Thought I'd share this. Although at my hospital we are 4 days into elective procedures. All elective procedure patients are required to have the virus nasal swab. Turnaround time is 45 min. So far, in these asymptomatic patients, approximately 11% have been positive. Take it FWIW, but I found it fairly surprising. Not a very hard hit area. Higher than I expected.
Sars Cov-2 positive rates in elective procedure patients........
9,397 Views |
62 Replies |
Last: 5 yr ago by permabull
Very interesting. Just a question, How accurate are they thinking the nasal swab test is?
fascinating
So operator dependent. We're seeing false negative rates up to 30%.college of AG said:
Very interesting. Just a question, How accurate are they thinking the nasal swab test is?
What about false positive rates? I assume those are pretty low.
So this is currently positive right? Not antibodies indicating previous infection but actual current viral load?
So what happens when the test positive?
Are they sent home? Do they still get the surgery?
Are they sent home? Do they still get the surgery?
What is the demographics of these patients? Are more of them older in age? Are they mostly people who would have been isolated at their houses with family or are many of them from assisted living ect?
7nine
This is the viral RNA RT-PCR swab. Detecting the virus in one's nasopharynx. I don't have exact demographics, but suffice to say mostly older co-morbid patients (colonoscopies, spinal injections, elective heart caths, etc). We are located in fairly affluent zip code and referral base is mostly fairly nearby (not an inner city county hospital). The procedure is cancelled if positive.
Not what I wanted to hear but what I expected. I am the young guy on my street on the other side of town. It is 90% retired (average age 70+) and they just dont care or think the are more invincible than their teenage grand kids. They are still having dinner parties, standing face to face with their lawn guy, inviting food delivery guys in the house. Not a **** anywhere to be given.
Duncan Idaho said:
Not what I wanted to hear but what I expected. I am the young guy on my street on the other side of town. It is 90% retired (average age 70+) and they just dont care or think the are more invincible than their teenage grand kids. They are still having dinner parties, standing face to face with their lawn guy, inviting food delivery guys in the house. Not a **** anywhere to be given.
why not? the more people that have this (especially asymptomatic) the better for the longterm fight against this virus. We certainly won't get to herd immunity 11% at a time....but we also can't get there without starting somewhere.
This is the hill he's chosen to die on. Just let him be.
11% among folks with no symptoms in a relatively non hard hit area is huge actually.
Maybe the OP can clarify, were these people pre-symptomatic or asymptomatic?
One is a terrible thing. one is a good thing.
Good if that many old/high risk people are and will remain asymptomatic.
Bad if there are that many old people infected but not yet showing symptoms.
One is a terrible thing. one is a good thing.
Good if that many old/high risk people are and will remain asymptomatic.
Bad if there are that many old people infected but not yet showing symptoms.
Taking into account up to 30% false negative I would guess more like 15% actual.
Asymptomatic. Don't know whether they will get sick yet. Remember there have been estimates that near 50% infected don't get symptoms.
It could also be good to have older folks who can get it and It doesn't kill them. I choose to be positive. No pun intended but I'll take it.
And that's just people who currently test positive via PCR, just catching CURRENT infections, non inclusive of resolved ones.
Obviously low n and very much your anecdote but still. That's significant
Obviously low n and very much your anecdote but still. That's significant
I would think these 11% are asymptomatic since they are coming in for an elective procedure. Probably never even thought they had it
Thank you for the new info.
I'm going to safely guess that the population consisting mostly of older patients with comorbidities who are need of elective surgeries is significantly less likely to have been infected than the population at large.
More indication of wider infection spread, with higher rates of less than severe outcomes, than is believed.
More indication of wider infection spread, with higher rates of less than severe outcomes, than is believed.
I thought that the asymptomatic was inversely linked to your age. Some that 50% asymptomatic was mostly younger people.
So what happens with the house hold? Are their spouses/rides to the hospital immediately tested? At least encouraged to get tested?
So what happens with the house hold? Are their spouses/rides to the hospital immediately tested? At least encouraged to get tested?
Having old people getting the virus isn't the way you want to reach herd immunity. The best case scenario is to have the young and healthy get the virus and clear it. And hopefully immunity will last a decent period of time. Assuming no significant genetic variants and mutations occur, the virus will stop spreading in that way. Having old people get it just means more hospitalizations and more deaths.Aggie95 said:Duncan Idaho said:
Not what I wanted to hear but what I expected. I am the young guy on my street on the other side of town. It is 90% retired (average age 70+) and they just dont care or think the are more invincible than their teenage grand kids. They are still having dinner parties, standing face to face with their lawn guy, inviting food delivery guys in the house. Not a **** anywhere to be given.
why not? the more people that have this (especially asymptomatic) the better for the longterm fight against this virus. We certainly won't get to herd immunity 11% at a time....but we also can't get there without starting somewhere.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
That is very interesting. We are starting the same thing in Aggieland it will be interesting.Marcus Aurelius said:
Thought I'd share this. Although at my hospital we are 4 days into elective procedures. All elective procedure patients are required to have the virus nasal swab. Turnaround time is 45 min. So far, in these asymptomatic patients, approximately 11% have been positive. Take it FWIW, but I found it fairly surprising. Not a very hard hit area. Higher than I expected.
Don't forget that herd immunity is still an assumption. We have no idea if it exists although I think it does for at least a year or two.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
http://fox17.com/news/local/580-bledsoe-county-inmates-recover-from-covid-19
More "closed, fully observable population" information.
Fully 586 inmates tested positive. The article is ambiguous, but it sounds like 580 are asymptomatic (or are now?), and only 2 required hospitalization.
That's a miniscule hospitalization rate.
More "closed, fully observable population" information.
Fully 586 inmates tested positive. The article is ambiguous, but it sounds like 580 are asymptomatic (or are now?), and only 2 required hospitalization.
That's a miniscule hospitalization rate.
I'm really starting to believe the multi-strain theory is accurate. If not a large enough mutation to be considered a different "strain" it's enough to affect severity of the disease. Strain hit west coast from China not nearly as deadly but strain with a mutation in Europe and that's what hit New York and Italy.
Or it's even quite possible there's been another mutation where the virus has weakened, as what happened in the first SARS outbreak. The research coming out of Arizona seems to indicate there is a strain out there that has deleted part of the ability to evade the immune system.
Or it's even quite possible there's been another mutation where the virus has weakened, as what happened in the first SARS outbreak. The research coming out of Arizona seems to indicate there is a strain out there that has deleted part of the ability to evade the immune system.
but the NYC strain is dominating American spread now
Duncan Idaho said:
Not what I wanted to hear but what I expected. I am the young guy on my street on the other side of town. It is 90% retired (average age 70+) and they just dont care or think the are more invincible than their teenage grand kids. They are still having dinner parties, standing face to face with their lawn guy, inviting food delivery guys in the house. Not a **** anywhere to be given.
Maybe it's time for some introspective. Everyone around you, even with an exponentially higher chance of dying from Covid, isn't afraid to live their life.
Living in fear, isn't living.
A lot of university centers are beginning to ramp up testing for ALL staff, including those returning to work. Here at Florida, it is a requirement to get tested prior to returning.
I'm assuming we will very soon be seeing a lot of this type of data.
I'm assuming we will very soon be seeing a lot of this type of data.
The only symptoms I've had so far are a change in my sense of smell last night. Today it seems pretty much back to normal.Marcus Aurelius said:
Asymptomatic. Don't know whether they will get sick yet. Remember there have been estimates that near 50% infected don't get symptoms.
I've been having sinus problems all year including the worst sinus infection of my life in February. I think that it's quite possible that my symptom is due to sinus problems, but I'm not counting on that being the case.
We are about to find out it's spread more than thought, and is less deadly than thought. My prediction at least.
cone said:
but the NYC strain is dominating American spread now
Remember, up until very recently only people with symptoms were being swabbed. If the New York mutation is the one causing a much higher percentage of the bad symptoms then that would explain why it would be the more dominant strain on the swabs they were looking at. The people with the less deadly strain (in this theory) would've had almost no reason to be tested.
These sorts of asymptomatic swab tests described by MA haven't been done for very long, at least not out in the general public.
This theory should not have to be guessed at. Viruses are very very very simple "organisms" and virologist can detect single RNA substitutions routinely. I do not have first hand knowledge but I'm sure there are plenty of labs sequencing these germs and would report if there were clearly separate strains with different clinical pictures.Moxley said:
I'm really starting to believe the multi-strain theory is accurate. If not a large enough mutation to be considered a different "strain" it's enough to affect severity of the disease. Strain hit west coast from China not nearly as deadly but strain with a mutation in Europe and that's what hit New York and Italy.
Or it's even quite possible there's been another mutation where the virus has weakened, as what happened in the first SARS outbreak. The research coming out of Arizona seems to indicate there is a strain out there that has deleted part of the ability to evade the immune system.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
I don't buy the different strands/severity thing. I still say it's far more viral load.
Marcus Aurelius said:So operator dependent. We're seeing false negative rates up to 30%.college of AG said:
Very interesting. Just a question, How accurate are they thinking the nasal swab test is?
Are false positives pretty much nil with this test?
Featured Stories
See All
No. 22 Aggies fall to No. 9 Oklahoma on Friday night, 8-7
by Richard Zane
16:22
16h ago
2.9k
11:09
1d ago
8.3k
Troublesome C-minus showing gets A&M dominated by Oklahoma
by Olin Buchanan
35:54
16h ago
3.3k
1:30
18h ago
718
Rylan Griffen ready to refocus as the Aggies eye the Big Dance
by Luke Evangelist