Skip to main content
Download PDF

Seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among staff at primary healthcare institutions in Prishtina

BMC Infectious Diseases volume 22, Article number: 57 (2022) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Many studies examined the spread of SARS-CoV-2 within populations using seroprevalence. Healthcare workers are a high-risk population due to patient contact, and studies are needed to examine seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among healthcare workers. Our study investigates the seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among staff at primary healthcare institutions in Prishtina, and factors associated with seroprevalence.

Methods

We carried out a cross-sectional survey including SARS-CoV-2 serological testing and questionnaires with primary healthcare workers from primary healthcare facilities in the Prishtina, the capital city of Kosovo. We calculated prevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, and of self-reported positive PCR test among primary healthcare workers, as well as crude and adjusted ORs for explanatory factors.

Results

Eighty-three of the healthcare workers (17.47%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies IgG or IgM, while 231 (48.63%) either had antibodies or a previous positive PCR test. Odds of seropositivity were affected by male gender (OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.20, 3.61), and infected family members (OR 3.61, 95% CI 2.25, 5.79) of healthcare workers. Higher education, being part of larger families and having infected family members gave higher odds of positive PCR test and seropositivity. Other healthcare workers had lower odds of positive PCR test and seropositivity than physicians.

Conclusion

Over 17% of healthcare workers were seropositive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and close to half of them were either seropositive or PCR self-reported positive test. Several factors are associated with decreased and increased odds for such outcomes. These findings should be explored further and addressed to Kosovo policy makers, and assist them to intensify vaccination efforts, and maintain control measures until we achieve herd immunity.

Key messages

  • Primary healthcare workers have a prevalence of 17.47% for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies

  • Almost half of those surveyed had either tested positive by PCR or had antibodies

  • We did not find a significant association with adherence to protective measures

  • Infected family members significantly increased the odds of seropositivity

Peer Review reports

Introduction

COVID-19 is a novel viral disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 originating from Wuhan, China in December 2019 [1]. This infectious disease was named COVID-19 by the World Health Organization at the beginning of last year. At the time of writing, more than 315 million cases and more than 5.5 million deaths around the world have been confirmed [2]. SARS-CoV-2 rapidly spread worldwide, which continues to pose a major challenge and is an ongoing threat for public health and healthcare systems. In several countries, the demand for medical care exceeds the available resources, requiring stakeholders to reorganize the medical landscape [3].

During pandemics, everyone can potentially be infected, but healthcare workers (HCWs) are at a particularly high risk of infection, due to direct and indirect contact with patients [4]. As SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted via airborne droplet infection and indirect contact with COVID-19 patients, all kinds of HCWs are at high risk of infection [5]. Healthcare staff face numerous challenges, including: increased workload created by outbreaks, fear of contagion for themselves and their families, working with new and frequently changing protocols and personal protective equipment (PPE), caring for patients who are very sick and quickly deteriorating, and caring for colleagues who become ill [6]. Many studies have examined seroprevalence among HCWs. For example, some studies from different countries have reported low seroprevalence of COVID-19 in HCWs who work in pediatric hospitals [7, 8], tertiary hospitals [9, 10], university or academic hospitals [11, 12] and emergency HCWs [13]. Some studies show that measurement of seroprevalence in SARS-CoV-2 in frontline HCWs can give highly varied results based on the country or region of testing, healthcare role and when testing was carried out [14,15,16].

Kosovo was among the last countries in the region and Europe to be hit by the coronavirus pandemic, with the first cases confirmed on 13th March 2020 [17]. Prishtina, as a capital city and a more populated area, has recorded more cases of the virus than other cities [18]. As a result, the frontline health workforce has experienced a high workload during the pandemic, along with multiple psychosocial stressors, which may affect their mental and emotional health, leading to burnout symptoms [19].

SARS-CoV-2 infection is followed by an antibody response with IgG and IgM antibodies, and therefore serological tests can provide more information on SARS-CoV-2. Antibody tests are potentially useful for detecting previous infection when measured 15 or more days after the onset of symptoms, but the duration of elevated antibody levels is currently unknown [20].

In Kosovo, primary healthcare facilities are the first contact for most patients. Given their continuous exposure to the virus, extensive and continuous testing of primary HCWs is a necessity. Kosovo has not been an exception to this requirement, as the pandemic has posed considerable danger to HCWs, particularly primary HCWs. This is the first study to date examining seroprevalence in primary HCWs in Kosovo. Studies elsewhere in the world have reported 2.6% [21] and 9.17% [22] seropositivity of COVID-19 antibodies among primary HCWs. This study aims to determine the prevalence of positive anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among primary HCWs in the municipality of Prishtina, and its association with different demographic, epidemiological factors and health behaviors.

Methods

Study design and setting

We used cross-sectional survey data, collected from municipal workers (healthcare workers and administration), to determine the seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among primary healthcare workers in Prishtina. The data was collected between 14 October to 17 of December 2020. This survey collected information on demographics, socioeconomic status, educational background, exposure to the COVID-19 virus in the workplace, protective measures applied, COVID-19 symptoms experienced, and their health status (before, during, and after COVID-19 virus disease). The questionnaire for the survey was tested and revised before the data collection. All interviewers, prior to data collection had received training in study methodology and questionnaire implementation, as well as confidentiality and ethical behavior. The interviewers provided respondents with a phone number, and if the respondent was unable to answer the questions at the time of testing, the interviewer would schedule another convenient appointment. The interview data were filled in the questionnaire by hand (paper and pencil).

Sampling, participants, testing and data collection

The sample was consecutive, i.e. survey targeted all healthcare and administration workers of the Municipality of Prishtina, who were invited to be part of the study. Contact data was provided by the Municipality of Prishtina. The sample selected for this study included only HCWs. A flow chart for the sample selection process is presented in Fig. 1. One hundred and seventy-two HCWs did not participate because they refused, were on leave, were busy, or it was not possible to contact them due to no connection or an incorrect phone number. Empirical data were collected from 475 HCWs from 32 primary healthcare facilities.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Sample selection flow chart

Full size image

Study participants were invited to be tested for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Two immunoassay tests were done to detect IgM and IgG antibodies. The testing was performed using VIDAS® SARS-CoV-2 by bioMérieux. Blood samples were drawn within the healthcare facility for all participants of the study. Post-test, information was collected through a telephone interview that allowed interpersonal communication without the need for a face-to-face meeting with the respondent. The respondents were asked if they were willing to respond to some questions related to their health condition and exposure to the COVID-19 virus. All individuals who agreed to participate were asked for their informed consent. Informed consent was obtained verbally over the telephone before starting the interview. They were informed that their participation is voluntary, and each participant was given the option to refuse to participate, to answer any question, or to terminate the interview and participation at any time. Ethical approval for the study was received from ethics committee of the Kosovo Doctors Chamber (12-08-2020, NR. REF. 8/2020). The study was carried out in accordance with the guidelines of the Helsinki Declaration for human participant data.

Outcome measures

The primary pre-specified outcomes were COVID-19 prevalence measures, including either positive IgG or IgM SARS-CoV-2 antibodies test, or/and self-reported PCR positive test. A serological (IgM or IgG) test was considered positive in case of “i” (index value result with VIDAS® SARS-CoV-2) was equal or larger than 1. A self-reported PCR test was considered positive in case the respondent reported that they had undergone a positive PCR test. From both of these outcomes we derived a third outcome variable that would register that a respondent had a serological or PCR self-reported positive test in order to register prevalence for COVID-19 according to any of the sources of data available. The most reliable outcome measure is serologic prevalence as we have had access directly to test results. We use the other two outcome measures to complete the picture on prevalence of COVID-19 among HCWs, knowing serological testing can turn negative at early stages of disease or after some time has passed.

Additional outcome measures were the crude and adjusted OR of COVID-19 seroprevalence or/and self-reported PCR positive test result with respect to different characteristics such as level of education, gender, residence, protective behaviors towards COVID-19, type of healthcare worker, etc.

Statistical analysis

We first calculated the prevalence of SARS COVID-19 using IgG, IgM, or/and self-reported PCR test result measures (Table 1). Then we performed a descriptive analysis of SARS-CoV-2 prevalence against several categories of variables. Crude univariable logistic regression was performed to test the unadjusted associations of variables with odds for seroprevalence. Then all the variables with a p-value < 0.10 representing differences that could potentially influence the seroprevalence were included in multiple logistic regression. We tested for collinearity in the adjusted models. Such tests showed no indication of collinearity in examination of Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) for each of variables included in the models.

Table 1 Prevalence of COVID-19 in healthcare workers
Full size table

Analyses were performed using STATA, release V.15 IC (StataCorp).

Results

Study sample

All study participants included were HCWs working in primary care sector in municipality of Prishtina, namely doctors (30.7%), nurses (48.4%), and laboratory technicians (20.8%). Of all participants, 102 (21.4%) were male and 373 (78.6%) were female.

Seroprevalence levels

From the sample of HCWs, 73 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 IgG—a prevalence of 15.37%, and 53 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 IgM—a prevalence of 11.16%. A total of 189 HCWs (39.79%) reported that they had been previously diagnosed with COVID-19 by a nose swab PCR test. There were overall 231 HCWs who either reported previous PCR diagnosis, or tested positive for serological markers IgG or IgM, which was almost half of the study sample (48.63%, Table 1).

Effect of other factors on odds of seroprevalence

Analysis of HCWs who were either IgM or IgG positive (Table 2) showed that the odds for being seropositive in SARS-CoV-2 IgG or IgM were increased among male participants in adjusted (OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.20, 3.61) and unadjusted analysis (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.21, 3.44). HCWs who reported that family members had been diagnosed with COVID-19 also showed higher odds of seropositivity for either antibody in adjusted (OR 2.99, 95% CI 1.78, 5.02) and crude analysis (OR 2.77, 95% CI 1.68, 4.54). Reduced odds of seropositivity were observed for smokers in unadjusted analysis, but adjusted analysis did not reveal any significant association (adjusted OR 0.55, 95% I 0.31, 1.01, crude OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.31, 0.99).

Table 2 Odds ratios of IgM or IgG positive HCWs
Full size table

Family behaviour of HCW gave reduced odds of seroprevalence, but the difference was not significant in this case for either being member of families not visiting restaurants (adjusted OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.35, 1.17, crude OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.40, 1.22), or being member of families respecting maximally protective measures (adjusted OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.06, 1.80, crude OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.06, 1.25).

Effect of other factors on odds of previous PCR diagnosis

In our survey, we examined how odds of reported previous PCR diagnosis were affected by different factors, calculating both crude and adjusted odds ratios (Table 3). Those with larger families, had slightly higher odds of positive PCR test result in crude analysis (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.01, 1.27), but adjusted analysis did not demonstrate significantly higher odds (OR 1.09. 95% CI 0.96, 1.24). As observed for seropositivity, both crude (OR 2.98, 95% CI 1.95, 4.55) and adjusted (OR 2.82, 95% CI 1.79, 4.44) odds ratios showed that those with infected family members were more likely to have tested positive for COVID-19. Usage of masks by colleagues was not associated with a significant difference in odds of previous diagnosis.

Table 3 Odds ratios of PCR positive HCWs
Full size table

Compared with physicians, nurses (adjusted OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.29, 0.93, crude OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.35, 0.81), and other staff (adjusted OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.29, 1.12, crude OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.30, 0.86) had lower odds of seropositivity. Working in the COVID-19 testing unit gave increased odds for a positive PCR test (adjusted OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.00, 2.24, crude OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.13, 2.38).

Effect of other factors on odds of seropositivity or previous PCR diagnosis

Our examination of COVID-19 overall prevalence, by assessing those who either tested positive for IgG or IgM in the serological tests or had previously been diagnosed with COVID-19 by PCR testing, showed similar patterns to other analyses (Table 4). Males were again found to have significantly higher unadjusted odds of COVID-19 (OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.03, 2.50). Compared with high school graduates, those with higher levels of education had higher odds of COVID-19 prevalence. For HCWs with postgraduate degree, unadjusted analysis gave an odds ratio of 1.96 (95% CI 1.19, 3.21).

Table 4 Odds ratios of IgM or IgG or PCR positive HCWs
Full size table

The residence in Prishtina was reflected in higher odds of COVID-19 (adjusted OR 1.59, 95% CI 0.79, 3.21, crude OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.03, 3.92). Those with larger families again showed higher odds of COVID-19 in unadjusted analysis (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.01, 1.28) which was not significant in adjusted analysis. Infected family members were again associated with significantly higher odds of COVID-19 (adjusted OR 3.61, 95% CI 2.25, 5.79, crude OR 3.54, 95% CI 2.27, 5.53).

Mask usage in co-workers again did not show a significant difference in odds. Those working as nurses or laboratory technicians were again less likely to be infected with COVID-19 compared to physicians, but only the crude odds ratio for nurses (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.36, 0.83) had had significantly lower odds. Those who worked in COVID-19 testing units also showed higher odds of COVID-19 (adjusted OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.04, 2.16).

Discussion

Among HCWs, 83 (17.47%) were seropositive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies IgG or IgM. A total of 189 HCWs (39.79%) reported that they had been previously diagnosed with COVID-19 by a nose swab PCR test. There were overall 231 HCWs who either reported previous PCR diagnosis, or tested positive for serological markers IgG or IgM, which was almost half of the study sample (48.63%, Table 1). Several factors are associated with decreased and increased odds for such outcomes.

Our result of 17.47% seroprevalence is comparable to the range of percentage reported in other similar studies [23,24,25,26]. Interestingly, the majority of HCWs who reported having previously tested positive by PCR tests did not test positive for either antibody. Inbaraj et al. reported roughly 7 undetected infections for every PCR confirmed case [27], which is the opposite of the trend we have observed. It is possible that this represents the extensive and thorough testing of HCWs in Prishtina. Alkurt et al. reported that only 78.2% of PCR positive patients had IgG antibodies, and that IgG titres of asymptomatic PCR-positive patients were significantly lower than symptomatic patients. Notably, these patients were tested 52.8 ± 11.6 days after infection. Bendavid’s study in California also showed that the seroprevalence of subjects 2 weeks after symptoms was considerably higher than seroprevalence 2 months after symptoms [28]. It is possible, then, that the low amount of positive antibody tests in comparison with reported PCR tests is due to antibody loss, or to mild or asymptomatic cases among some HCWs. Although it would not account for the full extent of the variation found here, systematic reviews of serological tests have shown considerable variation between accuracy of serological tests, and lower accuracy for serological tests [11, 29, 30].

The study design and the general structure of the study were based on previously published studies [14, 31, 32]. The content of the questionnaire was based on existing studies published and on consultations with healthcare experts, public health experts and staff of the Main Family Medical Centre of Prishtina. The questionnaire was compiled, tested, and revised before data collection. Key healthcare experts and medical staff from the Main Family Medical Centre of Prishtina gave their input on the study design, questionnaire, and overall progress of the study. The main limitation of the study is the relatively small sample size.

Our study is the first study about COVID-19 seroprevalence in HCWs working in Kosovo. Another study by our group has examined the seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in municipal workers in Prishtina municipality. Out of 418 municpal workers surveyed, we found that 21.1% were seropositive for either IgG or IgM, of which 9.6% were positive for IgM and 19.4% for IgG [33]. There are some studies that previously have examined seroprevalence among HCWs in primary healthcare. In Spain, Barallat et al. found 9.17% of IgG seropositivity in HCWs [22]. Compared to results of other previous studies, in Essen, Germany 1.6% and New York, USA 33% our study stands in the middle of seropositivity among HCWs [34, 35]. HCWs from emergency departments reportedly have a lower percentage of seropositivity (5.9%) [36]. In contrast with our study, Airoldi et al. [37] found that female HCWs have higher odds of seropositivity OR 1.29, 95% CI (0.92 to 1.80), but other studies have shown, like our study, that male HCWs have a higher ORs [26, 38]. Similar to our study, studies have confirmed the increased odds of seropositivity in physicians compared to nurses and other HCWs [38]. Studies have also reported higher odds of seroprevalence for smokers, but without a significant relationship [39].

Our results show that around a fifth of HCWs in Prishtina Municipality have antibodies for COVID-19, and just under half have been infected. This means that there is potential for most HCWs to be infected, which could lead to further spread of COVID and more hospitalization, which again can lead to more risk for HCWs. Considering that newly qualified Kosovar physicians are often going outside Kosovo [40], healthcare staff resources are already limited, and the need for ample health professionals for patients to have sufficient regular care means that protective measures for health professionals are needed. This should alert our policy makers and trigger them to speed up the process vaccinating more people, particularly HCWs, and increase attempts to protect HCWs from burnout.

Our study did not identify a clear link between adherence to protective measures by family, wearing of masks by coworkers, and seroprevalence or odds of diagnosis by PCR. Systematic reviews have suggested that masks have a protective effect on healthcare workers, and for the public in general [41], but higher certainty evidence is still needed [42]. Similarly, the effect of other protective measures has been examined [4, 43], but the effect of family adherence to these measures has not been considered in detail.

In conclusion, we found that several factors increase the odds of IgG and IgM seropositivity. We also found that HCWs who respect basic infection-control measures have lower odds of being seropositive on IgG and IgM, although the difference was not significant. This could be due to collinearity, which was not detected when we ran tests. Further research could clarify the relationship between family adherence to protective measures and usage of masks by staff, and seroprevalence. Our study results could assist policy makers in Kosovo to continue to raise awareness about coronavirus and its health consequences [44]. Further testing in the future would allow observation of how seroprevalence changes over time.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Zhu N, Zhang D, Wang W, Li X, Yang B, Song J, Zhao X, Huang B, Shi W, Lu R. A novel coronavirus from patients with pneumonia in China, 2019. N Engl J Med. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2001017.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. WHO. COVID-19 dashboard. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Tanne JH, Hayasaki E, Zastrow M, Pulla P, Smith P, Rada AG. Covid-19: how doctors and healthcare systems are tackling coronavirus worldwide. BMJ. 2020;368:m1090.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bandyopadhyay S, Baticulon RE, Kadhum M, Alser M, Ojuka DK, Badereddin Y, Kamath A, Parepalli SA, Brown G, Iharchane S, et al. Infection and mortality of healthcare workers worldwide from COVID-19: a systematic review. BMJ Glob Health. 2020;5(12):e003097.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Godderis L, Boone A, Bakusic J. COVID-19: a new work-related disease threatening healthcare workers. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Walton M, Murray E, Christian MD. Mental health care for medical staff and affiliated healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. 2020;9(3):241–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Amendola A, Tanzi E, Folgori L, Barcellini L, Bianchi S, Gori M, Cammi G, Albani E, Zuccotti GV. Low seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers of the largest children hospital in Milan during the pandemic wave. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2020;41(12):1468–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Insúa C, Stedile G, Figueroa V, Hernández C, Svartz A, Ferrero F, Ossorio MF, Brunetto O. Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among physicians from a children’s hospital. Archivos Argentinos de Pediatria. 2020;118(6):381–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Brehm TT, Schwinge D, Lampalzer S, Schlicker V, Küchen J, Thompson M, Ullrich F, Huber S, Schmiedel S, Addo MM, et al. Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among hospital workers in a German tertiary care center: a sequential follow-up study. Int J Hygiene Environ Health. 2021;232:113671.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Lau JS, Buntine P, Price M, Darzins P, Newnham E, Connell A, Chean R, Edwards G, Guy S. SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in healthcare workers in a tertiary healthcare network in Victoria, Australia. Infect Dis Health. 2021;26:208.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Lapić I, Rogić D, Šegulja D, Kralik Oguić S, Knežević J. The reliability of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody testing—a pilot study in asymptomatic health care workers in a Croatian university hospital. Croat Med J. 2020;61(6):485–90.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Kantele A, Lääveri T, Kareinen L, Pakkanen SH, Blomgren K, Mero S, Patjas A, Virtanen J, Uusitalo R, Lappalainen M, et al. SARS-CoV-2 infections among healthcare workers at Helsinki University Hospital, Finland, spring 2020: Serosurvey, symptoms and risk factors. Travel Med Infect Dis. 2021;39:101949.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Egger M, Bundschuh C, Wiesinger K, Bräutigam E, Berger T, Clodi M, Dieplinger B. Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in health care personnel of two acute care hospitals in Linz, Austria. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2021;59(6):e231–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Chen Y, Tong X, Wang J, Huang W, Yin S, Huang R, Yang H, Chen Y, Huang A, Liu Y, et al. High SARS-CoV-2 antibody prevalence among healthcare workers exposed to COVID-19 patients. J Infect. 2020;81(3):420–6.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Fukuda H, Seyama K, Ito K, Ai T, Nojiri S, Hori S, Wakita M, Saito K, Shida Y, Nagura R, et al. SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in healthcare workers at a frontline hospital in Tokyo. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):8380.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Milazzo L, Lai A, Pezzati L, Oreni L, Bergna A, Conti F, Meroni C, Minisci D, Galli M, Corbellino M, et al. Dynamics of the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among healthcare workers at a COVID-19 referral hospital in Milan, Italy. Occup Environ Med. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2020-107060.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Bojaj G, Agahi R, Hoxha I. Treatment of the first COVID-19 case in Kosovo and management of the pandemic. Sci Progr Res. 2021;1(3):58–62.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Proinformacioni g: Prishtina më së shumti me Covid-19, vetëm dje 372 raste. In. Prishtina, Kosovo; 2021.

  19. Sultana A, Sharma R, Hossain MM, Bhattacharya S, Purohit N. Burnout among healthcare providers during COVID-19 pandemic: challenges and evidence-based interventions. Indian J Med Ethics. 2020;5(4):1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, Takwoingi Y, Davenport C, Spijker R, Taylor-Phillips S, Adriano A, Beese S, Dretzke J, di Ruffano LF. Antibody tests for identification of current and past infection with SARS-CoV-2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;6(6):CD013652.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Lackermair K, William F, Grzanna N, Lehmann E, Fichtner S, Kucher HB, Wilhelm K, Estner H. Infection with SARS-CoV-2 in primary care health care workers assessed by antibody testing. Fam Pract. 2021;38(2):76–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Barallat J, Fernández-Rivas G, Quirant-Sánchez B, González V, Doladé M, Martinez-Caceres E, Piña M, Matllo J, Estrada O, Blanco I. Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG specific antibodies among healthcare workers in the Northern Metropolitan Area of Barcelona, Spain, after the first pandemic wave. PLoS ONE. 2020;15(12):e0244348.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Houlihan CF, Vora N, Byrne T, Lewer D, Kelly G, Heaney J, Gandhi S, Spyer MJ, Beale R, Cherepanov P. Pandemic peak SARS-CoV-2 infection and seroconversion rates in London frontline health-care workers. Lancet. 2020;396(10246):e6–7.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Jones CR, Hamilton FW, Thompson A, Morris TT, Moran E. SARS-CoV-2 IgG seroprevalence in healthcare workers and other staff at North Bristol NHS Trust: a sociodemographic analysis. J Infect. 2021;82(3):e24–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Sotgiu G, Barassi A, Miozzo M, Saderi L, Piana A, Orfeo N, Colosio C, Felisati G, Davì M, Gerli AG, et al. SARS-CoV-2 specific serological pattern in healthcare workers of an Italian COVID-19 forefront hospital. BMC Pulm Med. 2020;20(1):203.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Shields A, Faustini SE, Perez-Toledo M, Jossi S, Aldera E, Allen JD, Al-Taei S, Backhouse C, Bosworth A, Dunbar LA, et al. SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence and asymptomatic viral carriage in healthcare workers: a cross-sectional study. Thorax. 2020;75(12):1089–94.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Inbaraj LR, George CE, Chandrasingh S. Seroprevalence of COVID-19 infection in a rural district of South India: A population-based seroepidemiological study. PLoS ONE. 2021;16(3):e0249247.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Bendavid E, Mulaney B, Sood N, Shah S, Bromley-Dulfano R, Lai C, Weissberg Z, Saavedra-Walker R, Tedrow J, Bogan A, et al. COVID-19 antibody seroprevalence in Santa Clara County, California. Int J Epidemiol. 2021;50(2):410–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Lisboa Bastos M, Tavaziva G, Abidi SK, Campbell JR, Haraoui L-P, Johnston JC, Lan Z, Law S, MacLean E, Trajman A, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of serological tests for covid-19: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2020;370:m2516.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Vengesai A, Midzi H, Kasambala M, Mutandadzi H, Mduluza-Jokonya TL, Rusakaniko S, Mutapi F, Naicker T, Mduluza T. A systematic and meta-analysis review on the diagnostic accuracy of antibodies in the serological diagnosis of COVID-19. Syst Rev. 2021;10(1):155.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Garcia-Basteiro AL, Moncunill G, Tortajada M, Vidal M, Guinovart C, Jiménez A, Santano R, Sanz S, Méndez S, Llupià A, et al. Seroprevalence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 among health care workers in a large Spanish reference hospital. Nat Commun. 2020;11(1):3500.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Grant JJ, Wilmore SMS, McCann NS, Donnelly O, Lai RWL, Kinsella MJ, Rochford HL, Patel T, Kelsey MC, Andrews JA. Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in healthcare workers at a London NHS Trust. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2020;42:1–3.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Gashi B, Osmani V, Halili R, Hoxha T, Kamberi A, Hoti N, Agahi R, Basha V, Berisha V, Hoxha I. Seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among municipal staff in the Municipality of Prishtina. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(23):12545.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Korth J, Wilde B, Dolff S, Anastasiou OE, Krawczyk A, Jahn M, Cordes S, Ross B, Esser S, Lindemann M, et al. SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody detection in healthcare workers in Germany with direct contact to COVID-19 patients. J Clin Virol. 2020;128:104437.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Mansour M, Leven E, Muellers K, Stone K, Mendu DR, Wajnberg A. Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among healthcare workers at a tertiary academic hospital in New York City. J Gen Intern Med. 2020;35:2485–6.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Madsen T, Levin N, Niehus K, Law K, Mayer J, Chapman M, Johnson A, Hartsell S. Prevalence of IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 among emergency department employees. Am J Emerg Med. 2020;38(12):2752.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Airoldi C, Patrucco F, Milano F, Alessi D, Sarro A, Rossi MA, Cena T, Borrè S, Faggiano F. High Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 among Healthcare Workers in a North Italy Hospital. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(7):1.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Mahto M, Banerjee A, Biswas B, Kumar S, Agarwal N, Singh PK. Seroprevalence of IgG against SARS-CoV-2 and its determinants among healthcare workers of a COVID-19 dedicated hospital of India. Am J Blood Res. 2021;11(1):44–52.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Kataria Y, Cole M, Duffy E, de la Cena K, Schechter-Perkins EM, Bouton TC, Werler MM, Pierre C, Ragan EJ, Weber SE, et al. Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies and risk factors in health care workers at an academic medical center in Boston, Massachusetts. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):9694.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Gollopeni B. Kosovar emigration: causes, losses and benefits. Sociologija i prostor: časopis za istraživanje prostornoga i sociokulturnog razvoja. 2016;54(206):295–314.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Chu DK, Akl EA, Duda S, Solo K, Yaacoub S, Schünemann HJ, Chu DK, Akl EA, El-harakeh A, Bognanni A, et al. Physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection to prevent person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2020;395(10242):1973–87.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. MacIntyre CR, Chughtai AA. A rapid systematic review of the efficacy of face masks and respirators against coronaviruses and other respiratory transmissible viruses for the community, healthcare workers and sick patients. Int J Nurs Stud. 2020;108:103629.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Gross JV, Mohren J, Erren TC. COVID-19 and healthcare workers: a rapid systematic review into risks and preventive measures. BMJ Open. 2021;11(1):e042270.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Khorram-Manesh A, Dulebenets MA, Goniewicz K. Implementing public health strategies—the need for educational initiatives: a systematic review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(11):5888.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

The Municipality of Prishtina funded this study.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Rrezart Halili and Jeta Bunjaku have equally contributed to the development of manuscript

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Main Family Medical Centre, Fehmi Agani Rd, Prishtina, 10000, Kosovo

    Rrezart Halili, Bujar Gashi, Teuta Hoxha, Agron Kamberi & Nexhmedin Hoti

  2. Evidence Synthesis Group, Prishtina Starts, Veternik, Prishtina, 10000, Kosovo

    Jeta Bunjaku & Ilir Hoxha

  3. Research Department, Heimerer College, Veranda D4, Hyrja C dhe D, Lagja Kalabri, Prishtina, 10000, Kosovo

    Riaz Agahi & Ilir Hoxha

  4. Index Kosova, 32A Gazmend Zajmi, Prishtina, 10000, Kosovo

    Vlora Basha & Visar Berisha

  5. The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, 1 Medical Center Drive, Lebanon, NH, 03766, USA

    Ilir Hoxha

Authors
  1. Rrezart Halili
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jeta Bunjaku
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bujar Gashi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Teuta Hoxha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Agron Kamberi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Nexhmedin Hoti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Riaz Agahi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Vlora Basha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Visar Berisha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Ilir Hoxha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

RH, JB, VBa, VBe, and IH have designed the study. BG, TH, AK and NH have advised and supported study design. VBa and VBe have organized, supervised and assured quality of the data collection. IH has performed statistical analysis. RH, JB, RA, VBe and IH have written the manuscript which was critically reviewed by all authors.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ilir Hoxha.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Prior to the study, informed consent was obtained from every participant as detailed in the text. Ethical approval for the study was received from ethics committee of the Kosovo Doctors Chamber (12-08-2020, NR. REF. 8/2020). The study was carried out in accordance with the guidelines of the Helsinki Declaration for human participant data.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Halili, R., Bunjaku, J., Gashi, B. et al. Seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among staff at primary healthcare institutions in Prishtina. BMC Infect Dis 22, 57 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-022-07038-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-022-07038-6

Keywords

BMC Infectious Diseases

ISSN: 1471-2334

Contact us