To support the deployment of serology assays for population screening during the COVID-19 pandemic, we compared the performance of three fully automated SARS-CoV-2 IgG assays: Mindray CL-900i^® (target: spike [S] and nucleocapsid [N]), BioMérieux VIDAS^®3 (target: receptor-binding domain [RBD]) and Diasorin LIAISON^®XL (target: S1 and S2 subunits). A total of 111 SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR- positive samples collected at ≥ 21 days post symptom onset, and 127 pre-pandemic control samples were included. Diagnostic performance was assessed in correlation to RT-PCR and a surrogate virus-neutralizing test (sVNT). Moreover, cross-reactivity with other viral antibodies was investigated. Compared to RT-PCR, LIAISON^®XL showed the highest overall specificity (100%), followed by VIDAS^®3 (98.4%) and CL-900i^® (95.3%). The highest sensitivity was demonstrated by CL-900i^® (90.1%), followed by VIDAS^®3 (88.3%) and LIAISON^®XL (85.6%). The sensitivity of all assays was higher in symptomatic patients (91.1–98.2%) compared to asymptomatic patients (78.4–80.4%). In correlation to sVNT, all assays showed excellent sensitivities (92.2–96.1%). In addition, VIDAS^®3 demonstrated the best correlation (r = 0.75) with the sVNT. The present study provides insights on the performance of three fully automated assays, which could help diagnostic laboratories in the choice of a particular assay according to the intended use.

A vast majority of the commercially available lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) is used to detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies qualitatively. Recently, a novel fluorescence-based lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) test was developed for quantitative measurement of the total binding antibody units (BAUs) (BAU/mL) against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein receptor-binding domain (S-RBD). This study aimed to evaluate the performance of the fluorescence LFIA Finecare^TM 2019-nCoV S-RBD test along with its reader (Model No.: FS-113). Plasma from 150 reverse trancriptase–PCR (RT-PCR)-confirmed positive individuals and 100 prepandemic samples were tested by Fincare^TM to access sensitivity and specificity. For qualitative and quantitative validation of the FinCare^TM measurements, BAU/mL results of FinCare^TM were compared with results of 2 reference assays: the surrogate virus-neutralizing test (sVNT, GenScript Biotech, USA) and the VIDAS®3 automated assay (BioMérieux, France). Finecare^TM showed 92% sensitivity and 100% specificity compared with PCR. Cohen's Kappa statistic denoted moderate and excellent agreement with sVNT and VIDAS®3, with values being 0.557 (95% CI: 0.32–0.78) and 0.731 (95% CI: 0.51–0.95), respectively. A strong correlation was observed between Finecare^TM/sVNT (r = 0.7, p < 0.0001) and Finecare^TM/VIDAS®3 (r = 0.8, p < 0.0001). Finecare^TM is a reliable assay and can be used as a surrogate to assess binding and neutralizing antibody response after infection or vaccination, particularly in none or small laboratory settings.

Background: In December 2019, a novel coronavirus called SARS-CoV-2 was identified as the cause of a cluster of pneumonia cases in Wuhan, China. It rapidly spread due to human-to-human transmission, resulting in a global pandemic. Nearly every country, including Qatar, has established guidelines and regulations to limit the spread of the virus and to preserve public health. However, these procedures have been associated with negative effects on the psychological and intellectual well-being of individuals, including children and adolescents. Objective: The objective of this study was to determine the psychological influence of home isolation and social distancing on children and adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic in Qatar, and the strategies used to cope with these measures. Methods: This cross-sectional study was undertaken using an online questionnaire administered through SMS text messaging. All home-isolated children and adolescents registered at the Primary Health Care Corporation aged 7-18 years were invited to participate in the study. Children and adolescents with intellectual disadvantages were excluded. A P value of .05 (two-tailed) was considered statistically significant. Results: Data were collected from 6608 participants from June 23 to July 18, 2020. Nearly all participants adhered to the official regulations during the period of home isolation and social distancing; however, 69.1% (n=4568) of parents believed their children were vulnerable to the virus compared to 25% (n=1652) who expressed they were not vulnerable at all. Higher levels of anger, depression, and general anxiety were prevalent among 1.3% (n=84), 3.9% (n=260), and 1.6% (n=104) of participants, respectively. The mean score for the emotional constructs anger and depression decreased with increased compliance with regulations (P=.04 and P=.11, respectively). The differences in mean score for all psychological and coping strategies used among participants across the 3 levels of vulnerability to SARS-CoV-2 were statistically significant. The mean score varied little with increasing reported vulnerability to the virus. This mild variation can make a difference when the sample size is large, as is the case in this study. Conclusions: Screening for psychological and social disruptions is important for the development of strategies by schools and health care providers to assess and monitor behavioral changes and negative psychological impact during post–COVID-19 reintegration. Participants experiencing higher levels of anxiety should be given more attention during reintegration and transitional phases in schools. Although electronic devices and social media platforms may have lowered anxiety levels in some cases, it is important to address how they are used and how content is tailored to children and adolescents. It is also important to maintain an active lifestyle for children and young persons, and encourage them not to neglect their physical health, as this promotes a better psychological state of mind.

Waning protection against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants by pre-existing antibodies elicited because of current vaccination or natural infection is a global concern. Whether this is due to the waning of immunity to SARS-COV-2 remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the dynamics of antibody isotype responses amongst vaccinated naïve (VN) and naturally infected (NI) individuals. We followed up antibody levels in COVID-19 messenger RNA (mRNA)-vaccinated subjects without prior infection (VN, n = 100) in two phases: phase-I (P-I) at ~ 1.4 and phase-II (P-II) at ~ 5.3 months. Antibody levels were compared with those of unvaccinated and naturally infected subjects (NI, n = 40) at ~ 1.7 (P-1) and 5.2 (P-II) months post-infection. Neutralizing antibodies (NTAb), anti-S-RBD-IgG, -IgM and anti-S-IgA isotypes were measured. The VN group elicited significantly greater antibody responses (P < 0.001) than the NI group at P-I, except for IgM. In the VN group, a significant waning in antibody response was observed in all isotypes. There was about an ~ 4-fold decline in NTAb levels (P < 0.001), anti-S-RBD-IgG (~5-fold, P < 0.001), anti-S-RBD-IgM (~6-fold, P < 0.001) and anti-S1-IgA (2-fold, P < 0.001). In the NI group, a significant but less steady decline was notable in S-RBD-IgM (~2-fold, P < 0.001), and a much smaller but significant difference in NTAb (<2-fold, P < 0.001) anti-S-RBD IgG (<2-fold, P = 0.005). Unlike the VN group, the NI group mounted a lasting anti-S1-IgA response with no significant decline. Anti-S1-IgA, which were ~ 3-fold higher in VN subjects compared with NI in P-1 (P < 0.001), dropped to almost the same levels, with no significant difference observed between the two groups in P-II. Whereas double-dose mRNA vaccination boosted antibody levels, vaccinated individuals’ ‘boost’ was relatively short-lived.

Airborne bacteria pose a potential risk to human health upon inhalation in the indoor environments of health care facilities. Airborne bacteria may originate from various sources, including patients, workers, and daily visitors. Hence, this study investigates the quantity, size, and identification of airborne bacteria indoors and outdoors of four Primary Health Care Centers (PHCC) in Doha, Qatar. Air samples were collected from the lobby, triage room, and outside environment of the centers, including, Qatar University (QU-HC), Al-Rayyan (AR-HC), Umm-Ghuwailina (UG-HC), and Old Airport (OA-HC) between August 2020 and March 2021, throughout both the hot and the cold seasons. Samples were collected using an Anderson six-stage cascade impactor. The mean of the total colony-forming units was calculated per cubic meter of air (CFU/m³). QU-HC had the lowest mean of total bacterial count compared with other centers in the indoor and outdoor areas with 100.4 and 99.6 CFU/m³, respectively. In contrast, AR-HC had the highest level, with 459 CFU/m³ indoors, while OA-HC recorded the highest bacterial concentration of the outdoor areas with a total mean 377 CFU/m³. In addition, 16S rRNA sequencing was performed for genera identification. Staphylococcus, Acinetobacter, Bacillus, and Pseudomonas were the four most frequently identified bacterial genera in this study. The abundance of airborne bacteria in the four health centers was higher in the cold season. About 46% of the total airborne bacterial count for three PHCC centers exceeded 300 CFU/m³, making them uncompliant with the World Health Organization’s (WHO) recommendation for indoor settings. Consequently, an IAQ standards should be shaped to establish a baseline for measuring air pollution in Qatar. Additionally, it is crucial to understand seasonal fluctuations better so that hospitals can avoid rising and spreading infection peaks.

Background: Covid-19 related studies report psychological impacts during home isolation and social distancing. Despite that, children and adolescents were able to adopt coping strategies that assisted in lowering severe levels of psychological disorders. This study aims to report on the psychosocial implications of social distancing and isolation on children of different nationalities who reside in Qatar, and to reveal their coping ways. Methods: This is a cross sectional study with qualitative component at its end. The study is a part of a larger study that reported the results of a national screening for psychological disorders experienced by children and adolescents in Qatar. A bilingual online questionnaire included close-ended and one open-ended question to screen for psychological changes and identify coping strategies practiced by children and adolescents (7–18 years) during home-isolation and social distancing. The quantitative questionnaire had five main sections as follows: the sociodemographic characteristics, Spence Children’s Anxiety Scale, Kutcher Adolescent Depression Scale, and Clinical Anger Scale). The last section screened for eight different coping strategies. The summative content analysis was used to analyze the open-ended question “What practices do you do at home that make you happy?”. First, open coding was used (for identification), followed by the axial coding (for comparison), and lasted by sorting of coping strategies inductively. Results: Six thousand six hundred and eight (6608) subjects participated between June 23 and July 18, 2020. The clinical outcomes of the study had varying prevalence and levels of severity, which ranged from mild to severe. Higher prevalence was noted for adjustment disorder 66.5% (n = 4396), and generalized anxiety 60% (n = 3858), in comparison to depression 40% (n = 2588). Additionally, participants reported using cognitive, spiritual, social, and physical coping strategies. Eight higher order themes were identified to reflect the coping strategies: playing with siblings or pets, gardening, cooking, practicing arts and crafts, and doing chores. Furthermore, Sociodemographic factors such as ethnicity, religion and family status played a considerable role in choosing the type of coping strategy. Conclusion: The uniqueness of the study is bringing the psychosocial implications of social distancing through the voices of children and adolescents, and coping strategies from their perspective. These results are of importance for educational and healthcare systems that are recommended to collaborate even in “normal” times to prepare these age categories for any future crises. The importance of daily lifestyle and family is highlighted as protectors, and crucial factors in emotional management.