TY - JOUR T1 - Snapshot PCR Surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 in Hospital Staff in England JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2020.06.14.20128876 SP - 2020.06.14.20128876 AU - Colin Brown AU - Kathryn Clare AU - Meera Chand AU - Julie Andrews AU - Cressida Auckland AU - Sarah Beshir AU - Saher Choudhry AU - Kerrie Davies AU - Jane Freeman AU - Andrew Gallini AU - Rachel Moores AU - Trupti Patel AU - Gosia Poznalska AU - Alison Rodger AU - Stella Roberts AU - Christopher Rooney AU - Mark Wilcox AU - Simon Warren AU - Joanna Ellis AU - Robin Gopal AU - Jake Dunning AU - Maria Zambon AU - Susan Hopkins Y1 - 2020/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/06/16/2020.06.14.20128876.abstract N2 - Background Significant nosocomial transmission of SARS-CoV-2 has been demonstrated. Understanding the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 carriage amongst HCWs at work is necessary to inform the development of HCW screening programmes to control nosocomial spread.Methods Cross-sectional ‘snapshot’ survey from April-May 2020; HCWs recruited from six UK hospitals. Participants self-completed a health questionnaire and underwent a combined viral nose and throat swab, tested by Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) for SARS-CoV-2 with viral culture on majority of positive samples.Findings Point prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 carriage across the sites was 2·0% (23/1152 participants), median cycle threshold value 35·70 (IQR:32·42-37·57). 17 were previously symptomatic, two currently symptomatic (isolated anosmia and sore throat); the remainder declared no prior or current symptoms. Symptoms in the past month were associated with threefold increased odds of testing positive (aOR 3·46, 95%CI 1·38-8·67; p=0·008). SARS-CoV-2 virus was isolated from only one (5%) of nineteen cultured samples. A large proportion (39%) of participants reported symptoms in the past month.Interpretation The point-prevalence is similar to previous estimates for HCWs in April 2020, though a magnitude higher than in the general population. Based upon interpretation of symptom history and testing results including viral culture, the majority of those testing positive were unlikely to be infectious at time of sampling. Development of screening programmes must balance the potential to identify additional cases based upon likely prevalence, expanding the symptoms list to encourage HCW testing, with resource implications and risks of excluding those unlikely to be infectious with positive tests.Funding Public Health England.Evidence before this study A search of PubMed was performed on 29th April 2020 to identify other major works in this field, using the search terms (“novel coronavirus” OR “SARS-CoV-2” OR “COVID-19” OR “coronavirus”) AND (“workers” OR “staff”) AND (“testing” OR “screening”) from 31st December 2019 onwards with no other limits. This search was updated on 10th May 2020, and in addition reference lists were checked and pre-print papers were shared with us through professional networks. We found three papers commenting on prevalence of asymptomatic/pauci-symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in healthcare workers, with prevalence estimates ranging from 1·1 to 8%. One of these studies explored previous symptoms in depth, though this was based upon a retrospective questionnaire and thus subject to recall bias. None of these studies explored exposures to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, commented on whether participants had been tested prior to the start of the study, or broke down results by staff role. Only one reported on estimated viral load (as inferred from cycle threshold [Ct] value), and none reported attempting viral culture.Added value of this study This is the first published study of which we are aware that has been conducted across multiple sites in England and is therefore potentially more representative of the overall prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infectivity amongst HCWs in the workplace. We explored symptoms in the preceding month in more depth than previous studies and in addition asked about previous test results and various exposures, also not commented on in other studies. Additionally, we attempted to isolate virus from some PCR-positive samples to look for evidence of infectious virus.Implications of all the available evidence Authors of previous studies have proposed that screening asymptomatic HCWs for SARS-CoV-2 RNA may be beneficial, in addition to screening symptomatic HCWs. Our findings suggest that when prevalence of COVID-19 is very low, routine and repeated screening would be unlikely to have significant value, especially given the majority of participants testing positive in this study were unlikely to be infectious. However, in situations where prevalence levels are high in a particular population or setting, for example in a hospital outbreak, widening the case definition, or screening all HCWs irrespective of symptoms, may be of benefit.Competing Interest StatementCB, KC, MC, JA, CA, SB, SC, KD, AG, RM, TP, GP, AR, SR, CR, MW, SW, JE, RG, JD, MZ, SH report no competing interests. JF reports grants and other support from Merck and Summit PLC outside the submitted work.Clinical TrialThe study was funded and undertaken by PHE as part of pandemic surveillanceFunding StatementThe study was funded and undertaken by PHE as part of pandemic surveillance. The corresponding author had full access to all study data and takes final responsibility for submission.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ethics approval (NR0202) was obtained from the PHE Research Support and Governance Office prior to commencement and for all protocol changes.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesData available on request ER -