Development and assessment of a hospital-led, community-partnering COVID-19 testing and prevention program for homeless and congregate living services in Toronto, Canada: a descriptive feasibility study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2 in shelters and congregate living settings are a major concern because of overcrowding and because resident populations are often at high risk for infection. The objective of this study was to describe the development, implementation and assessment of the COVID-19 Community Response Team, a program that enabled Women's College Hospital in Toronto, Ontario, to work in partnership with shelters and congregate living settings to prevent outbreaks. METHODS: The Community Response Team, associated with Women's College Hospital, an academic ambulatory hospital, carried out mobile testing for SARS-CoV-2, supported outbreak management and prevention through ongoing onsite partnership with medical staff, and conducted infection prevention and control (IPC) training to shelter staff. We conducted a descriptive analysis of the sites supported by the program between Apr. 20, 2020, and Aug. 15, 2020. We also assessed the program's feasibility (number of completed needs assessments, mobile testing events and IPC training events, and median time from referral to service delivery), adoption (number of nasopharyngeal swabs, number of pre- and post-program outbreaks and IPC uptake) and acceptability or satisfaction. RESULTS: The Community Response Team supported 32 sites. Of those, 30 completed an intake needs assessment, 24 completed mobile testing for SARS-CoV-2 and 15 received IPC support. Mobile testing resulted in the collection of 1566 nasopharyngeal swabs, of which 64 were positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Three sites had confirmed outbreaks. The median time from referral to needs assessment was 4 days (interquartile range [IQR] 1-13 days), and the median time to the testing day was 9 days (IQR 1-49 days). The median time from referral to IPC staff training was 14 days (IQR 4-79 days), and 100% of respondents reported being pleased or very pleased with the training. During the follow-up period, the 3 facilities with outbreaks overcame those outbreaks. Three sites supported by the Community Response Team had further single cases, but no site reported subsequent or secondary outbreaks. INTERPRETATION: The Community Response Team program led to the transfer of IPC knowledge, allowed for the management and prevention of SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks, and demonstrated feasibility. Collaborative supports between hospitals and the community housing sector may serve as models for ongoing system integration beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».