ABSTRACT
Background This study aimed to assess the contribution of asymptomatic and presymptomatic residents and staff in SARS-CoV-2 transmission during a large outbreak in a Dutch nursing home.
Methods Observational study in a 185-bed nursing home with two consecutive testing strategies: testing of symptomatic cases only, and weekly facility-wide testing of staff and residents regardless of symptoms. Nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal testing with RT-PCR for SARs-CoV-2 was conducted with a standardized symptom assessment. Positive samples with a cycle threshold (CT) value below 32 were selected for sequencing.
Results 185 residents and 244 staff participated. Sequencing identified one cluster. In the symptom-based test strategy period 3/39 residents were presymptomatic versus 38/74 residents in the period of weekly facility-wide testing (p-value<0.001). In total, 51/59 (91.1%) of SARS-CoV-2 positive staff was symptomatic, with no difference between both testing strategies (p-value 0.763). Loss of smell and taste, sore throat, headache or myalga was hardly reported in residents compared to staff (p-value <0.001). Median Ct-value of presymptomatic residents was 21.3, which did not differ from symptomatic (20.8) or asymptomatic (20.5) residents (p-value 0.624).
Conclusions The frequency of a/presymptomatic residents compared to staff suggests that a/presymptomatic residents could be unrecognized symptomatic cases. However, symptomatic and presymptomatic/unrecognized symptomatic residents both have the same potential for viral shedding. The high prevalence symptomatic staff found in facility-wide testing suggests that staff has difficulty attributing their symptoms to possible SARS-CoV-2 infection. Weekly testing was an effective strategy for early identification of SARS-Cov-2 cases, resulting in fast isolation and mitigation of this outbreak.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (Dutch: RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Medical Ethics Committee of the VU University Medical Centre in Amsterdam reviewed the study protocol and confirmed that the study does not fall under the scope of the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
FUNDING This work was supported by the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (Dutch: RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The authors declare that they do not have any associations that might pose a conflict of interest.
Data Availability
Data is available upon request.
