Abstract
Background COVID-19 reinfected patients suffer from diverse health consequences. Information on the severity of COVID-19 reinfection is scarce. The current study aimed to determine the proportion of COVID-19 reinfection and risk factors associated with its severity.
Methods This cross-sectional study targeted all COVID-19 patients reported in May 2021 at the Health Information Unit (HIU) of the Directorate General of Health Services (DGHS) of Bangladesh. We identified 473 (1.14%) reinfected patients out of 41408 diagnosed cases by reviewing their medical records. Considering the selection criteria and informed consent, we enrolled 404 reinfected patients. Data were collected through telephone interviews and reviewing medical records using a semi-structured questionnaire and a checklist.
Results The majority of the reinfected patients were urban residents (98.0%). Around 13.0% of reinfected patients had <90% oxygen saturation, and 64.0% had an interval of 3-6 months between two attacks. The severity of reinfection included asymptomatic (12.9%), mild (8.9%), moderate (66.3%), and severe (11.9%) forms of infection. An interval of 3-6 months between two attacks had less chance of having mild (AOR=0.031, ρ=0.000), moderate (AOR=0.132, ρ=0.017), and severe (AOR=0.059, ρ=0.002) infections. Patients who maintained physical distance had less chance of moderate-intensity reinfection (AOR=0.137, ρ=0.013), while the vaccinated patients had a higher chance of moderate (AOR=16.127, ρ=0.001) and severe (AOR=3.894, ρ=0.047) intensity reinfection.
Conclusion To avert COVID-19 reinfection and its severity, patients should be vigilant about preventive practices even after recovery. The study suggests vibrant interventions aligned with exposure, physical distancing, vaccination, and comorbidities for mitigating reinfection.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethical approval of the study was given by the Institutional Review Board of the National Institute of the Preventive and Social Medicine (NIPSOM), Dhaka, Bangladesh with reference no. NIPSOM/IRB/2021/06, date: 02/03/2021.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available as the ethical vote did not include open data access but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
