@文章{info:doi/10.2196/41395，作者=“Kim, Min Hyung and Ryu, Un hyounung and Heo, Seok-Jae and Kim, Yong Chan and Park, Yoon Soo”，标题=“辅助实时定位系统在预防SARS-CoV-2在医院环境中的潜在作用:回顾性病例-对照研究”，期刊=“J Med Internet Res”，年=“2022”，月=“10”，日=“18”，卷=“24”，数=“10”，页=“e41395”，关键词=“实时定位系统;COVID-19;接触者追踪;二次传播;背景:为了减轻接触者追踪的负担，人们对医院感染控制方面的新技术的需求越来越大。目的:比较实时定位系统(RTLS)与传统接触者追踪方法在识别与SARS-CoV-2二次传播相关的高危接触者病例方面的有效性。方法:在韩国一所大学医院进行了一项回顾性病例对照研究，涉及2022年1月23日至3月25日确诊的COVID-19确诊患者的住院接触病例。使用常规方法或RTLS对接触病例进行识别。本研究的主要终点是SARS-CoV-2在接触病例中的继发性传播。单变量和多变量逻辑回归分析比较检测阳性和阴性接触病例。 Results: Overall, 509 and 653 cases were confirmed by the conventional method and the RTLS, respectively. Only 74 contact cases were identified by both methods, which could be attributed to the limitations of each method. Sensitivity was higher for the RTLS tracing method (653/1088, 60.0{\%}) than the conventional tracing method (509/1088, 46.8{\%}) considering all contact cases identified by both methods. The secondary transmission rate in the RTLS model was 8.1{\%}, while that in the conventional model was 5.3{\%}. The multivariable logistic regression model revealed that the RTLS was more capable of detecting secondary transmission than the conventional method (adjusted odds ratio 6.15, 95{\%} CI 1.92-28.69; P=.007). Conclusions: This study showed that the RTLS is beneficial when used as an adjunctive approach to the conventional method for contact tracing associated with secondary transmission. However, the RTLS cannot completely replace traditional contact tracing. ", issn="1438-8871", doi="10.2196/41395", url="//www.mybigtv.com/2022/10/e41395", url="https://doi.org/10.2196/41395", url="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36197844" }