This is a preprint.
Risk of COVID-19 among frontline healthcare workers and the general community: a prospective cohort study
- PMID: 32511531
- PMCID: PMC7273299
- DOI: 10.1101/2020.04.29.20084111
Risk of COVID-19 among frontline healthcare workers and the general community: a prospective cohort study
Update in
-
Risk of COVID-19 among front-line health-care workers and the general community: a prospective cohort study.Lancet Public Health. 2020 Sep;5(9):e475-e483. doi: 10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30164-X. Epub 2020 Jul 31. Lancet Public Health. 2020. PMID: 32745512 Free PMC article.
Abstract
Background: Data for frontline healthcare workers (HCWs) and risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection are limited and whether personal protective equipment (PPE) mitigates this risk is unknown. We evaluated risk for COVID-19 among frontline HCWs compared to the general community and the influence of PPE.
Methods: We performed a prospective cohort study of the general community, including frontline HCWs, who reported information through the COVID Symptom Study smartphone application beginning on March 24 (United Kingdom, U.K.) and March 29 (United States, U.S.) through April 23, 2020. We used Cox proportional hazards modeling to estimate multivariate-adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) of a positive COVID-19 test.
Findings: Among 2,035,395 community individuals and 99,795 frontline HCWs, we documented 5,545 incident reports of a positive COVID-19 test over 34,435,272 person-days. Compared with the general community, frontline HCWs had an aHR of 11·6 (95% CI: 10·9 to 12·3) for reporting a positive test. The corresponding aHR was 3·40 (95% CI: 3·37 to 3·43) using an inverse probability weighted Cox model adjusting for the likelihood of receiving a test. A symptom-based classifier of predicted COVID-19 yielded similar risk estimates. Compared with HCWs reporting adequate PPE, the aHRs for reporting a positive test were 1·46 (95% CI: 1·21 to 1·76) for those reporting PPE reuse and 1·31 (95% CI: 1·10 to 1·56) for reporting inadequate PPE. Compared with HCWs reporting adequate PPE who did not care for COVID-19 patients, HCWs caring for patients with documented COVID-19 had aHRs for a positive test of 4·83 (95% CI: 3·99 to 5·85) if they had adequate PPE, 5·06 (95% CI: 3·90 to 6·57) for reused PPE, and 5·91 (95% CI: 4·53 to 7·71) for inadequate PPE.
Interpretation: Frontline HCWs had a significantly increased risk of COVID-19 infection, highest among HCWs who reused PPE or had inadequate access to PPE. However, adequate supplies of PPE did not completely mitigate high-risk exposures.
Funding: Zoe Global Ltd., Wellcome Trust, EPSRC, NIHR, UK Research and Innovation, Alzheimer's Society, NIH, NIOSH, Massachusetts Consortium on Pathogen Readiness.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of interests JW, RD, and JC are employees of Zoe Global Ltd. TDS is a consultant to Zoe Global Ltd. DAD and ATC previously served as investigators on a clinical trial of diet and lifestyle using a separate mobile application that was supported by Zoe Global Ltd. Other authors have no conflict of interest to declare.
Figures

Similar articles
-
Risk of COVID-19 among front-line health-care workers and the general community: a prospective cohort study.Lancet Public Health. 2020 Sep;5(9):e475-e483. doi: 10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30164-X. Epub 2020 Jul 31. Lancet Public Health. 2020. PMID: 32745512 Free PMC article.
-
Frontline healthcare workers' experiences with personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: a rapid qualitative appraisal.BMJ Open. 2021 Jan 20;11(1):e046199. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046199. BMJ Open. 2021. PMID: 33472794 Free PMC article.
-
Cross-sectional study of personal protective equipment use, training and biosafety preparedness among healthcare workers during the first months of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Brazil.BMJ Public Health. 2024 Apr 16;2(1):e000654. doi: 10.1136/bmjph-2023-000654. eCollection 2024 Jun. BMJ Public Health. 2024. PMID: 40018173 Free PMC article.
-
Real-world assessment, relevance, and problems in use of personal protective equipment in clinical dermatology practice in a COVID referral tertiary hospital.J Cosmet Dermatol. 2020 Dec;19(12):3189-3198. doi: 10.1111/jocd.13736. Epub 2020 Oct 17. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2020. PMID: 32975000 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Risk Factors for COVID-19 Infection Among Healthcare Workers. A First Report From a Living Systematic Review and meta-Analysis.Saf Health Work. 2022 Sep;13(3):263-268. doi: 10.1016/j.shaw.2022.04.001. Epub 2022 Apr 12. Saf Health Work. 2022. PMID: 35433073 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Sociodemographic, laboratory, image data and predictors of gravity risk in patients with COVID-19.PLoS One. 2021 Aug 19;16(8):e0256331. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0256331. eCollection 2021. PLoS One. 2021. PMID: 34411145 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Epidemiology Characteristics of COVID-19 Infection Amongst Primary Health Care Workers in Qatar: March-October 2020.Front Public Health. 2021 May 20;9:679254. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.679254. eCollection 2021. Front Public Health. 2021. PMID: 34095077 Free PMC article.
-
Clinical symptoms and faecal shedding of SARS-CoV-2 RNA among hospitalized COVID-19 patients: Implication for transmission.PLOS Glob Public Health. 2024 Aug 28;4(8):e0003571. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0003571. eCollection 2024. PLOS Glob Public Health. 2024. PMID: 39197068 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Johns Hopkins University of Medicine Coronavirus Resource Center. 2020. https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/us-map (accessed 5/6/2020 2020).
-
- California Department of Public Health Latest Covid-19 Facts. 2020. https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/OPA/Pages/NR20-065.aspx (accessed May 1, 2020 2020).
Publication types
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous