Abstract
Background SARS-CoV-2 spreads in hospitals, but the contribution of these settings to the overall COVID-19 burden at a national level is unknown.
Methods We used comprehensive national English datasets and simulation modelling to determine the total burden (identified and unidentified) of symptomatic hospital-acquired infections. Those unidentified would either be 1) discharged before symptom onset (“missed”), or 2) have symptom onset 7 days or fewer from admission (“misclassified”). We estimated the contribution of “misclassified” cases and transmission from “missed” symptomatic infections to the English epidemic before 31st July 2020.
Findings In our dataset of hospitalised COVID-19 patients in acute English Trusts with a recorded symptom onset date (n = 65,028), 7% were classified as hospital-acquired (with symptom onset 8 or more days after admission and before discharge). We estimated that only 30% (range across weeks and 200 simulations: 20-41%) of symptomatic hospital-acquired infections would be identified. Misclassified cases and onward transmission from missed infections could account for 15% (mean, 95% range over 200 simulations: 14·1%-15·8%) of cases currently classified as community-acquired COVID-19.
From this, we estimated that 26,600 (25,900 to 27,700) individuals acquired a symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in an acute Trust in England before 31st July 2020, resulting in 15,900 (15,200-16,400) or 20.1% (19.2%-20.7%) of all identified hospitalised COVID-19 cases.
Conclusions Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 to hospitalised patients likely caused approximately a fifth of identified cases of hospitalised COVID-19 in the “first wave”, but fewer than 1% of all SARS-CoV-2 infections in England. Using symptom onset as a detection method for hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 likely misses a substantial proportion (>60%) of hospital-acquired infections.
Funding National Institute for Health Research, UK Medical Research Council, Society for Laboratory Automation and Screening, UKRI, Wellcome Trust, Singapore National Medical Research Council.
Evidence before this study We searched PubMed with the terms “((national OR country) AND (contribution OR burden OR estimates) AND (“hospital-acquired” OR “hospital-associated” OR “nosocomial”)) AND Covid-19” for articles published in English up to July 1st 2021. This identified 42 studies, with no studies that had aimed to produce comprehensive national estimates of the contribution of hospital settings to the COVID-19 pandemic. Most studies focused on estimating seroprevalence or levels of infection in healthcare workers only, which were not our focus. Removing the initial national/country terms identified 120 studies, with no country level estimates. Several single hospital setting estimates exist for England and other countries, but the percentage of hospital-associated infections reported relies on identified cases in the absence of universal testing.
Added value of this study This study provides the first national-level estimates of all symptomatic hospital-acquired infections with SARS-CoV-2 in England up to the 31st July 2020. Using comprehensive data, we calculate how many infections would be unidentified and hence can generate a total burden, impossible from just notification data. Moreover, our burden estimates for onward transmission suggest the contribution of hospitals to the overall infection burden.
Implications of all the available evidence Large numbers of patients may become infected with SARS-CoV-2 in hospitals though only a small proportion of such infections are identified. Further work is needed to better understand how interventions can reduce such transmission and to better understand the contributions of hospital transmission to mortality.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
GMK was supported by an MRC Skills Development Fellowship (MR/P014658/1). TMP was supported by the Society for Laboratory Automation and Screening, under award number: SLAS_VS2020. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the Society for Laboratory Automation and Screening. YJ, JR, BC and JVR were supported by a UKRI grant: MR/V028456/1. BC and JVR were also supported by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Healthcare Associated Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance at Oxford University in partnership with Public Health England (PHE) (NIHR200915). JMR was supported by UKRI through the JUNIPER modelling consortium [grant number MR/V038613/1]. SF was supported by a Senior Research Fellowship from the Wellcome Trust (210758/Z/18/Z). MY was supported by a Singapore National Medical Research Council Research Fellowship (NMRC/Fellowship/0051/2017).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethical approval for ISARIC was given by the South Central - Oxford C Research Ethics Committee in England (Ref 13/SC/0149), the Scotland A Research Ethics Committee (Ref 20/SS/0028) and the WHO Ethics Review Committee (RPC571 and RPC572, 25 April 2013). SUS data were collected within statutory approvals granted to Public Health England for infectious disease surveillance and control. Information was held securely and in accordance with the Data Protection Act 2018 and Caldicott guidelines.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵* ISARIC4C Investigators listed at https://isaric4c.net/about/authors/
↵+ The following authors were part of the Centre for Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Disease COVID-19 Working Group. Each contributed in processing, cleaning and interpretation of data, interpreted findings, contributed to the manuscript, and approved the work for publication: Sam Abbott, Amy Gimma, Hamish P Gibbs, Kaja Abbas, Rosanna C Barnard, Frank G Sandmann, Nikos I Bosse, Paul Mee, Ciara V McCarthy, Matthew Quaife, Adam J Kucharski, Christopher I Jarvis, Joel Hellewell, Emilie Finch, Alicia Rosello, Mark Jit, Rachael Pung, Rosalind M Eggo, Akira Endo, Graham Medley, Damien C Tully, Kerry LM Wong, Yang Liu, Katharine Sherratt, James D Munday, Lloyd A C Chapman, Stéphane Hué, Kathleen O’Reilly, Nicholas G. Davies, Sophie R Meakin, Fiona Yueqian Sun, Oliver Brady, C Julian Villabona-Arenas, Katherine E. Atkins, Kiesha Prem, David Hodgson, Mihaly Koltai, Carl A B Pearson, William Waites, Simon R Procter, Rachel Lowe.
Data Availability
References for all data and code used are available via a github repository (https://github.com/gwenknight/hai_first_wave.git). All data is available by application to the ISARIC4C UK COVID-19 Clinical Information Network (CO-CIN) study and to PHE for the SUS and Second Generation Surveillance System (SGSS) data.
