Establishing SARS-CoV-2 Membrane protein-specific antibodies as a valuable serological target via high-content microscopy

The prevalence and strength of serological responses mounted towards SARS-CoV-2 proteins other than nucleocapsid (N) and spike (S), which may be of use as additional serological markers, remains underexplored. Using high content microscopy to assess antibody responses against full length StrepTagged SARS-CoV-2 proteins, we found that 85% (166/196) of unvaccinated individuals with RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections and 74% (31/42) of individuals infected after being vaccinated developed detectable IgG against the structural protein M, which is higher than previous estimates. Compared with N antibodies, M IgG displayed a shallower time-dependent decay and greater specificity. Sensitivity for SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was enhanced when N and M IgG detection was combined. These findings indicate that screening for M seroconversion may be a good approach for detecting additional vaccine breakthrough infections and highlight the potential to use HCM as a rapidly deployable method to identify the most immunogenic targets of newly emergent pathogens. Graphical

Risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence following the first pandemic wave in UK healthcare workers in a large NHS Foundation Trust.

Background: We aimed to measure SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in a cohort of healthcare workers (HCWs) during the first UK wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, explore risk factors associated with infection, and investigate the impact of antibody titres on assay sensitivity. Methods: HCWs at Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust were prospectively enrolled and sampled at two time points. We developed an in-house ELISA for testing participant serum for SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgA reactivity against Spike and Nucleoprotein. Data were analysed using three statistical models: a seroprevalence model, an antibody kinetics model, and a heterogeneous sensitivity model. Results: Our in-house assay had a sensitivity of 99·47% and specificity of 99·56%. We found that 24·4% (n=311/1275) of HCWs were seropositive as of 12th June 2020. Of these, 39·2% (n=122/311) were asymptomatic. The highest adjusted seroprevalence was measured in HCWs on the Acute Medical Unit (41·1%, 95% CrI 30·0-52·9) and in Physiotherapists and Occupational Therapists (39·2%, 95% CrI 24·4-56·5). Older age groups showed overall higher median antibody titres. Further modelling suggests that, for a serological assay with an overall sensitivity of 80%, antibody titres may be markedly affected by differences in age, with sensitivity estimates of 89% in those over 60 years but 61% in those ≤30 years. Conclusions:  HCWs in acute medical units and those working closely with COVID-19 patients were at highest risk of infection, though whether these are infections acquired from patients or other staff is unknown. Current serological assays may underestimate seroprevalence in younger age groups if validated using sera from older and/or more severe COVID-19 cases.

mRNA vaccination drives differential mucosal neutralizing antibody profiles in naïve and SARS-CoV-2 previously-infected individuals.

Two doses of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine induces a strong systemic SARS-CoV-2 specific humoral response. However, SARS-CoV-2 airborne transmission makes mucosal immune response a crucial first line of defense. Therefore, we characterized SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG responses induced by BNT162b2 vaccine, as well as IgG responses to other pathogenic and seasonal human coronaviruses in oral fluid and plasma from 200 UK healthcare workers who were naïve (N=62) or previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 (N=138) using a pan-coronavirus multiplex binding immunoassay (Meso Scale Discovery®). Additionally, we investigated the impact of historical SARS-CoV-2 infection on vaccine-induced IgG, IgA and neutralizing responses in selected oral fluid samples before vaccination, after a first and second dose of BNT162b2, as well as following a third dose of mRNA vaccine or breakthrough infections using the same immunoassay and an ACE2 inhibition assay. Prior to vaccination, we found that spike-specific IgG levels in oral fluid positively correlated with IgG levels in plasma from previously-infected individuals (Spearman r=0.6858, p<0.0001) demonstrating that oral fluid could be used as a proxy for the presence of plasma SARS-CoV-2 IgG. However, the sensitivity was lower in oral fluid (0.85, 95% CI 0.77-0.91) than in plasma (0.94, 95% CI 0.88-0.97). Similar kinetics of mucosal and systemic spike-specific IgG levels were observed following vaccination in naïve and previously-infected individuals, respectively. In addition, a significant enhancement of OC43 and HKU1 spike-specific IgG levels was observed in previously-infected individuals following one vaccine dose in oral fluid (OC43 S: p<0.0001; HKU1 S: p=0.0423) suggesting cross-reactive IgG responses to seasonal beta coronaviruses. Mucosal spike-specific IgA responses were induced by mRNA vaccination particularly in previously-infected individuals (71%) but less frequently in naïve participants (23%). Neutralizing responses to SARS-CoV-2 ancestral and variants of concerns were detected following vaccination in naïve and previously-infected participants, with likely contribution from both IgG and IgA in previously-infected individuals (correlations between neutralizing responses and IgG: Spearman r=0.5642, p<0.0001; IgA: Spearman r=0.4545, p=0.0001). We also observed that breakthrough infections or a third vaccine dose enhanced mucosal antibody levels and neutralizing responses. These data contribute to show that a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection tailors the mucosal antibody profile induced by vaccination.

Evolution of long-term vaccine induced and hybrid immunity in healthcare workers after different COVID19 vaccine regimens: a longitudinal cohort study

Background Both infection and vaccination, alone or in combination, generate antibody and T cell responses against SARS-CoV-2. However, the maintenance of such responses – and hence protection from disease – requires careful characterisation. In a large prospective study of UK healthcare workers (Protective immunity from T cells in Healthcare workers (PITCH), within the larger SARS-CoV-2 immunity & reinfection evaluation (SIREN) study) we previously observed that prior infection impacted strongly on subsequent cellular and humoral immunity induced after long and short dosing intervals of BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech) vaccination. Methods Here, we report longer follow up of 684 HCWs in this cohort over 6-9 months following two doses of BNT162b2 or AZD1222 (Oxford/AstraZeneca) vaccination and up to 6 months following a subsequent mRNA booster vaccination. Findings We make three observations: Firstly, the dynamics of humoral and cellular responses differ;binding and neutralising antibodies declined whereas T and memory B cell responses were maintained after the second vaccine dose. Secondly, vaccine boosting restored IgG levels, broadened neutralising activity against variants of concern including omicron BA.1, BA.2 and BA.5, and boosted T cell responses above the 6-month level post dose 2. Thirdly, prior infection maintained its impact driving larger and broader T cell responses compared with never-infected people – a feature maintained until 6 months after the third dose. Conclusions Broadly cross-reactive T cell responses are well maintained over time – especially in those with combined vaccine and infection-induced immunity ("hybrid” immunity) – and may contribute to continued protection against severe disease. Funding Department for Health and Social Care, Medical Research Council Graphical abstract Moore et al. studied antibody and cellular responses to COVID-19 vaccines before and after dose 3. Antibody responses waned, but T cell responses were well maintained. T cells recognised Omicron variants better and for longer than antibodies. Differences due to vaccine regimen and previous infection evened out over time.

Factors Associated With Mortality Among Homeless Older Adults in California: The HOPE HOME Study.

Importance: The population of homeless older adults is growing and experiences premature mortality. Little is known about factors associated with mortality among homeless older adults. Objective: To identify the prevalence and factors associated with mortality in a cohort of homeless adults 50 years and older. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this prospective cohort study (Health Outcomes in People Experiencing Homelessness in Older Middle Age [HOPE HOME]), 450 adults 50 years and older who were homeless at baseline were recruited via venue-based sampling in Oakland, California. Enrollment occurred in 2 phases, from July 2013 to June 2014 and from August 2017 to July 2018, and participants were interviewed at 6-month intervals. Exposures: Baseline and time-varying characteristics, including sociodemographic factors, social support, housing status, incarceration history, chronic medical conditions, substance use, and mental health problems. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mortality through December 31, 2021, based on state and local vital records information from contacts and death certificates. All-cause mortality rates were compared with those in the general population from 2014 to 2019 using age-specific standardized mortality ratios with 95% CIs. Results: Of the 450 included participants, median (IQR) age at baseline was 58.1 (54.5-61.6) years, 107 (24%) were women, and 360 (80%) were Black. Over a median (IQR) follow-up of 55 (38-93) months, 117 (26%) participants died. Median (IQR) age at death was 64.6 (60.3-67.5) years. In multivariable analyses, characteristics associated with mortality included a first episode of homelessness at 50 years and older (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.62; 95% CI, 1.13-2.32), homelessness (aHR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.23-2.68) or institutionalization (aHR, 6.36; 95% CI, 3.42-11.82) at any follow-up compared with being housed, fair or poor self-rated health (aHR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.13-2.40), and diabetes (aHR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.06-2.26). Demographic characteristics, substance use problems, and mental health problems were not independently associated. All-cause standardized mortality was 3.5 times higher (95% CI, 2.5-4.4) compared with adults in Oakland. The most common causes of death were heart disease (n = 17 [14.5%]), cancer (n = 17 [14.5%]), and drug overdose (n = 14 [12.0%]). Conclusions and Relevance: The cohort study found that premature mortality was common among homeless older adults and associated factors included late-life homelessness and ongoing homelessness. There is an urgent need for policy approaches to prevent and end homelessness among older adults in the US.

Evolution of long-term vaccine-induced and hybrid immunity in healthcare workers after different COVID-19 vaccine regimens.

BACKGROUND: Both infection and vaccination, alone or in combination, generate antibody and T cell responses against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, the maintenance of such responses-and hence protection from disease-requires careful characterization. In a large prospective study of UK healthcare workers (HCWs) (Protective Immunity from T Cells in Healthcare Workers [PITCH], within the larger SARS-CoV-2 Immunity and Reinfection Evaluation [SIREN] study), we previously observed that prior infection strongly affected subsequent cellular and humoral immunity induced after long and short dosing intervals of BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech) vaccination. METHODS: Here, we report longer follow-up of 684 HCWs in this cohort over 6-9 months following two doses of BNT162b2 or AZD1222 (Oxford/AstraZeneca) vaccination and up to 6 months following a subsequent mRNA booster vaccination. FINDINGS: We make three observations: first, the dynamics of humoral and cellular responses differ; binding and neutralizing antibodies declined, whereas T and memory B cell responses were maintained after the second vaccine dose. Second, vaccine boosting restored immunoglobulin (Ig) G levels; broadened neutralizing activity against variants of concern, including Omicron BA.1, BA.2, and BA.5; and boosted T cell responses above the 6-month level after dose 2. Third, prior infection maintained its impact driving larger and broader T cell responses compared with never-infected people, a feature maintained until 6 months after the third dose. CONCLUSIONS: Broadly cross-reactive T cell responses are well maintained over time-especially in those with combined vaccine and infection-induced immunity ("hybrid" immunity)-and may contribute to continued protection against severe disease. FUNDING: Department for Health and Social Care, Medical Research Council.

Preventative practices and effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on caregivers of children with pediatric pulmonary hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is a serious and life-threatening disease characterized by elevated mean arterial pressure and pulmonary vascular resistance. COVID-19 may exacerbate PH, as evidenced by higher mortality rates among those with PH. The objective of this study was to understand the unique burdens that the COVID-19 pandemic has placed upon families of children living with PH. METHODS: Participants were recruited online through the "Families of children with pulmonary hypertension" Facebook group and asked to complete a survey about their experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: A total of 139 parents/caregivers of children living with PH completed the online survey. Almost all (85.6%) of parents/caregivers had received the COVID-19 vaccine, though only 59.7% reported a willingness to vaccinate their child with PH against COVID-19. Over 75% of parents/caregivers felt that they practiced preventative measures (e.g., wearing a facemask, social distancing, and avoiding gatherings) more than those in the community where they live. They also reported several hardships related to caring for their child with PH during the pandemic such as financial duress, loss of work, and affording treatment costs. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that parents/caregivers of children at higher risk for COVID-19 complications may be more willing to act on clinical recommendations themselves as proxy for protecting those at high risk. The economic, emotional and social impacts of COVID-19 are significantly greater for high-risk individuals.

mRNA vaccination drives differential mucosal neutralizing antibody profiles in naïve and SARS-CoV-2 previously-infected individuals

Two doses of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine induces a strong systemic SARS-CoV-2 specific humoral response. However, SARS-CoV-2 airborne transmission makes mucosal immune response a crucial first line of defense. Therefore, we characterized SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG responses induced by BNT162b2 vaccine, as well as IgG responses to other pathogenic and seasonal human coronaviruses in oral fluid and plasma from 200 UK healthcare workers who were naïve (N=62) or previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 (N=138) using a pan-coronavirus multiplex binding immunoassay (Meso Scale Discovery®). Additionally, we investigated the impact of historical SARS-CoV-2 infection on vaccine-induced IgG, IgA and neutralizing responses in selected oral fluid samples before vaccination, after a first and second dose of BNT162b2, as well as following a third dose of mRNA vaccine or breakthrough infections using the same immunoassay and an ACE2 inhibition assay. Prior to vaccination, we found that spike-specific IgG levels in oral fluid positively correlated with IgG levels in plasma from previously-infected individuals (Spearman r=0.6858, p<0.0001) demonstrating that oral fluid could be used as a proxy for the presence of plasma SARS-CoV-2 IgG. However, the sensitivity was lower in oral fluid (0.85, 95% CI 0.77-0.91) than in plasma (0.94, 95% CI 0.88-0.97). Similar kinetics of mucosal and systemic spike-specific IgG levels were observed following vaccination in naïve and previously-infected individuals, respectively. In addition, a significant enhancement of OC43 and HKU1 spike-specific IgG levels was observed in previously-infected individuals following one vaccine dose in oral fluid (OC43 S: p<0.0001;HKU1 S: p=0.0423) suggesting cross-reactive IgG responses to seasonal beta coronaviruses. Mucosal spike-specific IgA responses were induced by mRNA vaccination particularly in previously-infected individuals (71%) but less frequently in naïve participants (23%). Neutralizing responses to SARS-CoV-2 ancestral and variants of concerns were detected following vaccination in naïve and previously-infected participants, with likely contribution from both IgG and IgA in previously-infected individuals (correlations between neutralizing responses and IgG: Spearman r=0.5642, p<0.0001;IgA: Spearman r=0.4545, p=0.0001). We also observed that breakthrough infections or a third vaccine dose enhanced mucosal antibody levels and neutralizing responses. These data contribute to show that a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection tailors the mucosal antibody profile induced by vaccination.

Proportionality, wrongs and equipoise for natural immunity exemptions: response to commentators.

We would like to thank each of the commentators on our feature article for their thoughtful engagement with our arguments. All the commentaries raise important questions about our proposed justification for natural immunity exemptions to COVID-19 vaccine mandates. Thankfully, for some of the points raised, we can simply signal our agreement. For instance, Reiss is correct to highlight that our article did not address the important US-centric considerations she helpfully raises and fruitfully discusses. We also agree with Williams about the need to provide a clear rationale for mandates, and to obtain different kinds of data in support of possible policies.Unfortunately, we lack the space to engage with every one of the more critical comments raised in this rich set of commentaries; as such, in this response, we shall focus on a discussion of hybrid immunity, which underlies a number of different arguments evident in the commentaries, before concluding with some reflections responding to Lipsitch's concern about the appropriate standard of proof in this context.

A Telemedicine Alternative to the 6-Minute Walk Test Using Personal Activity Trackers in Liver Transplant Candidates.

The COVID-19 pandemic has limited liver transplant (LT) candidates access to clinics. Telehealth methods to assess frailty are needed. We developed a method to estimate the step length of LT candidates, which would permit remotely obtaining the 6-min walk test (6MWT) distance with a personal activity tracker (PAT). Methods: 6MWT was performed while candidates wore a PAT. On first 21 subjects (stride cohort), the step length was measured and compared with calculated one (6MWT-distance/6MWT steps). On a second cohort (PAT-6MWT; n = 116), we collected the 6MWT step count and used multivariable models to generate formulas estimating step length. We multiplied the estimated step length times 6MWT steps to estimate the distance and compared it to the measured distance. The liver frailty index (LFI) and 6MWT were used as frailty metrics. Results: Measured/calculated step length were highly correlated (ρ = 0.85; P < 0.001) in the stride cohort. In the PAT-6MWT cohort, LFI was the strongest variable associated with step length, along with height, albumin, and large-volume paracentesis (R 2 = 0.58). On a second model without LFI, age, height, albumin, hemoglobin, and large-volume paracentesis were strongly associated with step length (R 2 = 0.45). There was a robust correlation between observed 6MWT and PAT-6MWT utilizing step length equations with (ρ = 0.80; P < 0.001) or without LFI (ρ = 0.75; P < 0.001). Frailty by 6MWT <250 m did not change significantly using the observed (16%) or the with/without LFI-estimated (14%/12%) methods. Conclusions: We created a method to obtain 6MWT distance remotely with the use of a PAT. This novel approach opens the possibility of performing telemedicine PAT-6MWT to monitor LT candidates' frailty status.

Benzodiazepine and antipsychotic use among hospitalized older adults before versus after restricting visitation: March to May 2020.

BACKGROUND: Hospital visitation restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic prompted concerns about unintended consequences for older patients, including an increased incidence of delirium and agitation. While first-line interventions for these conditions are non-pharmacologic, a lack of family support could result in increased use of benzodiazepines and antipsychotics, which are associated with poor outcomes in older adults. Little is known about the association of visitation policies with use of these medications among older adults. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study among adults aged ≥65 hospitalized from March 1 through May 31, 2020 at four hospitals in the Mid-Atlantic. The dates of onset of visitation restrictions (i.e., hospital-wide guidelines barring visitors) were collected from hospital administrators. Outcomes were use of benzodiazepines and antipsychotics, assessed using patient-level electronic health record data. Using multivariable logistic regression with hospital and study-day fixed effects, the quasi-experimental study design leveraged the staggered onset of visitation restrictions across the hospitals to measure the odds of receiving each medication when visitors were versus were not allowed. RESULTS: Among 2931 patients, mean age was 76.6 years (SD, 8.3), 51.6% were female, 58.6% white, 32.5% black, and 2.6% Hispanic. Overall, 924 (31.5%) patients received a benzodiazepine and 298 (10.2%) an antipsychotic. The adjusted odds of benzodiazepine use was lower on days when visitors were versus were not allowed (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.39, 0.99). Antipsychotic use did not significantly differ between days when visitors were versus were not allowed (AOR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.43, 2.21). CONCLUSIONS: Among older patients hospitalized during the first wave of the pandemic, benzodiazepine use was lower on days when visitors were allowed. These findings suggest that the presence of caregivers impacts use of potentially inappropriate medications among hospitalized older adults, supporting efforts to recognize caregivers as essential members of the care team.

T-cell and antibody responses to first BNT162b2 vaccine dose in previously infected and SARS-CoV-2-naive UK health-care workers: a multicentre prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 affects the immune response to the first dose of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. We aimed to compare SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell and antibody responses in health-care workers with and without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection following a single dose of the BNT162b2 (tozinameran; Pfizer-BioNTech) mRNA vaccine. METHODS: We sampled health-care workers enrolled in the PITCH study across four hospital sites in the UK (Oxford, Liverpool, Newcastle, and Sheffield). All health-care workers aged 18 years or older consenting to participate in this prospective cohort study were included, with no exclusion criteria applied. Blood samples were collected where possible before vaccination and 28 (±7) days following one or two doses (given 3-4 weeks apart) of the BNT162b2 vaccine. Previous infection was determined by a documented SARS-CoV-2-positive RT-PCR result or the presence of positive anti-SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antibodies. We measured spike-specific IgG antibodies and quantified T-cell responses by interferon-γ enzyme-linked immunospot assay in all participants where samples were available at the time of analysis, comparing SARS-CoV-2-naive individuals to those with previous infection. FINDINGS: Between Dec 9, 2020, and Feb 9, 2021, 119 SARS-CoV-2-naive and 145 previously infected health-care workers received one dose, and 25 SARS-CoV-2-naive health-care workers received two doses, of the BNT162b2 vaccine. In previously infected health-care workers, the median time from previous infection to vaccination was 268 days (IQR 232-285). At 28 days (IQR 27-33) after a single dose, the spike-specific T-cell response measured in fresh peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) was higher in previously infected (n=76) than in infection-naive (n=45) health-care workers (median 284 [IQR 150-461] vs 55 [IQR 24-132] spot-forming units [SFUs] per 106 PBMCs; p<0·0001). With cryopreserved PBMCs, the T-cell response in previously infected individuals (n=52) after one vaccine dose was equivalent to that of infection-naive individuals (n=19) after receiving two vaccine doses (median 152 [IQR 119-275] vs 162 [104-258] SFUs/106 PBMCs; p=1·00). Anti-spike IgG antibody responses following a single dose in 142 previously infected health-care workers (median 270 373 [IQR 203 461-535 188] antibody units [AU] per mL) were higher than in 111 infection-naive health-care workers following one dose (35 001 [17 099-55 341] AU/mL; p<0·0001) and higher than in 25 infection-naive individuals given two doses (180 904 [108 221-242 467] AU/mL; p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: A single dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine is likely to provide greater protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection in individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, than in SARS-CoV-2-naive individuals, including against variants of concern. Future studies should determine the additional benefit of a second dose on the magnitude and durability of immune responses in individuals vaccinated following infection, alongside evaluation of the impact of extending the interval between vaccine doses. FUNDING: UK Department of Health and Social Care, and UK Coronavirus Immunology Consortium.

notes from the president/ mot de la présidente

Greetings from Treaty 1 territory and home of the Metis Nation, on the cold Prairies in the city of Winnipeg. While we ride the wave of the pandemic with you, we are working hard to stay in touch with all our affiliate provinces to keep updated on the state of Music Education in each region. A huge thank you to Choral Canada, the research committee team, and lead researcher, Dr Francine Morin, on their amazing work on the research study on singing in schools.

The unnaturalistic fallacy: COVID-19 vaccine mandates should not discriminate against natural immunity.

COVID-19 vaccine requirements have generated significant debate. Here, we argue that, on the evidence available, such policies should have recognised proof of natural immunity as a sufficient basis for exemption to vaccination requirements. We begin by distinguishing our argument from two implausible claims about natural immunity: (1) natural immunity is superior to 'artificial' vaccine-induced immunity simply because it is 'natural' and (2) it is better to acquire immunity through natural infection than via vaccination. We then briefly survey the evidence base for the comparison between naturally acquired immunity and vaccine-induced immunity. While we clearly cannot settle the scientific debates on this point, we suggest that we lack clear and convincing scientific evidence that vaccine-induced immunity has a significantly higher protective effect than natural immunity. Since vaccine requirements represent a substantial infringement of individual liberty, as well as imposing other significant costs, they can only be justified if they are necessary for achieving a proportionate public health benefit. Without compelling evidence for the superiority of vaccine-induced immunity, it cannot be deemed necessary to require vaccination for those with natural immunity. Subjecting them to vaccine mandates is therefore not justified. We conclude by defending the standard of proof that this argument from necessity invokes, and address other pragmatic and practical considerations that may speak against natural immunity exemptions.

Virtual balint group experience due to the COVID-19 pandemic

Aims In the changes brought about by remote working, the local psychotherapy case discussion group (Balint Group) has developed as a remote service via video consultation. It is important to consider the effect that this change in method of delivery has had on experience. Method An anonymous survey was distributed to determine the benefits and challenges from participants and facilitators with at least a month of virtual Balint Group experience. The open-ended survey questions captured extended answer responses from 16 students and trainees, and 5 (co-)facilitators, within Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust. The qualitative feedback was analysed by thematic analysis, identifying three main themes. Result The first theme of practicalities was centred around access to the group. The virtual format had benefits in terms of reducing travel and time commitment and so improving attendance. However, disadvantages were in technological issues and finding a private and safe environment, individuals often not leaving the work environment on which they were reflecting. The second theme of communication identified how virtual methods are a less natural way of interacting (for example sequential point making), losing both immediacy of reactions and non-verbal communication. There was a loss of essential communication cues, with disjointed conversation affecting contribution. The third theme of group dynamics had some advantages, feeling less intimidating virtually. Yet disadvantages included loss of group cohesion, with participants not building the same relationships (on arriving and leaving a group space), and trust. The more subtle emotions in the group might be missed and opinions given less openly. The facilitators needed to be more directive and experienced difficulties maintaining group engagement and managing the frame. Conclusion The advantages of virtual format are more based on accessibility and the disadvantages more experiential. There are elements of being physically remote that lead to a disembodied experience, that might impact on capacity to reflect emotionally. This might make it more difficult to identify unconscious processes and the experience might be more cognitive. There is a risk that virtually participants will feel more alone with difficult feelings and unsupported by the group. When mental health is being affected by social isolation due to the pandemic, having groups virtually can mimic this isolation in working life. Overall the preference remained for an in-person group. However, it was clear that access to some form of a group was important, to contain anxiety during these unprecedented times.