Evaluating the effectiveness of rapid SARS-CoV-2 genome sequencing in supporting infection control teams: the COG-UK hospital-onset COVID-19 infection study

Author:

Stirrup OliverORCID,Blackstone James,Mapp Fiona,MacNeil Alyson,Panca Monica,Holmes Alison,Machin Nicholas,Shin Gee Yen,Mahungu Tabitha,Saeed Kordo,Saluja Tranprit,Taha Yusri,Mahida Nikunj,Pope Cassie,Chawla Anu,Cutino-Moguel Maria-Teresa,Tamuri Asif,Williams Rachel,Darby Alistair,Robertson David,Flaviani Flavia,Nastouli Eleni,Robson Samuel,Smith Darren,Loose MatthewORCID,Laing Kenneth,Monahan Irene,Kele Beatrix,Haldenby Sam,George Ryan,Bashton Matthew,Witney Adam,Byott Matthew,Coll Francesc,Chapman Michael,Peacock Sharon,Hughes JosephORCID,Nebbia Gaia,Partridge David G,Parker Matthew,Price JamesORCID,Peters Christine,Roy Sunando,Snell Luke B,de Silva Thushan I,Thomson Emma,Flowers Paul,Copas Andrew,Breuer Judith, ,

Abstract

AbstractIntroductionViral sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 has been used for outbreak investigation, but there is limited evidence supporting routine use for infection prevention and control (IPC) within hospital settings.MethodsWe conducted a prospective non-randomised trial of sequencing at 14 acute UK hospital trusts. Sites each had a 4-week baseline data-collection period, followed by intervention periods comprising 8 weeks of ‘rapid’ (<48h) and 4 weeks of ‘longer-turnaround’ (5-10 day) sequencing using a sequence reporting tool (SRT). Data were collected on all hospital onset COVID-19 infections (HOCIs; detected ≥48h from admission). The impact of the sequencing intervention on IPC knowledge and actions, and on incidence of probable/definite hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) was evaluated.ResultsA total of 2170 HOCI cases were recorded from October 2020-April 2021, with sequence reports returned for 650/1320 (49.2%) during intervention phases. We did not detect a statistically significant change in weekly incidence of HAIs in longer-turnaround (IRR 1.60, 95%CI 0.85-3.01; P=0.14) or rapid (0.85, 0.48-1.50; P=0.54) intervention phases compared to baseline phase. However, IPC practice was changed in 7.8% and 7.4% of all HOCI cases in rapid and longer-turnaround phases, respectively, and 17.2% and 11.6% of cases where the report was returned. In a per-protocol sensitivity analysis there was an impact on IPC actions in 20.7% of HOCI cases when the SRT report was returned within 5 days.ConclusionWhile we did not demonstrate a direct impact of sequencing on the incidence of nosocomial transmission, our results suggest that sequencing can inform IPC response to HOCIs, particularly when returned within 5 days.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3