In this prospective cohort of 1,012 Swiss hospital employees, 3 different assays were used to screen serum for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Seropositivity was 1%; the positive predictive values of the lateral-flow immunoassay were 64% (IgG) and 13% (IgM). History of fever and myalgia most effectively differentiated seropositive and seronegative participants.

We performed a cross-sectional survey of infection preventionists in 60 US community hospitals between April 22 and May 8, 2020. Several differences in hospital preparedness for SARS-CoV-2 emerged with respect to personal protective equipment conservation strategies, protocols related to testing, universal masking, and restarting elective procedures.

The incubation period of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is rarely >14 days. We report a patient with hypogammaglobulinemia who developed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with a confirmed incubation period of at least 21 days. These findings raise concern for a prolonged presymptomatic transmission phase, necessitating a longer quarantine duration in this patient population.

The current pandemic is defined by the transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that can lead to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). How is SARS-CoV-2 transmitted? In this review, we use a global lens to examine the sociological contexts that are potentially and systematically involved in high rates of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, including lack of personal protective equipment, population density and confinement. Altogether, this review provides an in-depth conspectus of the current literature regarding how SARS-CoV-2 disproportionately impacts many minority communities. By contextualising and disambiguating transmission risks that are particularly prominent for disadvantaged populations, this review can assist public health efforts throughout and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.

Forecasting the epidemics of the diseases is very valuable in planning and supplying resources effectively. This study aims to estimate the epidemiological trends of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) prevalence and mortality using the advanced α-Sutte Indicator, and its prediction accuracy level was compared with the most frequently adopted autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) method. Time-series analysis was performed based on the total confirmed cases and deaths of COVID-19 in the world, Brazil, Peru, Canada and Chile between 27 February 2020 and 30 June 2020. By comparing the prediction reliability indices, including the root mean square error, mean absolute error, mean error rate, mean absolute percentage error and root mean square percentage error, the α-Sutte Indicator was found to produce lower forecasting error rates than the ARIMA model in all data apart from the prevalence testing set globally. The α-Sutte Indicator can be recommended as a useful tool to nowcast and forecast the COVID-19 prevalence and mortality of these regions except for the prevalence around the globe in the near future, which will help policymakers to plan and prepare health resources effectively. Also, the findings of our study may have managerial implications for the outbreak in other countries.

Public health emergencies can arise from a wide range of causes, one of which includes outbreaks of contagion. The world has continued to be threatened by various infectious outbreaks of different types that have global consequences. While all pandemics are unique in their level of transmission and breadth of impact, the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic is the deepest global crisis of the 21st century, which has affected nearly every country globally. Yet, going forward, there will be a continued need for global health security resources to protect people around the world against increasing infectious disease outbreaks frequency and intensity. Pandemic response policies and processes all need to be trusted for effective and ethical pandemic response. As the world can learn during the past few years about frequent infectious disease outbreaks, (these) diseases respect no borders, and, therefore, our spirit of solidarity must respect no borders in our efforts to stop the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and be better prepared to respond effectively to a health crisis in the future.

Strengthening health systems and maintaining essential service delivery during health emergencies response is critical for early detection and diagnosis, prompt treatment, and effective control of pandemics, including the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Health information systems (HIS) developed during recent Ebola outbreaks in West Africa and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) provided opportunities to collect, analyze, and distribute data to inform both day-to-day and long-term policy decisions on outbreak preparedness. As COVID-19 continues to sweep across the globe, HIS and related technological advancements remain vital for effective and sustained data sharing, contact tracing, mapping and monitoring, community risk sensitization and engagement, preventive education, and timely preparedness and response activities. In reviewing literature of how HIS could have further supported mitigation of these Ebola outbreaks and the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, 3 key areas were identified: governance and coordination, health systems infrastructure and resources, and community engagement. In this concept study, we outline scalable HIS lessons from recent Ebola outbreaks and early COVID-19 responses along these 3 domains, synthesizing recommendations to offer clear, evidence-based approaches on how to leverage HIS to strengthen the current pandemic response and foster community health systems resilience moving forward.

We all now know that the novel coronavirus is anything but a common cold. The pandemic has created many new obligations for all of us, several of which come with serious costs to our quality of life. But in some cases, the guidance and the law are open to a degree of interpretation, leaving us to decide what is the ethical (or unethical but desired) course of action. Because of the high cost of some of the obligations, a conflict of interest can arise between what we want to do and what it is right to do. And so, some people choose to respect only the letter of the law, but not the spirit, or not to respect even the spirit of the guidelines. This paper identifies and describes the new obligations imposed on us all by the pandemic, considers their costs in terms of the good life, and provides an ethical analysis of two personal and two public cases in terms of the letter and spirit of the guidance and legislation.