Should healthcare workers with SARS-CoV-2 household exposures work? A Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Importance Due to high community transmission of the Omicron variant, healthcare workers (HCWs) have been increasingly reporting household exposures to confirmed COVID-19 cases. Quebec (Canada) provincial guidelines required to quarantine these HCWs. Facing the risk of staffing shortages, our hospital decided to allow them to work. Objective To evaluate the risk for HCWs, who were household contacts, to become positive for COVID-19 by RT-PCR and evaluate the risk of nosocomial COVID-19 transmission. Design Cohort of HCWs with a history of household exposure to a confirmed case of COVID-19. Setting CHU Sainte-Justine, a tertiary care mother and child center in Montreal (QC) Canada Participants Consecutive HCWs who contacted OHS between December 20, 2021 and January 17, 2022 for a history of household exposure to COVID-19. Exposure Confirmed case of COVID-19 in the household Main outcome and measures The main outcome was a positive RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2. Outbreaks and nosocomial cases were identified through daily analysis of COVID-19 cases, by sector and part of the usual Infection Prevention and Control surveillance process. Results Overall, 237 of 475 (50%) HCWs who declared a known household contact with a confirmed COVID-19 case remained negative. Of those who became positive, 196 (82.4%) were positive upon initial testing and were quarantined. Only 42 (15%) of 279 HCWs who were allowed to work became positive, a median of 4 days after the initial test. The absence of symptoms at initial evaluation (OR 3.8, 95% CI 2.5-5.7) and having received a third vaccine dose more than 7 days before (OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.3 – 2.8) were associated with an increased odds of remaining negative. There was no outbreak among HCWs and no nosocomial transmission to patients from a HCW that was allowed to work, while a known household contact. Conclusion and relevance Measures taken to protect the health care environment from COVID-19 must be cautiously balanced with the risk of staffing shortage. Allowing vaccinated asymptomatic HCWs who are known household contacts of confirmed COVID-19 cases to work is likely a safe alternative, when staff shortage is anticipated.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".