Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Among Workers in Northern Italy
Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Among Workers in Northern Italy
复制标题
DOI：
10.1093/annweh/wxab062
复制
发表时间：
2021-08-08
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Faggiano, Fabrizio
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Airoldi, Chiara;Calcagno, Andrea;Faggiano, Fabrizio
背景 严重急性呼吸道冠状病毒 2 (SARS-CoV-2) 在活跃工人中的传播鲜为人知。我们研究的目的是评估工人便利样本中免疫球蛋白 G (IgG) 的血清阳性率，并确定第一次大流行期间的高风险工作部门。方法 我们对 2020 年 3 月 28 日至 8 月 7 日期间接受 SARS-CoV-2 检测的工人进行了一项横断面研究，记录由位于意大利西北部的一家私人医疗中心记录。使用卡方检验评估血清流行率与人口和职业变量之间的关联，并计算血清流行率和95%置信区间（CI）。结果 我们从约 1000 家公司的 22708 名员工样本中收集了 23568 项血清学检测结果。中位年龄为 45 岁，约 60% 的受试者为男性。总体血清阳性率为 4.97% [95%CI 4.69-5.25]。性别之间没有发现统计差异，而血清阳性率与受试者的年龄、地理位置和职业部门相关。物流业（31.3%）、纺织厂（12.6%）、疗养院（9.8%）和化学工业（6.9%）工人的积极性显着较高。然而，我们在独立于该行业的单个公司中观察到了一些集群案例。然后，对 940 名食品工人的详细关注显示，血清阳性率为 5.21% [95%CI 3.79-6.63]，并且自我报告 COVID-19 症状和在封锁期间工作的受试者被感染的可能性较高 (p < 0.001)。结论 获得的数据可能对未来的公共卫生决策有用；与职业部门相比，单个公司的预防系统失败似乎增加了 SARS-CoV-2 的传播。
Background The spread of severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among active workers is poor known. The aim of our study was to evaluate the seroprevalence of immunoglobulin G (IgG) among a convenience sample of workers and to identify high-risk job sectors during the first pandemic way. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study among workers tested for SARS-CoV-2 between 28 March and 7 August 2020, recorded by a private healthcare center located in North-West Italy. Association among seroprevalence and demographic and occupational variables was evaluated using chi square test and the seroprevalence and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Results We collected the results for 23568 serological tests from a sample of 22708 workers from about 1000 companies. Median age was 45 years and about 60% of subjects were male. The overall seroprevalence was 4.97% [95%CI 4.69-5.25]. No statistical difference was found among gender while seroprevalence was associated with subjects' age, geographical location, and occupational sector. Significantly higher values of positivity were observed for the logistics sector (31.3%), weaving factory (12.6%), nursing homes (9.8%), and chemical industry (6.9%) workers. However, we observed some clusters of cases in single companies independently from the sector. Then, a detailed focus on 940 food workers shown a seroprevalence of 5.21% [95%CI 3.79-6.63] and subjects who self-reported COVID-19 symptoms and who worked during lockdown had a higher probability of being infected (p < 0.001). Conclusions Data obtained might be useful for future public health decision; more than occupation sector, it seems that failure on prevention system in single companies increase the SARS-CoV-2 transmission.