Merve ACUN PINAR, Gülden SARI, Adem KOYUNCU, Bilge ÜZMEZOĞLU, Cebrail ŞİMŞEK

Sağlık çalışanlarında Covid-19 enfeksiyon kaynaklarının belirlenmesi: retrospektif 180 vakanın analizi

Amaç: Bu çalışmada Covid-19 tanısı alan sağlık çalışanlarının; demografik özellikleri, laboratuvar ve radyolojik bulguları, enfeksiyon kaynakları ve temas risklerinin belirlenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Retrospektif, kesitsel nitelikteki bu çalışma Nisan 2020 ve Ocak 2021 tarihleri arasında çalışan sağlığı birimine başvurarak Covid-19 tanısı alan sağlık çalışanlarında yapıldı. Vakaların Covid-19 enfeksiyonu açısından son 14 gün içerisindeki riskli temasları, Sağlık Bakanlığı Covid-19 rehberine göre temas riskleri, laboratuvar ve radyolojik bulguları incelendi. Bulgular: Çalışmaya ortalama yaşı 38,9 ± 9,3 (21- 65) olan 180 (116 kadın, 64 erkek) sağlık çalışanı dahil edildi. Vakaların son 14 gün içerisindeki Covid-19 tanılı kişi ile temasları sorgulandığında; 114 (%63,3) kişide işyeri teması olduğu ve bu temasların 78’inin (%68,4) Covid-19 tanılı hasta ile, 36’sının (%31,6) ise Covid-19 tanılı mesai arkadaşı ile olduğu tespit edildi. Vakaların 33’ünde (%18,3) işyeri dışı temas saptanırken, 33 (%18,3) kişide bilinen herhangi bir Covid-19 enfeksiyonlu kişi ile temas öyküsü saptanmadı. İşyeri dışı teması olan vakaların tamamında orta veya yüksek riskli temas öyküsü varken, işyeri teması olanların %61,4’ünde düşük riskli veya riskli değerlendirilmeyen temas mevcuttu. Sonuç: Sağlık bakım hizmeti veren çalışanlarda Covid-19 enfeksiyonu gelişmesi durumunda, işyeri dışında bir maruziyet saptanmadığında hastalığın mesleksel olarak kabul edilmesi ve bundan doğacak tazminat, rehabilitasyon haklarının sağlanması önemlidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Covid-19, sağlık çalışanları, temas riskleri, meslek hastalığı

Identification of Covid-19 infection sources in healthcare professionals: a retrospective analysis of 180 cases

Purpose: The aim of this study is to determine demographic characteristics, laboratory and radiological findings, sources of infection and contact risks among healthcare workers diagnosed with Covid-19;. Materials and Methods: This retrospective, cross-sectional study was conducted in healthcare workers who were diagnosed with Covid-19 by applying to the employee health unit between April 2020 and January 2021. The risky contacts of the cases in terms of Covid-19 infection in the last 14 days, contact risks according to the Covid-19 guide of the Ministry of Health, laboratory and radiological findings were examined. Results: 180 (116 female, 64 male) healthcare workers with a mean age of 38.9±9.3 (21-65) were included in the study. It was determined that 114 (63.3%) people had workplace contact and 78 (68.4%) of these contacts were with a patient with a diagnosis of Covid-19, and 36 (31.6%) with a colleague with a diagnosis of Covid-19. While out-of-work contact was detected in 33 (18.3%) of the cases, there was no history of contact with any known person with Covid-19 infection in 33 (18.3%). All of the cases with out-of-work contact had a history of medium or high-risk contact, while 61.4% of those with workplace contact had low-risk or non-risk contact. Conclusion: In the event of Covid-19 infection developing in healthcare workers, it is important to accept the disease as occupational and to provide compensation and rehabilitation rights when no exposure outside the workplace is detected.

Keywords:

Covid-19, healthcare workers, communicable risks, occupational disease,

PDF

___

1. World Health Organization. WHO Coronavirus (COVID-19) Dashboard. https://covid19.who.int (accessed Feb 2022).
2. Türk Tabipler Birliği. Kaybettiğimiz sağlık çalışanları. https://siyahkurdele.com (accessed Feb 2022).
3. World Health Organization. The impact of covid-19 on health and care workers: a closer look at deaths. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/345300 (accessed Feb 2022).
4. World Health Organization. COVID-19: Occupational health and safety for health workers, Interim guiadance. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO2019-nCoV-HCW_advice-2021.1 (accessed Feb 2022).
5. 6331 sayılı İş Sağlığı ve Güvenliği Kanunu. (2012). T.C. ResmîGazete, 28339, 20 Haziran 2012.
6. Moen BE. Covıd-19 should be recognized as an occupational disease world- wide. Occup Med (Lond) 2020;70:299.
7. Koh D. Occupational risks for COVID-19 infection. Occup Med (Lond) 2020;70:3-5.
8. Sandal A, Yildiz AN. Covid-19 as a recognized workrelated disease: the current situation worldwide. Saf Health Work. 2021;12:136-8.
9. Halk Sağlığı Genel Müdürlüğü. COVID-19 (SARSCoV-2 enfeksiyonu) Rehberi. Ankara, Halk Sağlığı Genel Müdürlüğü, 2021.
10. Lindesmith L, Moe C, Marionneau S, Ruvoen N, Jiang X, Lindblad L et al. Human susceptibility and resistance to norwalk virus infection. Nat Med. 2003;9:548-53.
11. Batool Z, Durrani SH, Tariq S. Association of ABO and Rh blood group types to hepatitis b, hepatitis c, hiv and syphilis ınfection, a five year' experience in healthy blood donors in a tertiary care hospital. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. 2017;29:90-2.
12. Araç E, Solmaz I. Evaluation of blood groups in patients with anti TPO positive. Asian Journal of Medical Sciences. 2019;10:67-70.
13. Pelzer U, Klein F, Bahra M, Sinn M, Dörken B, Neuhaus P et al. Blood group determinates incidence for pancreatic cancer in Germany. Front Physiol. 2013;4:118.
14. Cheng Y, Cheng G, Chui CH, Lau FY, Chan PK, Ng MH et al. ABO blood group and susceptibility to severe acute respiratory syndrome. JAMA. 2005;293:1450-1.
15. Arac E. Association between the rh blood group and the covid-19 susceptibility. International Journal of Hematology and Oncology. 2020;30:81-6.
16. Wu B-B, Gu D-Z, Yu J-N, Yang J, Shen W-Q. Association between ABO blood groups and COVID-19 infection, severity and demise: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Infect Genet Evol. 2020;84:104485.
17. Eren C. İstanbul ilinde ABO ve Rh kan grupları dağılımının analizi. Dicle Tıp Dergisi. 2019;46:241-6.
18. Bhatraju PK, Ghassemieh BJ, Nichols M, Kim R, Jerome KR, Nalla AK et al. Covid-19 in critically ill patients in the Seattle Region-Case Series. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:2012-22.
19. Song JY, Yun JG, Noh JY, Cheong HJ, Kim WJ. Covid-19 in South Korea-challenges of subclinical manifestations. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:1858-9.
20. Lan FY, Filler R, Mathew S, Buley J, Iliaki E, BrunoMurto LA et al. COVID-19 symptoms predictive of healthcare workers’ SARS-CoV-2 PCR results. PloS One. 2020;15:e0235460.
21. Ben-Shmuel A, Brosh-Nissimov T, Glinert I, BarDavid E, Sittner A, Poni R et al. Detection and infectivity potential of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) environmental contamination in isolation units and quarantine facilities. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020;26:1658-62.
22. Sierpiński R, Pinkas J, Jankowski M, Juszczyk G, Topór-Mądry R, Szumowski Ł. Occupational risks for SARS-CoV-2 infection: the Polish experience. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2020;33:781-9.
23. Dini G, Montecucco A, Rahmani A, Barletta C, Pellegrini L, Debarbieri N et al. Clinical and epidemiological characteristics of COVID-19 during the early phase of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: a crosssectional study among medical school physicians and residents employed in a regional reference teaching hospital in Northern Italy. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2021;34:189-201.
24. Eren E, Celik I, Yildiz M, Topaloglu US, Kilinc-Toker A, Arman-Firat E et al. Evaluation of health care workers with Covıd-19. Klimik. 2020;33:230-4.
25. Zhang ZL, Hou YL, Li DT, Li FZ. Laboratory findings of COVID-19: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Scand J Clin Lab Invest. 2020;80:441-7.
26. Bao C, Liu X, Zhang H, Li Y, Liu J. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) CT findings: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Radiol. 2020;17:701-9.