Are Mobile Phones part of the chain of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the hospital?

Introduction

Mobile phones(MPs) have become a working-tool. However, there are no official policies from the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention(CDC) about its disinfection in healthcare facilities. Permanence of SARS-CoV-2 in surfaces of hospital environment has been described¹ raising the concern about cross-transmission². Even though SARS-CoV-2 has been found in MPs of patients with COVID-19³, they have not been portrayed as source of transmission in the hospital.

Material and methods

This is a cross-sectional study performed at an adult Intensive Care Unit(ICU) of a teaching hospital in Sao Paulo, Brazil. The ICU has 11 separated patient-rooms.

Healthcare workers(HCWs) use scrubs, N95-respirators and surgical-cap inside of the unit and add a surgical-gown, face shield and gloves when entering a patient’s room.

An educational campaign about cross-transmission and disinfection of MPs was performed at the beginning of the pandemic. Informative posters were left in the unit that had a QR-code with access to a video of the campaign advising to use 70% alcohol swab on MPs and to place a screen protector to protect the MP oleophobic coating; and avoid the use of MPs during patient care and in the restroom.

Ten days after the campaign we collected samples from HCW’s MPs. Herewith an electronic questionnaire was applied. It included queried conceptions about hand hygiene and MP care.

The MPs were swabbed using a nylon FLOQ Swab™(Copan Italia SPA-Italy) beginning with the front-screen and without taking its cases off. Once sampled, swabs were placed in universal transport medium(UTM™ Copan Italia SPA-Italy) stored at -80ºC and submitted to SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR. Positive RT-PCR samples were submitted to viral culture.

The extraction of nucleic acids was performed using QIAmp viral RNA mini kit(QIAGEN-USA). For the RT-PCR assay, the commercial RealStar®SARS-CoV-2 Kit1.0(Altona-Diagnostics-Germany) that detects the presence of SARS-CoV-2 through amplification of the S-gene and E-gene was used. The amplification was done using the Roche Light Cycler® 96System(USA). According to the manufacturer, the sample is considered positive when one of the target genes is detected.

Culture was performed inoculating Vero cells (ATCC® CCL-81™), as previously described ⁴⁵, in Dulbecco minimal essential medium supplemented with fetal bovine serum(5%), antibiotics and antimycotics(Cultilab, Campinas, São Paulo, www.cultilb.com.br) at 37°C in an atmosphere with 5%CO2. Every day the cells were examined for cytopathic effect(CE), new RT-PCR of the samples and blind passage of culture supernatant was performed on the third, seven and fourteen day of culture.

Results

Fifty-one of the fifty-three HCWs working in the unit participated on the survey and responded the questionnaire. Nine(18%) had covered their MP with kitchen-plastic film in an attempt to facilitate disinfection. Eleven(16%) did not recall the educational campaign and three(6%) answered that it did not change their behaviour. Only four(8%) did not believe that the virus could remain on MPs and one(4%) did not believe that the virus could remain on the hands; 98% referred washing their hands more since the pandemic(Table1).

Twenty-two COVID-19 patients were hospitalized in the unit, eleven(50%) had positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR and twenty(91%) had a lung computed-tomography suggestive of COVID-19.

Fifty-one MP swabs were collected, two were positive by RT-PCR(4%), with C_t values of 34 and 36, both detected the E-gene.

The two RT-PCR positive samples were isolated for viral culture. The sample with C_t 34 showed CE on the third day, subsequent RT-PCR of this isolate was negative. The isolate with C_t 36 did not show CE, subsequent RT-PCR of this isolate was negative as well. The supernatant of both cultures were monitored for 14 days without observing any other CE afterwards.

Discussion

In this study, although most of HCWs believed on the importance of cross-transmission and increased the adhesion to hand hygiene and MP disinfection during the pandemic, we identified SARS-CoV-2 on MPs. Our findings suggest the need of a universal policy in the infection-control guidelines on how to care for electronic devices in the hospital.

Little is known about virus on MPs or its potential for cross-contamination. A study of MPs from HCWs of a Paediatric unit⁶ found virus RNA in 38.5% of the cases(42/109); predominantly Norovirus(n=39).

Two samples from a CPAP helmet used by COVID-19 patients, were positive by the RT-PCR[1] from patients who had 10 or more days of symptoms and were positive despite the fact that surfaces were cleaned twice a day¹.

Pre-symptomatic COVID-19 patients can contaminate their surroundings as well. A study of quarantined asymptomatic students rooms showed that 8/22(36%) surfaces, including linen were positive. The students later developed COVID-19⁷. This study has limitations. It is not clear which is the best method to collect the SARS-CoV-2 from MPs. Furthermore, the C_ts found are high and may be interpreted as having a small viral load⁸, although late amplification may have been caused by the freezing and thawing of the samples⁹,¹⁰.

Conclusions

Healthcare worker’s MPs can be contaminated by SARS-CoV-2. Thus, it is possible MPs may be a part of the chain of virus transmission in healthcare settings.