Pregnancy

How SARS-CoV-2 Positivity Factors by Blood Type, Race, and Pregnancy

How SARS-CoV-2 Positivity Factors by Blood Type, Race, and Pregnancy

Certain blood groups in combination with Rh, race (black patients and white patients) and pregnant or non-pregnant women have demonstrated protection against the virus.

A new controlled case study recently published in the American Journal of Infection Control (AJIC), demonstrates that SARS-CoV-2 positive results are linked to blood type, confirming previous research. Additionally, this study investigated blood groups for SARS-CoV-2 and the correlation for acquisition of the disease in various socio-demographic groups, including women of childbearing age, which supports additional research and more recent studies demonstrating the existence of inequalities within certain socio-demographic groups. Although this study validated the protection of pregnant women against SARS-CoV-2, further and larger studies are needed.

“Our study team was able to replicate the results of studies performed earlier in the pandemic, which demonstrated that blood type may play an important role in the acquisition of SARS-CoV-2. We were also able to support findings from more recent research showing that social inequalities, such as race and gender, contribute to an individual’s likelihood of contracting the disease,” Maria L. Vacca, MSN, RN, CIC, Director of infection control at Thomas Jefferson University Hospitals Center City, and the study author said Infection control today® (TIC®) in an exclusive interview. “While replicating the results of previous research studies is important, our research yielded a new finding, showing that pregnant women in our study group were significantly less likely to contract SARS-CoV-2 than non-pregnant women. pregnant of childbearing age. This new information is very exciting and adds to the growing body of knowledge that currently exists regarding the virus.

This Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved study was conducted at Jefferson University Hospitals located in New Jersey and Pennsylvania from March 2020 to March 2021. It included 27,662 patients and enhanced international initial studies that have revealed a significant correlation between blood type A and SARS. -Susceptibility to CoV-2.

“This article focuses on 1 glaring aspect of health care brought to light during the pandemic – socio-economic level and lack of adequate health care. Both have been a wake-up call for society to act finally on this known disparity,” said Sharon Ward-Fore, MS, MT (ASCP), CIC, FAPIC, an infection control consultant based in Chicago, and member of Infection control today® Editorial Advisory Board, says TIC® when she reviewed this research.

Inclusion criteria included 27,662 hospitalized patients whose blood type was assessed and who were tested for SARS-CoV-2. The endpoints of the study combined ABO, Rh and (ACIM) with test positivity. Inclusion criteria included all admitted adult patients, ages 18 and older, who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 and had a blood type recorded on admission. The first test for SARS-CoV-2 with a positive result was used for patients who had multiple tests for SARS-CoV-2, and all others excluded. The study’s primary endpoints combined ABO and Rh blood group with the likelihood of a positive test and all-cause inpatient mortality (ACIM). Secondary endpoints included age, gender, race, and body mass index (BMI).

Among the patients included in the study:

  1. 42% were men,
  2. the average age was 56.3 years [19.2] years,
  3. 60% were Caucasian.
  4. The average BMI was 29.3 [8.1] kg/m2;
  5. 39% of patients were considered obese.

In patients who met the criteria, the investigators found the following results:

  • Overall, ACIM was highest in blood group A (-) and lowest in blood group O (+).
  • Interestingly, blood groups B and AB did not show an association.
  • Blood type O (-) was found to have the lowest number of positive tests.
  • Type A blood was associated with increased positivity [1.01 (1.0-1.21), P = .03].
  • Type B [1.10 (0.99-1.23), P = .08] and AB [0.98 (0.81-1.19), P = .84] showed no association.
  • When evaluating ACIM, type A [1.18 (0.91-1.52), P = .22]B [1.13 (0.82- 1.56), P = .480]and AB [1.06 (0.62-1.81), P = .839] were not associated with increased mortality.
  • The female subgroup was less likely to test positive [0.88 (0.82-0.986), P = .002].
  • Black patients demonstrated a higher likelihood of positivity compared to whites [1.96 (1.79-2.14), P < .001].
  • Non-pregnant women were 2.5 times more likely to test positive [2.49 (2.04-3.04), P < .001].

Inclusion criteria included all admitted adult patients, ages 18 and older, who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 and had a blood type recorded on admission. The first test for SARS-CoV-2 with a positive result was used for patients who had multiple tests for SARS-CoV-2, and all others excluded. The primary endpoints of the study combined ABO and Rh blood group with the likelihood of being positive and (ACIM). Secondary endpoints included age, gender, race, and body mass index (BMI). There was a subgroup analysis focusing on women of childbearing age and in pregnancy.

“Further studies are needed to confirm and investigate this topic. I would love to see more infection preventionists conduct research studies on this and other topics they are passionate about, and I think this is an important and growing role for our profession,” Vacca said. TIC®.

The investigators also mentioned in the study, “More research is warranted…to explore whether positivity is affected by physiological, social, or behavioral factors, or influenced by a combination of causes.”