing facility (facility A) in King County, Washington, had a positive test result for SARS-CoV-2, the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19, after working while symptomatic on February 26 and 28. By March 6, seven residents of this second facility were symptomatic and had positive test results for SARS-CoV-2. On March 13, CDC performed symptom assessments and SARS-CoV-2 testing for 76 (93%) of the 82 facility A residents to evaluate the utility of symptom screening for identification of COVID-19 in SNF residents. Residents were categorized as asymptomatic or symptomatic at the time of testing, based on the absence or presence of fever, cough, shortness of breath, or other symptoms on the day of testing or during the preceding 14 days. Among 23 (30%) residents with positive test results, 10 (43%) had symptoms on the date of testing, and 13 (57%) were asymptomatic. Seven days after testing, 10 of these 13 previously asymptomatic residents had developed symptoms and were recategorized as presymptomatic at the time of testing. The reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing cycle threshold (Ct) values indicated large quantities of viral RNA in asymptomatic, presymptomatic, and symptomatic residents, suggesting the potential for transmission regardless of symptoms. Symptom-based screening in SNFs could fail to identify approximately half of residents with COVID-19. Long-term care facilities should take proactive steps to prevent introduction of SARS-CoV-2 (3). Once a confirmed case is identified in an SNF, all residents should be placed on isolation precautions if possible (3), with considerations for extended use or reuse of personal protective equipment (PPE) as needed (4).
What is already known about this topic? The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalization, and death is higher in unvaccinated than vaccinated persons, and the incidence rate ratios are related ...to vaccine effectiveness. What is added by this report? Across 13 U.S. jurisdictions, incidence rate ratios for hospitalization and death changed relatively little after the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant reached predominance, suggesting high, continued vaccine effectiveness against severe COVID-19. Case IRRs decreased, suggesting reduced vaccine effectiveness for prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infections. What are the implications for public health practice? Getting vaccinated protects against severe illness from COVID-19, including the Delta variant. Monitoring COVID-19 incidence by vaccination status might provide early signals of potential changes in vaccine effectiveness that can be confirmed through robust controlled studies.
On February 28, 2020, a case of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) was identified in a woman resident of a long-term care skilled nursing facility (facility A) in King County, Washington.* Epidemiologic ...investigation of facility A identified 129 cases of COVID-19 associated with facility A, including 81 of the residents, 34 staff members, and 14 visitors; 23 persons died. Limitations in effective infection control and prevention and staff members working in multiple facilities contributed to intra- and interfacility spread. COVID-19 can spread rapidly in long-term residential care facilities, and persons with chronic underlying medical conditions are at greater risk for COVID-19-associated severe disease and death. Long-term care facilities should take proactive steps to protect the health of residents and preserve the health care workforce by identifying and excluding potentially infected staff members and visitors, ensuring early recognition of potentially infected patients, and implementing appropriate infection control measures.
Abstract Purpose We sought to identify attitudes and knowledge of adolescent vaccination recommendations for tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis (Tdap); quadrivalent meningococcal conjugate ...(MCV4); and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines among Hispanic, Somali, and Ethiopian/Eritrean communities in King County, Washington. Methods In-person surveys of Hispanic, Somali, and Ethiopian/Eritrean adolescents (n = 45) and parents of adolescents (n = 157), and three focus groups with mothers of 11- to 18-year-olds were conducted to assess knowledge, attitudes, and barriers related to recommended adolescent vaccines. Bivariate analyses of parent survey responses were performed to evaluate possible differences between ethnic groups (chi-square test and Fisher exact test where possible). Findings were used to develop (1) culture-specific written brochures for community members, which addressed misperceptions about adolescent immunizations and related diseases, and (2) a presentation highlighting specific messages for health care providers (HCPs) in the target communities. HCPs were surveyed after delivery of the presentation (n = 20). Results We identified barriers to adolescent immunization including: parents' and adolescents' limited awareness of, and misperceptions regarding, recommended adolescent vaccines and vaccine preventable diseases; lack of HCP recommendations for vaccination; and inability to access health information in native languages. Awareness of tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis, quadrivalent meningococcal conjugate, and human papillomavirus vaccines varied by vaccine and ethnic group. Lack of knowledge of adolescent vaccination recommendations was the main reason given by parents that their adolescents had not been vaccinated. Most parents in the focus groups identified doctors as a trusted source of health information and reported that they would vaccinate their teens if their doctor recommended it. All the surveyed HCPs routinely recommend adolescent vaccines at well-child visits, 55% at acute visits, and 35% at injury visits. Eighty percent reported that they would be more likely to recommend HPV vaccine after our on-site presentation. Conclusions A strong recommendation from the physician is a critical factor influencing parents' decision to vaccinate, even when hesitancy exists. Other factors (such as personal experiences with these diseases and religious and cultural beliefs) also influence parents' decisions regarding vaccination. Knowledge of beliefs, misperceptions, and concerns can help inform strategies to improve adolescent vaccine uptake among specific ethnic populations, including the availability of culturally tailored, translated information. Additionally, HCPs may benefit from guidance on communicating with ethnic populations to support meaningful dialogue with families about the risks and benefits of adolescent vaccines.
After a laboratory-confirmed case of Mycobacterium haemophilum skin infection in a recently tattooed immunocompetent adult was reported, we investigated to identify the infection source and ...additional cases. We found 1 laboratory-confirmed and 1 suspected case among immunocompetent adults who had been tattooed at the same parlor.
Abstract
Background
Data on tecovirimat effectiveness for human mpox are limited. We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional interview-based study to identify associations between tecovirimat ...treatment and the mpox clinical course.
Methods
Using public health surveillance data from King County, Washington, we recruited and interviewed persons diagnosed with mpox during May–October 2022. We calculated descriptive statistics on demographics, vaccination status, comorbidities, and symptoms including 3 self-reported dates (symptom onset, first date of symptom improvement, and illness resolution). We used multivariable linear regression, stratified by illness severity, to evaluate the association of tecovirimat treatment with time to symptom improvement and time to illness resolution. We compared individuals who did not receive tecovirimat to participants who started tecovirimat early (≤5 days from symptom onset) and late (>5 days and ≤28 days from symptom onset) in their illness.
Results
Of 465 individuals diagnosed with mpox, 115 (25%) participated in this study. Eighty participants (70%) received tecovirimat and 43 (37%) initiated tecovirimat early. Sixty-eight (59%) reported severe symptoms during their illness, including proctitis (n = 38 33%), rectal bleeding (n = 27 24%), or severe pain (n = 24 21%). In the multivariable analysis, early tecovirimat was associated with shorter time to symptom improvement (−5.5 days, P = .04) among participants with severe illness but not among those with nonsevere illness (0.9 day, P = .66). Early tecovirimat was not associated with faster illness resolution, regardless of severity.
Conclusions
Our small study suggests that early tecovirimat initiation may hasten subjective symptomatic improvement in people with severe mpox. Larger randomized trials are needed to evaluate this finding.
We interviewed 115 persons with mpox who did and did not receive tecovirimat, and performed a multivariable regression analysis. Initiating tecovirimat within 5 days of symptom onset appeared to be associated with faster improvement of symptoms in patients with severe mpox.
The objectives were to estimate 2009 pandemic influenza A (pH1N1) vaccination coverage among pregnant women and identify associated factors.
A multimodal survey was distributed to 5341 women who gave ...birth between November 1, 2009, and January 31, 2010, identified by hospitals in King County, Washington State, with maternity services (n=11).
Of 4205 respondents, 3233 (76.9%) reported that they had received pH1N1 vaccine during pregnancy or within 2 weeks after delivery. Women whose prenatal care provider recommended vaccine had a higher vaccination prevalence than women whose provider did not (81.5% vs 29.6%; adjusted prevalence ratio=2.1; 95% CI=1.72, 2.58). Vaccination prevalence was lower among women who had received prenatal care from a midwife only compared with women who had received care from other providers (62.9% vs 78.8%; adjusted prevalence ratio=0.89; 95% CI=0.83, 0.96).
Among pregnant women in King County, pH1N1 vaccination coverage was high. To improve coverage during nonpandemic seasons, influenza vaccine should be recommended routinely by prenatal care providers and vaccination provided where prenatal care is received. Barriers to midwives providing vaccination recommendations to patients should be explored.
PDF
