OBJECTIVES: To describe the loss of paramedic availability to Toronto Emergency Medical Services during a biphasic (SARS-1 and SARS-2) outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). METHODS: During the SARS outbreak, a dedicated paramedic surveillance and quarantine program was developed. The authors determined the number of paramedics on quarantine each day, the type of quarantine (either home quarantine [HQ] or work quarantine [WQ]), and the development of SARS-like symptoms. RESULTS: During the SARS outbreak, there were five cases of probable SARS and three cases of suspect SARS. SARS-1 lasted 30 days, during which 234 paramedics were placed on HQ. The total number of HQ days was 1,615. During the five peak days of SARS-1, the total number of HQ days was 664. SARS-2 lasted 18 days, during which 292 paramedics were placed on either HQ or WQ, for a combined number of quarantine days of 1,637. During the five peak days of SARS-2, the combined number of quarantine days was 910. Of these, paramedics were available for duty on 708 days (78%) due to the WQ program. The primary reason for quarantine was unprotected exposure to a health care institution experiencing a SARS outbreak. Under quarantine, SARS-like symptoms developed in 68 paramedics, including cough (53 [78%]), myalgia (33 [48%]), fatigue (30 [44%]), headache (29 [43%]), fever (11 [16%]), and shortness of breath (7 [10%]). CONCLUSIONS: Paramedics were among the health care workers who developed SARS. During SARS-2, WQ optimized the number of days on which paramedics were available for duty. Many paramedics developed SARS-like symptoms without being diagnosed as having SARS. A dedicated paramedic surveillance and quarantine program provided a useful means to manage the paramedic resource during the SARS outbreak.
OBJECTIVES: To describe the loss of paramedic availability to Toronto Emergency Medical Services during a biphasic (SARS-1 and SARS-2) outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). METHODS: During the SARS outbreak, a dedicated paramedic surveillance and quarantine program was developed. The authors determined the number of paramedics on quarantine each day, the type of quarantine (either home quarantine [HQ] or work quarantine [WQ]), and the development of SARS-like symptoms. RESULTS: During the SARS outbreak, there were five cases of probable SARS and three cases of suspect SARS. SARS-1 lasted 30 days, during which 234 paramedics were placed on HQ. The total number of HQ days was 1,615. During the five peak days of SARS-1, the total number of HQ days was 664. SARS-2 lasted 18 days, during which 292 paramedics were placed on either HQ or WQ, for a combined number of quarantine days of 1,637. During the five peak days of SARS-2, the combined number of quarantine days was 910. Of these, paramedics were available for duty on 708 days (78%) due to the WQ program. The primary reason for quarantine was unprotected exposure to a health care institution experiencing a SARS outbreak. Under quarantine, SARS-like symptoms developed in 68 paramedics, including cough (53 [78%]), myalgia (33 [48%]), fatigue (30 [44%]), headache (29 [43%]), fever (11 [16%]), and shortness of breath (7 [10%]). CONCLUSIONS: Paramedics were among the health care workers who developed SARS. During SARS-2, WQ optimized the number of days on which paramedics were available for duty. Many paramedics developed SARS-like symptoms without being diagnosed as having SARS. A dedicated paramedic surveillance and quarantine program provided a useful means to manage the paramedic resource during the SARS outbreak.
Authors: Christian Drosten; Stephan Günther; Wolfgang Preiser; Sylvie van der Werf; Hans-Reinhard Brodt; Stephan Becker; Holger Rabenau; Marcus Panning; Larissa Kolesnikova; Ron A M Fouchier; Annemarie Berger; Ana-Maria Burguière; Jindrich Cinatl; Markus Eickmann; Nicolas Escriou; Klaus Grywna; Stefanie Kramme; Jean-Claude Manuguerra; Stefanie Müller; Volker Rickerts; Martin Stürmer; Simon Vieth; Hans-Dieter Klenk; Albert D M E Osterhaus; Herbert Schmitz; Hans Wilhelm Doerr Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-04-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Kenneth W Tsang; Pak L Ho; Gaik C Ooi; Wilson K Yee; Teresa Wang; Moira Chan-Yeung; Wah K Lam; Wing H Seto; Loretta Y Yam; Thomas M Cheung; Poon C Wong; Bing Lam; Mary S Ip; Jane Chan; Kwok Y Yuen; Kar N Lai Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-03-31 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Susan M Poutanen; Donald E Low; Bonnie Henry; Sandy Finkelstein; David Rose; Karen Green; Raymond Tellier; Ryan Draker; Dena Adachi; Melissa Ayers; Adrienne K Chan; Danuta M Skowronski; Irving Salit; Andrew E Simor; Arthur S Slutsky; Patrick W Doyle; Mel Krajden; Martin Petric; Robert C Brunham; Allison J McGeer Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-03-31 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Thomas G Ksiazek; Dean Erdman; Cynthia S Goldsmith; Sherif R Zaki; Teresa Peret; Shannon Emery; Suxiang Tong; Carlo Urbani; James A Comer; Wilina Lim; Pierre E Rollin; Scott F Dowell; Ai-Ee Ling; Charles D Humphrey; Wun-Ju Shieh; Jeannette Guarner; Christopher D Paddock; Paul Rota; Barry Fields; Joseph DeRisi; Jyh-Yuan Yang; Nancy Cox; James M Hughes; James W LeDuc; William J Bellini; Larry J Anderson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-04-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: M L Fox; P Barba; I Heras; M López-Parra; M González-Vicent; R de la Cámara; M Batlle; R Parody; C Vallejo; I Ruiz-Camps; L Vázquez Journal: Clin Microbiol Infect Date: 2014-10-13 Impact factor: 8.067
Authors: Justin Mausz; Nicholas A Jackson; Corey Lapalme; Dan Piquette; Dave Wakely; Sheldon Cheskes Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-03-04 Impact factor: 3.390