A área profissional está associada à soroconversão para SARS-CoV-2 entre os profissionais do SESC-DF? Um estudo transversal

Versions

PDF (Português (Brasil))

How to Cite

Medeiros Ribeiro, J. A., da Costa Silva Marinho, L., Gomes Camargo Fonseca, S., Braga D’Almeida, J., Massignan, C. ., & Negrini Lia, E. (2024). A área profissional está associada à soroconversão para SARS-CoV-2 entre os profissionais do SESC-DF? Um estudo transversal. Tempus – Actas De Saúde Coletiva, 16(3), Pág. 152–167. https://doi.org/10.18569/tempus.v16i3.3065 (Original work published December 28, 2023)

Abstract

The aim of the study was to analyze the prevalence of seroconversion to antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in health professionals working at SESC-DF and compare it with the prevalence of professionals who do not belong to the health field, such as commercial and administrative staff; and also test the associations. The cross-sectional study was conducted between June and August 2020 among all 838 SESC-DF professionals who were working during the COVID-19 pandemic.  The Acro Biotech® antibody Rapid Test IgG/IgM COVID-19 was used to test the professionals. The covariates were work hours a month, age, sex, presence of comorbidities, date of the COVID-19 test; the presence of a symptomatic relative, and the need to be absent from work due to suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection. Descriptive analysis, Pearson chi-squared test, and hierarchical logistic regression were performed. Of the total 93 health professionals, 14 (15.10%) presented seroconversion while from 745 professionals who do not belong to the health field 100 (13.40%) presented seroconversion with no statistical difference (p=0.78 chi-squared test). The date of testing between 07/15 to 07/31 (Odds Ratio (OR) 8.53; 95% CI 1.18-61.51, p=0.03) and the presence of a symptomatic relative (OR 2.28; 95% CI 1.17-4.44; p=0.01) were associated with seroconversion. Employees with SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion presented 37.80 odds of absence from work (95% CI 22.35-63-91; p <0.001). Seroconversion was not associated with the professional field but with the date of testing, symptomatic relative, and absence from  

 

Approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Brasilia (process number CAAE 33386820.2.0000.0030).

https://doi.org/10.18569/tempus.v16i3.3065
PDF (Português (Brasil))