| 1. |
- Bruschettini, Matteo, et al.
(författare)
-
Clinical rating scales for assessing pain in newborn infants
- 2022
-
Ingår i: The Cochrane Library. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 1465-1858. ; 2022:3
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (methodology). The objectives are as follows:. To systematically review the current literature describing the development, content, and measurement properties of clinical rating scales for the assessment of pain in newborn infants. Copyright © 2022 The Cochrane Collaboration.
|
|
| 2. |
- Constantin, Alexandru Marian, et al.
(författare)
-
Workplace interventions to reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection outside of healthcare settings
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. - 1465-1858. ; 2024:4
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Although many people infected with SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) experience no or mild symptoms, some individuals can develop severe illness and may die, particularly older people and those with underlying medical problems. Providing evidence-based interventions to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection has become more urgent with the potential psychological toll imposed by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Controlling exposures to occupational hazards is the fundamental method of protecting workers. When it comes to the transmission of viruses, workplaces should first consider control measures that can potentially have the most significant impact. According to the hierarchy of controls, one should first consider elimination (and substitution), then engineering controls, administrative controls, and lastly, personal protective equipment. This is the first update of a Cochrane review published 6 May 2022, with one new study added. Objectives: To assess the benefits and harms of interventions in non-healthcare-related workplaces aimed at reducing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to other interventions or no intervention. Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science Core Collections, Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, World Health Organization (WHO) COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and medRxiv to 13 April 2023. Selection criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies of interventions. We included adult workers, both those who come into close contact with clients or customers (e.g. public-facing employees, such as cashiers or taxi drivers), and those who do not, but who could be infected by coworkers. We excluded studies involving healthcare workers. We included any intervention to prevent or reduce workers' exposure to SARS-CoV-2 in the workplace, defining categories of intervention according to the hierarchy of hazard controls (i.e. elimination; engineering controls; administrative controls; personal protective equipment). Data collection and analysis: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were incidence rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection (or other respiratory viruses), SARS-CoV-2-related mortality, adverse events, and absenteeism from work. Our secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, quality of life, hospitalisation, and uptake, acceptability, or adherence to strategies. We used the Cochrane RoB 2 tool to assess risk of bias, and GRADE methods to evaluate the certainty of evidence for each outcome. Main results: We identified 2 studies including a total of 16,014 participants. Elimination-of-exposure interventions. We included one study examining an intervention that focused on elimination of hazards, which was an open-label, cluster-randomised, non-inferiority trial, conducted in England in 2021. The study compared standard 10-day self-isolation after contact with an infected person to a new strategy of daily rapid antigen testing and staying at work if the test is negative (test-based attendance). The trialists hypothesised that this would lead to a similar rate of infections, but lower COVID-related absence. Staff (N = 11,798) working at 76 schools were assigned to standard isolation, and staff (N = 12,229) working at 86 schools were assigned to the test-based attendance strategy. The results between test-based attendance and standard 10-day self-isolation were inconclusive for the rate of symptomatic polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-positive SARS-CoV-2 infection (rate ratio (RR) 1.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 2.21; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). The results between test-based attendance and standard 10-day self-isolation were inconclusive for the rate of any PCR-positive SARS-CoV-2 infection (RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.82 to 2.21; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). COVID-related absenteeism rates were 3704 absence days in 566,502 days-at-risk (6.5 per 1000 working days) in the control group and 2932 per 539,805 days-at-risk (5.4 per 1000 working days) in the intervention group (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.25). We downgraded the certainty of the evidence to low due to imprecision. Uptake of the intervention was 71% in the intervention group, but not reported for the control intervention. The trial did not measure our other outcomes of SARS-CoV-2-related mortality, adverse events, all-cause mortality, quality of life, or hospitalisation. We found seven ongoing studies using elimination-of-hazard strategies, six RCTs and one non-randomised trial. Administrative control interventions. We found one ongoing RCT that aims to evaluate the efficacy of the Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccine in preventing COVID-19 infection and reducing disease severity. Combinations of eligible interventions. We included one non-randomised study examining a combination of elimination of hazards, administrative controls, and personal protective equipment. The study was conducted in two large retail companies in Italy in 2020. The study compared a safety operating protocol, measurement of body temperature and oxygen saturation upon entry, and a SARS-CoV-2 test strategy with a minimum activity protocol. Both groups received protective equipment. All employees working at the companies during the study period were included: 1987 in the intervention company and 1798 in the control company. The study did not report an outcome of interest for this systematic review. Other intervention categories. We did not find any studies in this category. Authors' conclusions: We are uncertain whether a test-based attendance policy affects rates of PCR-positive SARS-CoV-2 infection (any infection; symptomatic infection) compared to standard 10-day self-isolation amongst school and college staff. A test-based attendance policy may result in little to no difference in absenteeism rates compared to standard 10-day self-isolation. The non-randomised study included in our updated search did not report any outcome of interest for this Cochrane review. As a large part of the population is exposed in the case of a pandemic, an apparently small relative effect that would not be worthwhile from the individual perspective may still affect many people, and thus become an important absolute effect from the enterprise or societal perspective. The included RCT did not report on any of our other primary outcomes (i.e. SARS-CoV-2-related mortality and adverse events). We identified no completed studies on any other interventions specified in this review; however, eight eligible studies are ongoing. More controlled studies are needed on testing and isolation strategies, and working from home, as these have important implications for work organisations.
|
|
| 3. |
- Forsberg, David, et al.
(författare)
-
AIM in Neonatal and Pediatric Intensive Care
- 2022. - 1st
-
Ingår i: Artificial Intelligence in Medicine. - Cham : Springer Nature. ; , s. 1047-1056
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Infections are one of the leading causes of death in infants and detecting life-threatening events in infants is challenging. Thus, providing effective life-saving interventions in time is essential. As infants’ immune and autonomic control system are under development, signs preceding potentially life-threatening events are subtle. Clinical detection is aided by analysis of biomarkers, which unfortunately requires invasive sampling and is time consuming. Infection and inflammation interfere with the autonomic control systems and consequently affect vital signs. Constantly monitoring vital signs at a high frequency enables the immediate detection of discrepancies and is thus a key, noninvasive instrument in modern intensive care units. For pediatric intensive care, several predictive monitoring systems have been developed over the last decade that aim to utilize vital sign monitoring to mitigate the risk of developing lifethreatening events, such as sepsis. Recent advances in the field of machine learning have provided novel techniques for big data analysis. This enables an individualized risk assessment via continuous multimodal inputs and development of better clinical decision support systems. These more advanced systems are able to detect sepsis 24 hours earlier than clinical practice and enable an overall risk assessment for future sepsis, life-threatening events, and death at the time of hospitalization or during the first week of life. This chapter summarizes the current evidence on machine learning-based monitoring systems and provides an overview on the strengths, limitations, and potential future roles of novel machine learning-based methods for the early detection of pedatric sepsis and potentially life-threatening events.
|
|
| 4. |
- Moberg, Tilda, et al.
(författare)
-
Placenta-associated adverse pregnancy outcomes in women experiencing mild or severe hyperemesis gravidarum – a systematic review and meta-analysis
- 2023
-
Ingår i: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth. - 1471-2393. ; 23:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Nausea and vomiting in pregnancy (NVP) affects 50–80% of pregnant women and is correlated to the level of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG). Hyperemesis gravidarum (HG) is a severe condition, with an incidence of 0.2–1.5%, characterized by consistent nausea, vomiting, weight loss and dehydration continuing after the second trimester. Aim: The aim of this systematic review was to investigate a potential correlation between NVP or HG with adverse pregnancy outcomes and hCG levels. Method: A systematic search in PubMed, Embase and CINAHL Complete was conducted. Studies on pregnant women with nausea in the first or second trimester, reporting either pregnancy outcomes or levels of hCG were included. The primary outcomes were preterm delivery (PTD), preeclampsia, miscarriage, and fetal growth restriction. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I. The overall certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE. Results: The search resulted in 2023 potentially relevant studies; 23 were included. The evidence was uncertain for all outcomes, however women with HG had a tendency to have an increased risk for preeclampsia [odds ratio (OR) 1.18, 95% confidence of interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.35], PTD [OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.61], small for gestational age (SGA) [OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.35], and low birth weight (LBW) [OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.26 to 1.44]. Further, a higher fetal female/male ratio was observed [OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.60]. Meta-analyses were not performed for women with NVP; however, most of these studies indicated that women with NVP have a lower risk for PTD and LBW and a higher risk for SGA, and a higher fetal female/male ratio. Conclusion: There may be an increased risk in women with HG and a decreased risk in women with NVP for adverse placenta-associated pregnancy outcomes, however the evidence is very uncertain. Trial registration: PROSPERO: CRD42021281218.
|
|
| 5. |
- Persad, Emma, et al.
(författare)
-
Blood pressure trends following birth in infants born under 25 weeks' gestational age : a retrospective cohort study
- 2024
-
Ingår i: BMJ Paediatrics Open. - 2399-9772. ; 8:1, s. e002438-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: The aim of our study was to describe postnatal blood pressure (BP) trends and evaluate relevant dynamics and outcomes for a subgroup of extremely preterm (EPT) infants. Design: Retrospective observational cohort study. Setting: Patients admitted to Karolinska University Hospital Stockholm. Patients EPT infants born between 22+0 and 24+6 weeks’ gestational age (GA) undergoing invasive, continuous BP monitoring through an umbilical arterial catheter. Main outcome measures Physiological BP trends, the influence of cardiovascular active interventions and fluid boluses on BP, and relevant adverse outcomes, including intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH), necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) and death, were mapped over the first week of life. Results: We included 125 infants between January 2009 and November 2021. Mean BP values were 31 mm Hg, 32 mm Hg and 35 mm Hg, at 3 hours, 24 hours and 48 hours, respectively. A pronounced BP dip and nadir were observed around 20 hours, with a mean BP value of 32 mm Hg. 84% received fluid boluses within the first week of life; however, we could not observe any noteworthy change in BP following administration. Only 8% of patients received cardiovascular active drugs, which were too few to infer drug-specific effects. Overall, 48% developed IVH, 15% developed NEC and 25% died. Conclusions: Approximating clinically acceptable mean BP values using GA gives underestimations in these infants. The postnatal BP dip should be regarded as a physiological phenomenon and not automatic grounds for interventions which may momentarily stabilise BP but have no appreciable short-term or long-term effects. Further studies are warranted for improved understanding of clinically relevant trends and outcomes.
|
|
| 6. |
- Persad, Emma, et al.
(författare)
-
Interventions to minimize blood loss in very preterm infants - A systematic review and meta-analysis
- 2021
-
Ingår i: PLoS ONE. - : Public Library of Science (PLoS). - 1932-6203. ; 16:2 February
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Blood loss in the first days of life has been associated with increased morbidity and mortality in very preterm infants. In this systematic review we included randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of interventions to preserve blood volume in the infant from birth, reduce the need for sampling, or limit the blood sampled. Mortality and major neurodevelopmental disabilities were the primary outcomes. Included studies underwent risk of bias-assessment and data extraction by two review authors independently. We used risk ratio or mean difference to evaluate the treatment effect and meta-analysis for pooled results. The certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE. We included 31 trials enrolling 3,759 infants. Twenty-five trials were pooled in the comparison delayed cord clamping or cord milking vs. immediate cord clamping or no milking. Increasing placental transfusion resulted in lower mortality during the neonatal period (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.00; participants = 595; trials = 5; I2 = 0%, moderate certainty of evidence) and during first hospitalization (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.51, 0.96; 10 RCTs, participants = 2,476, low certainty of evidence). The certainty of evidence was very low for the other primary outcomes of this review. The six remaining trials compared devices to monitor glucose levels (three trials), blood sampling from the umbilical cord or from the placenta vs. blood sampling from the infant (2 trials), and devices to reintroduce the blood after analysis vs. conventional blood sampling (1 trial); the certainty of evidence was rated as very low for all outcomes in these comparisons. Increasing placental transfusion at birth may reduce mortality in very preterm infants; However, extremely limited evidence is available to assess the effects of other interventions to reduce blood loss after birth. In future trials, infants could be randomized following placental transfusion to different blood saving approaches. Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42020159882.
|
|
| 7. |
- Persad, Emma, et al.
(författare)
-
Non-opioid analgesics for procedural pain in neonates
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. - 1465-1858. ; 2022:7
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows:. To determine the effects of non-opioid analgesics in neonates (term or preterm) exposed to procedural pain compared to placebo or no drug, non-pharmacological intervention, other analgesics, or different routes of administration.
|
|
| 8. |
- Persad, Emma, et al.
(författare)
-
Non-opioid analgesics for procedural pain in neonates
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. - 1465-1858. ; 2023:4
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Neonates are an extremely vulnerable patient population, with 6% to 9% admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) following birth. Neonates admitted to the NICU will undergo multiple painful procedures per day throughout their stay. There is increasing evidence that frequent and repetitive exposure to painful stimuli is associated with poorer outcomes later in life. To date, a wide variety of pain control mechanisms have been developed and implemented to address procedural pain in neonates. This review focused on non-opioid analgesics, specifically non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists, which alleviate pain through inhibiting cellular pathways to achieve analgesia. The analgesics considered in this review show potential for pain relief in clinical practice; however, an evidence summation compiling the individual drugs they comprise and outlining the benefits and harms of their administration is lacking. We therefore sought to summarize the evidence on the level of pain experienced by neonates both during and following procedures; relevant drug-related adverse events, namely episodes of apnea, desaturation, bradycardia, and hypotension; and the effects of combinations of drugs. As the field of neonatal procedural pain management is constantly evolving, this review aimed to ascertain the scope of non-opioid analgesics for neonatal procedural pain to provide an overview of the options available to better inform evidence-based clinical practice. Objectives: To determine the effects of non-opioid analgesics in neonates (term or preterm) exposed to procedural pain compared to placebo or no drug, non-pharmacological intervention, other analgesics, or different routes of administration. Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, and two trial registries in June 2022. We screened the reference lists of included studies for studies not identified by the database searches. Selection criteria: We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and cluster-RCTs in neonates (term or preterm) undergoing painful procedures comparing NSAIDs and NMDA receptor antagonists to placebo or no drug, non-pharmacological intervention, other analgesics, or different routes of administration. Data collection and analysis: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our main outcomes were pain assessed during the procedure and up to 10 minutes after the procedure with a validated scale; episodes of bradycardia; episodes of apnea; and hypotension requiring medical therapy. Main results: We included two RCTs involving a total of 269 neonates conducted in Nigeria and India. NMDA receptor antagonists versus no treatment, placebo, oral sweet solution, or non-pharmacological intervention. One RCT evaluated using oral ketamine (10 mg/kg body weight) versus sugar syrup (66.7% w/w at 1 mL/kg body weight) for neonatal circumcision. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of ketamine on pain score during the procedure, assessed with the Neonatal Infant Pain Scale (NIPS), compared with placebo (mean difference (MD) −0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) −1.32 to −0.58; 1 RCT; 145 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No other outcomes of interest were reported on. Head-to-head comparison of different analgesics. One RCT evaluated using intravenous fentanyl versus intravenous ketamine during laser photocoagulation for retinopathy of prematurity. Neonates receiving ketamine followed an initial regimen (0.5 mg/kg bolus 1 minute before procedure) or a revised regimen (additional intermittent bolus doses of 0.5 mg/kg every 10 minutes up to a maximum of 2 mg/kg), while those receiving fentanyl followed either an initial regimen (2 μg/kg over 5 minutes, 15 minutes before the procedure, followed by 1 μg/kg/hour as a continuous infusion) or a revised regimen (titration of 0.5 μg/kg/hour every 15 minutes to a maximum of 3 μg/kg/hour). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of ketamine compared with fentanyl on pain score assessed with the Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised (PIPP-R) scores during the procedure (MD 0.98, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.20; 1 RCT; 124 participants; very low-certainty evidence); on episodes of apnea occurring during the procedure (risk ratio (RR) 0.31, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.18; risk difference (RD) −0.09, 95% CI −0.19 to 0.00; 1 study; 124 infants; very low-certainty evidence); and on hypotension requiring medical therapy occurring during the procedure (RR 5.53, 95% CI 0.27 to 112.30; RD 0.03, 95% CI −0.03 to 0.10; 1 study; 124 infants; very low-certainty evidence). The included study did not report pain score assessed up to 10 minutes after the procedure or episodes of bradycardia occurring during the procedure. We did not identify any studies comparing NSAIDs versus no treatment, placebo, oral sweet solution, or non-pharmacological intervention or different routes of administration of the same analgesics. We identified three studies awaiting classification. Authors' conclusions: The two small included studies comparing ketamine versus either placebo or fentanyl, with very low-certainty evidence, rendered us unable to draw meaningful conclusions. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of ketamine on pain score during the procedure compared with placebo or fentanyl. We found no evidence on NSAIDs or studies comparing different routes of administration. Future research should prioritize large studies evaluating non-opioid analgesics in this population. As the studies included in this review suggest potential positive effects of ketamine administration, studies evaluating ketamine are of interest. Furthermore, as we identified no studies on NSAIDs, which are widely used in older infants, or comparing different routes of administration, such studies should be a priority going forward.
|
|
| 9. |
- Pizarro, Ana Beatriz, et al.
(författare)
-
Workplace interventions to reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection outside of healthcare settings
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. - 1465-1858. ; 2021:9
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows:. To assess the benefits and harms of interventions in non-healthcare-related workplaces to reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection relative to other interventions or no intervention.
|
|
| 10. |
- Pizarro, Ana Beatriz, et al.
(författare)
-
Workplace interventions to reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection outside of healthcare settings
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. - 1465-1858. ; 5:5, s. CD015112-
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Although many people infected with SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2) experience no or mild symptoms, some individuals can develop severe illness and may die, particularly older people and those with underlying medical problems. Providing evidence-based interventions to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection has become more urgent with the spread of more infectious SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VoC), and the potential psychological toll imposed by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Controlling exposures to occupational hazards is the fundamental method of protecting workers. When it comes to the transmission of viruses, such as SARS-CoV-2, workplaces should first consider control measures that can potentially have the most significant impact. According to the hierarchy of controls, one should first consider elimination (and substitution), then engineering controls, administrative controls, and lastly, personal protective equipment (PPE). Objectives: To assess the benefits and harms of interventions in non-healthcare-related workplaces to reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection relative to other interventions, or no intervention. Search methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, the Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety (CCOHS), Clinicaltrials.gov, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to 14 September 2021. We will conduct an update of this review in six months. Selection criteria: We included randomised control trials (RCT) and planned to include non-randomised studies of interventions. We included adult workers, both those who come into close contact with clients or customers (e.g. public-facing employees, such as cashiers or taxi drivers), and those who do not, but who could be infected by co-workers. We excluded studies involving healthcare workers. We included any intervention to prevent or reduce workers' exposure to SARS-CoV-2 in the workplace, defining categories of intervention according to the hierarchy of hazard controls, i.e. elimination; engineering controls; administrative controls; personal protective equipment. Data collection and analysis: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were incidence rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection (or other respiratory viruses), SARS-CoV-2-related mortality, adverse events, and absenteeism from work. Our secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, quality of life, hospitalisation, and uptake, acceptability, or adherence to strategies. We used the Cochrane RoB 2 tool to assess the risk of bias, and GRADE methods to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. Main results: Elimination of exposure interventions. We included one study examining an intervention that focused on elimination of hazards. This study is an open-label, cluster-randomised, non-inferiority trial, conducted in England in 2021. The study compared standard 10-day self-isolation after contact with an infected person to a new strategy of daily rapid antigen testing and staying at work if the test is negative (test-based attendance). The trialists hypothesised that this would lead to a similar rate of infections, but lower COVID-related absence. Staff (N = 11,798) working at 76 schools were assigned to standard isolation, and staff (N = 12,229) at 86 schools to the test-based attendance strategy. The results between test-based attendance and standard 10-day self-isolation were inconclusive for the rate of symptomatic PCR-positive SARS-COV-2 infection rate ratio ((RR) 1.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 2.21; 1 study, very low-certainty evidence)). The results between test-based attendance and standard 10-day self-isolation were inconclusive for the rate of any PCR-positive SARS-COV-2 infection (RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.82 to 2.21; 1 study, very low-certainty evidence). COVID-related absenteeism rates were 3704 absence days in 566,502 days-at-risk (6.5 per 1000 days at risk) in the control group and 2932 per 539,805 days-at-risk (5.4 per 1000 days at risk) in the intervention group (RR 0.83; 95% CI 0.55 to 1.25). The certainty of the evidence was downgraded to low, due to imprecision. Uptake of the intervention was 71 % in the intervention group, but not reported for the control intervention. The trial did not measure other outcomes, SARS-CoV-2-related mortality, adverse events, all-cause mortality, quality of life, and hospitalisation. We found one ongoing RCT about screening in schools, using elimination of hazard strategies. Personal protective equipment. We found one ongoing non-randomised study on the effects of closed face shields to prevent COVID-19 transmission. Other intervention categories. We did not find studies in the other intervention categories. Authors' conclusions: We are uncertain whether a test-based attendance policy affects rates of PCR-postive SARS-CoV-2 infection (any infection; symptomatic infection) compared to standard 10-day self-isolation amongst school and college staff. Test-based attendance policy may result in little to no difference in absence rates compared to standard 10-day self-isolation. As a large part of the population is exposed in the case of a pandemic, an apparently small relative effect that would not be worthwhile from the individual perspective may still affect many people, and thus, become an important absolute effect from the enterprise or societal perspective. The included study did not report on any other primary outcomes of our review, i.e. SARS-CoV-2-related mortality and adverse events. No completed studies were identified on any other interventions specified in this review, but two eligible studies are ongoing. More controlled studies are needed on testing and isolation strategies, and working from home, as these have important implications for work organisations.
|
|
