Abdalrouf Abuobieda, Ibrahim Alaa, Abdulmogith Mohammed, Yousif Attiat, Al Okeil Nawaf, Al Otaibi Azzam, Albattal Saad, AlAbood Abood, Maher Medhat, AlRasheed Abdelaziz, Kofi Mostafa
Department of Family and Community Medicine (FCM), Prince Sultan Military Medical City (PSMMC), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
J Family Med Prim Care. 2021 Nov;10(11):4277-4285. doi: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_652_21. Epub 2021 Nov 29.
Asymptomatic individuals could be a source of spreading the infection, especially in their households. Triaging and testing an individual for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) infection rely on the criteria included in the adopted triaging instrument, and adopted case definition of a suspected case. They both may need to be reviewed and modified to make them more effective in making the right decision.
A cross-sectional study was used to find out the effectiveness of triaging instrument and the case definition used in the fever clinic (FC) in one of our primary care centers. The data of 630 randomly selected participants who were tested in our center between April 12 and August 12 2020 were analyzed.
About 36.8% of the 630 tested participants were positive for COVID-19. Symptomatic patients were 3.93 (95% CI; 2.58, 5.98; < 0.001) times more likely to test positive than asymptomatic ones. The participants with a history of contact with a COVID-19 confirmed case were 1.47 (95% CI; 1.03, 2.10; = 0.032) times more likely to test positive compared to those without such history. Symptomatic with and without history of contact were 8.40 (95% CI; 3.23, 21.86; < 0.001) and 4.91 (95% CI; 1.84, 13.09; < 0.001) times more likely to test positive compared to asymptomatic contact, respectively. Moreover, patients with comorbidity were also 1.85 (95% CI; 1.31, 2.60; < 0.001) times more likely to test positive than healthy ones. The mean of the number of the households, and the mean of the number of households tested positive significantly exceeded the means of those tested negative by 1.03 (95% CI; 0.48, 1.57; < 0.001), and 0.98 (95% CI; 0.68, 1.28; < 0.001), respectively. From the studied triaging items only symptoms, comorbidities, and the number of households tested positive were independently associated with testing positive. Moreover, from studied symptoms, only fever, cough, myalgia, and loss of taste and smell were independently associated with testing positive. Finally, from the studied comorbidities, only diabetes mellitus was independently associated with testing positive.
At the time of outbreak and pandemic, people get worried and need to be reassured, and contacts would then seek testing. However, resources including manpower, material, and money need to be protected and used wisely. Thus, the adoption of an evidence-based updated testing policy is crucially needed. Furthermore, early identification of the potential sources of the infection is also crucially needed to control the spreading of the infection.
无症状个体可能是感染传播的源头,尤其是在其家庭中。对个体进行冠状病毒病(COVID-19)感染的分诊和检测依赖于所采用的分诊工具中包含的标准以及所采用的疑似病例定义。这两者可能都需要审查和修改,以使其在做出正确决策方面更有效。
采用横断面研究来确定我们一个基层医疗中心发热门诊(FC)所使用的分诊工具和病例定义的有效性。分析了2020年4月12日至8月12日在我们中心接受检测的630名随机选择参与者的数据。
630名接受检测的参与者中约36.8%的人COVID-19检测呈阳性。有症状的患者检测呈阳性的可能性是无症状患者的3.93倍(95%置信区间;2.58,5.98;<0.001)。与无COVID-19确诊病例接触史的参与者相比,有COVID-19确诊病例接触史的参与者检测呈阳性的可能性高1.47倍(95%置信区间;1.03,2.10;=0.032)。有症状且有接触史和有症状但无接触史的参与者检测呈阳性的可能性分别是无症状有接触史参与者的8.40倍(95%置信区间;3.23,21.86;<0.001)和4.91倍(95%置信区间;1.84,13.09;<0.001)。此外,合并症患者检测呈阳性的可能性也比健康人高1.85倍(95%置信区间;1.31,2.60;<0.001)。检测呈阳性的家庭数量平均值和检测呈阳性的家庭平均数量分别比检测呈阴性的家庭平均值显著高出1.