About: Abstract Background Many papers considered the exposure risk to COVID-19 of general population and healthcare workers (HW). However, no available papers discussed the risk of exposure of family members (FM) of HWs. Aims The present study collected the data of SARS-COV-2 positive FM of HWs using serological rapid IgM/IgG tests (SRT) compared with positive HWs at SRT and serological quantitative IgG test (SQT). Methods The study was conducted from 2nd to 31th May 2020. 38 HWs were tested by both SRT and SQT; 81 FMs were screened using SRT. Descriptive statistical analyses were used to summarize the data. Results Of the 38 HWs, 2 (5,3%) showed IgG line at SRT, confirmed by SQT. 32 HWs decided self-isolation from the family during SARS-COV-2 spreading. Out of 81 FMs, 26 (32,1%) were found IgG positive at SRT. 11 (42%) of them had symptoms typical for COVID-19 in the study period. In two families, the HWs were the only negative case. Conclusions General population’s exposure to COVID-19 was less controlled than HWs’ one. HWs experienced lower infection’s rate than their families and did not represented a risk of transmission for relatives.

Facets (new session)
Description
Metadata
Settings
- owl:sameAs
- Inference Rule:

About: Abstract Background Many papers considered the exposure risk to COVID-19 of general population and healthcare workers (HW). However, no available papers discussed the risk of exposure of family members (FM) of HWs. Aims The present study collected the data of SARS-COV-2 positive FM of HWs using serological rapid IgM/IgG tests (SRT) compared with positive HWs at SRT and serological quantitative IgG test (SQT). Methods The study was conducted from 2nd to 31th May 2020. 38 HWs were tested by both SRT and SQT; 81 FMs were screened using SRT. Descriptive statistical analyses were used to summarize the data. Results Of the 38 HWs, 2 (5,3%) showed IgG line at SRT, confirmed by SQT. 32 HWs decided self-isolation from the family during SARS-COV-2 spreading. Out of 81 FMs, 26 (32,1%) were found IgG positive at SRT. 11 (42%) of them had symptoms typical for COVID-19 in the study period. In two families, the HWs were the only negative case. Conclusions General population’s exposure to COVID-19 was less controlled than HWs’ one. HWs experienced lower infection’s rate than their families and did not represented a risk of transmission for relatives. Goto Sponge NotDistinct Permalink

An Entity of Type : fabio:Abstract, within Data Space : covidontheweb.inria.fr associated with source document(s)

Attributes	Values
type	abstract
value	Abstract Background Many papers considered the exposure risk to COVID-19 of general population and healthcare workers (HW). However, no available papers discussed the risk of exposure of family members (FM) of HWs. Aims The present study collected the data of SARS-COV-2 positive FM of HWs using serological rapid IgM/IgG tests (SRT) compared with positive HWs at SRT and serological quantitative IgG test (SQT). Methods The study was conducted from 2nd to 31th May 2020. 38 HWs were tested by both SRT and SQT; 81 FMs were screened using SRT. Descriptive statistical analyses were used to summarize the data. Results Of the 38 HWs, 2 (5,3%) showed IgG line at SRT, confirmed by SQT. 32 HWs decided self-isolation from the family during SARS-COV-2 spreading. Out of 81 FMs, 26 (32,1%) were found IgG positive at SRT. 11 (42%) of them had symptoms typical for COVID-19 in the study period. In two families, the HWs were the only negative case. Conclusions General population’s exposure to COVID-19 was less controlled than HWs’ one. HWs experienced lower infection’s rate than their families and did not represented a risk of transmission for relatives.
Subject	Zoonoses Epidemiology Infectious diseases COVID-19 Society Family Health care occupations Sarbecovirus Chiroptera-borne diseases Infraspecific virus taxa
part of	Covid-19 exposure risk for family members of healthcare workers: an observational study
is abstract of	Covid-19 exposure risk for family members of healthcare workers: an observational study
is hasSource of	covid:ann/target/e405257e561e3a37674f9ee9002dcff214d00839 covid:ann/target/2fd16e1b7216efb74909c702dd2b3603b87b5bdf covid:ann/target/3a844a5cd1d31f0c81ef65796a8e53248cab0d8a covid:ann/target/2a658d8b0a3ecc5edaccf9cb8027bb25a2180081 covid:ann/target/a0375aa88613f1fc6aa518222d937a19325e1c8f covid:ann/target/28c0a1c6994eb7649a5c473df7cce9b6ce3c586b covid:ann/target/ff482536841bf6b84712c82c682d98265dc74dae covid:ann/target/13a3f0cdc15d29ef5a87a097bfcdc5ed60e8794c covid:ann/target/ef359178c21d371495fc614bb65dff4c0968833a covid:ann/target/abe92712544093f4aa74a1512d32a51b2eaa33a6 covid:ann/target/4566f7b32b9fa75e62e356193d62f7b223993567

Faceted Search & Find service v1.13.91 as of Mar 24 2020

Alternative Linked Data Documents: Sponger | ODE Content Formats:

RDF

ODATA

Microdata

About

OpenLink Virtuoso version 07.20.3229 as of Jul 10 2020, on Linux (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu), Single-Server Edition (94 GB total memory)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2025 OpenLink Software