Health care workers (HCW) are at high risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in HCW has been examined in cross-sectional studies by quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) tests, which may lead to underestimating exact incidence rates. We thus investigated the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a group of HCW at a dedicated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospital in a six-month follow-up period. We conducted a prospective cohort study on 109 participants of both sexes working in areas of high, moderate, and low SARS-CoV-2 exposure. qPCR tests in nasopharyngeal swabs and anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG serum antibodies were assessed at the beginning and six months later. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory parameters were analyzed according to IgG seropositivity by paired Student’s T-test or the chi-square test. The incidence rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection was considerably high in our cohort of HCW (58%), among whom 67% were asymptomatic carriers. No baseline risk factors contributed to the infection rate, including the workplace. It is still necessary to increase hospital safety procedures to prevent virus transmissibility from HCW to relatives and non-COVID-19 patients during the upcoming waves of contagion.

Throughout the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in Mexico (August—December 2020), we closely followed a cohort of n = 100 healthcare workers. These workers were initially seronegative for Immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, and maintained close contact with patients afflicted by the disease. We explored the database of demographic, physiological and laboratory parameters of the cohort recorded at baseline to identify potential risk factors for infection with SARS-CoV-2 at a follow-up evaluation six months later. Given that susceptibility to infection may be a systemic rather than a local property, we hypothesized that a multivariate statistical analysis, such as MANOVA, may be an appropriate statistical approach. Our results indicate that susceptibility to infection with SARS-CoV-2 is modulated by sex. For men, different physiological states appear to exist that predispose to or protect against infection, whereas for women, we did not find evidence for divergent physiological states. Intriguingly, male participants who remained uninfected throughout the six-month observation period, had values for mean arterial pressure and waist-to-hip ratio that exceeded the normative reference range. We hypothesize that certain risk factors that worsen the outcome of COVID-19 disease, such as being overweight or having high blood pressure, may instead offer some protection against infection with SARS-CoV-2.

Background/Objectives: Wearable devices offer a scalable approach to repeated cardiovascular assessment through ambulatory spot measurements and have demonstrated adequate performance in measuring heart rate (HR). However, their reliability for blood pressure (BP) assessment remains uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate BP and HR measurements obtained with the HUAWEI WATCH D2 smartwatch by comparison with standard reference devices under controlled postural conditions. Methods: A total of 30 participants (15 women and 15 men; age range, 21–88 years) were enrolled. One participant could not undergo smartwatch measurement because of wrist-size limitations, and measurement acquisition failed in another participant. Consequently, paired measurements obtained in the seated and upright positions were analyzed for 28 participants. Smartwatch-derived systolic BP (SBP), diastolic BP (DBP), and HR were compared with a digital sphygmomanometer, an analog sphygmomanometer, and a digital pulse oximeter. Agreement was assessed using percentage error and Bland–Altman analysis, complemented by linear regression to evaluate proportional bias. Results: In the seated position, the smartwatch showed agreement with percentage errors below 4% for SBP and DBP, with concordance coefficients indicating good agreement. In the upright position, accuracy decreased, with percentage errors up to 14%, increased variability, wider limits of agreement, and the presence of systematic and proportional discrepancies. Measurement performance was influenced by device placement, and isolated failures highlighted sensitivity to anatomical and technical factors. Conclusions: Smartwatch-based BP monitoring is feasible under controlled conditions but remains dependent on posture and measurement conditions. These findings support the use of wearable devices for scheduled spot-check cardiovascular assessment under controlled conditions and underscore the need for standardized measurement protocols before their implementation in ambulatory or long-term monitoring applications.