Can self-testing be enhanced to hasten safe return of healthcare workers in pandemics? Random order, open label trial using two manufacturers' SARS-CoV-2 lateral flow devices concurrently (preprint)

ObjectivesTo inform management of competing risks from Covid-19 and key-worker absence, we evaluated whether using two manufacturers lateral flow tests (LFTs) concurrently improved SARS-CoV-2 Omicron detection and was acceptable to hospital staff. In a nested study, to understand the risks of return to work after a fixed number of days of isolation or quarantine, we examined virus culture at Days 5-7 after positive test or significant exposure. Methods and Analysis1419 fully-vaccinated Liverpool (UK) University Hospitals staff participated in a random-order, open-label trial testing whether dual LFTs improved SARS-CoV2 detection, and whether dual swabbing was acceptable to users. Main outcome was self-reported LFT result. Staff enrolled via routine testing sites for symptomatic staff and close contacts. Recruitment took place between 7th February and 8th May 2022. Participants employed nose-throat swab Innova and nose-only swab Orient Gene LFTs for 10 days, with daily LFTs taken in random order. A swab for polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis was taken at Day-5 and, if positive, Day-10. A questionnaire on acceptability was administered on exit. Selected participants gave swabs for viral culture on Days 5-7; swabs were delivered and returned by courier. Cultures were considered positive if cytopathic effect was apparent or the SARs-COV2 N gene sub-genomic RNA was detected by sequencing. Results226 individuals reported 1466 pairs of LFT results. Tests disagreed in 127 cases (8.7%). Orient Gene was more likely (78 cf. 49, P=0.03) to be positive. Orient Gene positive Innova negative result-pairs became more frequent over time (P<0.001). If Innova was swabbed second, it was less likely to agree with a positive Orient Gene result (P=0.005); swabbing first with Innova made no significant difference (P=0.85). Of 311 individuals completing the exit questionnaire, 90.7% reported dual swabbing was easy, 57.1% said it was no barrier to their daily routine and 65.6% preferred dual testing. Respondents had more confidence in dual c.f. single test results (median 9 cf. 8 on 10-point scale, P<0.001). Viral cultures from swabs taken at Days 5-7 were positive for 6/31 (19.4%, 7.5%-37.5%) and indeterminate for 11/31 (35.5%, 19.2%-54.6%) LFT-positive participants, indicating they were likely still infectious. ConclusionsDual brand testing increased LFT detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen by a small but meaningful margin and was acceptable to hospital workers. Viral cultures demonstrated that policies recommending safe return to work [~]5 days after Omicron infection/exposure were flawed. Key-workers should be prepared for dynamic self-testing protocols in future pandemics. Trial registrationhttps://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN47058442 (IRAS Project ID:311842) Key messagesO_ST_ABSWhat is already known on this topicC_ST_ABSO_LIOmicron BA.1 and BA.2 waves caused large-scale healthcare worker absence in late 2021 - early 2022, risking patient safety from both Covid-19 and reduced care capacity C_LIO_LILateral flow tests (LFTs) reliably detected SARS-CoV-2 antigen, more so with Omicron than prior variants, identifying the most infectious individuals C_LIO_LISelf-testing with LFT SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests reduced Covid-19 transmission, mitigating risks of return to work, including healthcare settings C_LI What this study addsO_LIDual c.f. single brand LFT testing increased SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection marginally, but more than can be explained by extending swabbing from nose-only to nose-throat C_LIO_LINHS deployment of nose-only LFTs in response to compound pressures from Omicron, winter and pandemic burnout was safe and acceptable to most participating hospital staff C_LIO_LICulturable virus was detected confidently in a fifth (and potentially in a further third) of LFT-positive hospital workers 5-7 days after their self-referral for testing, indicating substantial protracted infectiousness C_LI How this study might affect research, practice or policyO_LIThis study shows international Covid-19 policies for return to work after fixed periods (e.g. 5 days after positive test) were flawed: too little emphasis was placed on variation in infectivity between individuals C_LIO_LIFuture pandemic preparedness needs to plan testing quality assurance unified across healthcare and community self-testing contexts, including continuous study of serial daily antigen, nucleic acid and culturable virus test results C_LI

Paranormal Beliefs, Vaccine Confidence, and COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake

Conservative religious ideologies have been linked to vaccine hesitancy. Yet, little is known about how paranormal beliefs relate to vaccine confidence and uptake. We hypothesize that paranormal beliefs will be negatively related to both confidence and uptake due to their association with lower levels of trust in science and a greater acceptance of conspiratorial beliefs. We test this hypothesis using a new nationally representative sample of U.S. adults fielded in May and June of 2021 by NORC. Using regression models with a sample of 1,734, we find that paranormal beliefs are negatively associated with general vaccine confidence, COVID-19 vaccine confidence, and COVID-19 vaccine uptake. These associations are partially or fully attenuated net of trust in science and conspiratorial belief. Although not a focus of the study, we also find that Christian nationalism's negative association with the outcomes is fully accounted for by measures of trust in science and conspiratorial beliefs. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Sociology of Religion is the property of Oxford University Press / USA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

Discovery of Small Molecules Targeting the Frameshifting Element RNA in SARS-CoV-2 Viral Genome.

Targeting structured RNA elements in the SARS-CoV-2 viral genome with small molecules is an attractive strategy for pharmacological control over viral replication. In this work, we report the discovery of small molecules that target the frameshifting element (FSE) in the SARS-CoV-2 RNA genome using high-throughput small-molecule microarray (SMM) screening. A new class of aminoquinazoline ligands for the SARS-CoV-2 FSE are synthesized and characterized using multiple orthogonal biophysical assays and structure-activity relationship (SAR) studies. This work reveals compounds with mid-micromolar binding affinity (KD = 60 ± 6 µM) to the FSE RNA and supports a binding mode distinct from previously reported FSE binders MTDB and merafloxacin. In addition, compounds are active in in vitro dual-luciferase and in-cell dual-fluorescent-reporter frameshifting assays, highlighting the promise of targeting structured elements of RNAs with druglike compounds to alter expression of viral proteins.

Remote administration of BICAMS measures and the Trail-Making Test to assess cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis.

Reliable remote cognitive testing could provide a safer assessment of cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis (MS) during the COVID-19 pandemic and thereafter. Here we aimed to investigate the reliability and feasibility of administering Brief International Cognitive Assessment for MS (BICAMS) and the Trail-Making Test (TMT) to people with MS online. Between-group differences on BICAMS and the TMT were examined in a sample of 68 participants. Group 1 (N = 34) was tested in-person pre-pandemic. Group 2 was tested remotely. Within-group differences for in-person and virtual administrations were examined for Group 1. No significant differences between virtual and in-person administrations of the CVLT-II and SDMT were detected. BVMT-R scores were significantly higher for virtual administrations (M = 20.59, SD = 6.65) compared to in-person administrations (M = 16.35, SD = 6.05), possibly indicating inter-rater differences. Strong positive correlations were found for in-person and virtual scores within Group 1 on the CVLT-II (r = .84), SDMT (r = .85), TMT-A (r = .88), TMT-B (r = .76) and BVMT-R (r = .72). No significant differences between in-person and remote administrations of CVLT-II and SDMT in people living with MS were detected. Recommendations for future studies employing the TMT and BVMT-R online are provided.

Comparison of Survivorship and Failure Modes Between Anatomic and Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty Across Multiple Government Joint Registries for a Single Platform Shoulder System

[...]recent years have seen a dramatic shift in utilization of rTSA in which rTSA is increasingly used to treat OA in patients with an intact rotator cuff, with a corresponding decline in use of aTSA.1-5 The reasons for this shift in usage are multi-factorial but may be due to the perceived lower risk of revision surgery with rTSA relative to aTSA, as the quality of the rotator cuff muscles and tendon are not necessary for a functional rTSA but are pre-requisite for a functional aTSA. Furthermore, these registries have high rates of government-mandated compliance such that all patients are enrolled and very few patients are lost to follow-up, thus minimizing the potential for selection bias that is inherently present in nearly all nongovernment registry clinical outcome studies. [...]to better understand the relative differences in primary aTSA and primary rTSA usage and performance, we analyzed two different government joint registries for survivorship and for reasons for revision associated with one platform shoulder system and compared trends in usage of aTSA and rTSA over a period of over 10 years to elucidate reasons for any market trends. Additionally, reasons for revision and the cumulative revision rate were assessed across the government joint registries to quantify and compare the performance of this platform shoulder prosthesis for primary aTSA and primary rTSA in each country over the study period. Over the period of analysis, use of primary aTSA and primary rTSA with the particular platform system has increased year to year in both Australia and the UK, with the exception of a decline in 2020 and 2021 due to COVID-19.

A Cost, Time, and Demographic Analysis of Participant Recruitment and Urine Sample Collection Through Social Media Optimization.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical research can be expensive and time consuming due to high associated costs and/or duration of the study. We hypothesized that urine sample collection using online recruitment and engagement of research participants via social medial has the potential to reach a large population in a small timeframe, at a reasonable cost. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cost analysis of a cohort study comparing cost per sample and time per sample for both online and clinically recruited participants for urine sample collection. During this time, cost data were collected based on study associated costs from invoices and budget spreadsheets. The data were subsequently analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Each sample collection kit contained 3 urine cups, 1 for the disease sample and 2 for control samples. Out of the 3,576 (1,192 disease + 2,384 control) total sample cups mailed, 1,254 (695 control) samples were returned. Comparatively, the 2 clinical sites collected 305 samples. Although the initial startup cost of online recruitment was higher, cost per sample for online recruited was found to be $81.45 compared to $398.14 for clinic sample. CONCLUSIONS: We conducted a nationwide, contactless, urine sample collection through online recruitment in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results were compared with the samples collected in the clinical setting. Online recruitment can be utilized to collect urine samples rapidly, efficiently, and at a cost per sample that was 20% of an in-person clinic, and without risk of COVID-19 exposure.

A Phase II randomised controlled trial of oral prednisolone in early diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis (PRedSS).

OBJECTIVES: Although the painful and disabling features of early diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis (dcSSc) have an inflammatory basis and could respond to corticosteroids, corticosteroids are a risk factor for scleroderma renal crisis. Whether or not they should be prescribed is therefore highly contentious. Our aim was to examine safety and efficacy of moderate dose prednisolone in early dcSSc. METHODS: PRedSS set out as a Phase II, multicentre, double-blind randomised controlled trial, converted to open-label during the Covid-19 pandemic. Patients were randomised to receive either prednisolone (∼0.3 mg/kg) or matching placebo (or no treatment during open-label) for 6 months. Co-primary endpoints were the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and modified Rodnan skin core (mRSS) at 3 months. Over 20 secondary endpoints included patient reported outcome measures reflecting pain, itch, fatigue, anxiety and depression, and helplessness. Target recruitment was 72 patients. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were randomised (17 prednisolone, 18 placebo/control). The adjusted mean difference between treatment groups at 3 months in HAQ-DI score was -0.10 (97.5% CI -0.29-0.10), p= 0.254, and in mRSS -3.90 (97.5% CI -8.83-1.03), p= 0.070, both favouring prednisolone but not significantly. Patients in the prednisolone group experienced significantly less pain (p= 0.027), anxiety (p= 0.018) and helplessness (p= 0.040) than control patients at 3 months. There were no renal crises, but sample size was small. CONCLUSION: PRedSS was terminated early primarily due to the Covid-19 pandemic, and so was underpowered. Therefore, interpretation must be cautious and results considered inconclusive, indicating the need for a further randomised trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03708718.

Cross-Theoretical Compliance: An Integrative Compliance Analysis of COVID-19 Mitigation Responses in Israel

To understand the question why people obey or break rules, different approaches have focused on different theories and subsets of variables. The present research develops a cross-theoretical approach that integrates these perspectives. We apply this in a survey of compliance with COVID-19 pandemic mitigation rules in Israel. The data reveal that compliance in this setting was shaped by a combination of variables originating from legitimacy, capacity, and opportunity theories (but not rational choice or social theories). This demonstrates the importance of moving beyond narrow theoretical perspectives of compliance, to a cross-theoretical understanding—in which different theoretical approaches are systematically integrated.

Using an Exposure Call Center to Help Mitigate Outbreaks, Such as COVID-19, on a University Campus.

Rapid identification and management of close contacts is an important component of an effective university mitigation strategy for highly contagious infectious diseases such as measles and coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Institutions of higher education must plan for an associated large influx of calls that can overwhelm standard student health and local public health operations. In fall 2020, a large state public university's Department of Student Health and Wellness created a dedicated exposure call center (ECC), in close collaboration with the local public health department, to quickly assess students who learned of a COVID-19 exposure outside of the formal contact tracing process. The ECC operated 7 days a week and fielded 3361 calls: 3187 from students and 174 from staff, faculty, and parents. The ECC provided rapid assessment and guidance for students with COVID-19 exposure, allowing for prompt quarantine and medical assessment when warranted. Call centers can increase the bandwidth of university health centers and also reduce the burden on health care providers and other public health resources during periods of crisis or high demand.

Suspected Suicide Attempts by Self-Poisoning Among Persons Aged 10-19 Years During the COVID-19 Pandemic - United States, 2020-2022.

The World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a global pandemic on March 11, 2020 (1). As strategies to mitigate the pandemic were implemented, concerns were raised that the containment efforts through quarantine and social distancing practices were negatively affecting the mental and physical health of children and adolescents (2). Suicide is a growing public health problem in the United States. In 2020, suicide was the second leading cause of death among persons aged 10-14 years and the third leading cause among those aged 15-24 years (3). The National Poison Data System (NPDS) database was used to examine trends in suspected suicide attempts by self-poisoning among persons aged 10-19 years before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Compared with 2019 (prepandemic), during 2021, the overall rate of suspected suicide attempts by self-poisoning increased by 30.0% (95% CI = 28.6%-30.9%), rates among children aged 10-12 years, adolescents aged 13-15 years, and females increased 73.0% (67.4%-80.0%), 48.8% (46.7%-50.9%), and 36.8% (35.4%-38.2%), respectively, and these trends continued into the third quarter of 2022. Substances most frequently involved in overdoses were acetaminophen, ibuprofen, sertraline, fluoxetine, and diphenhydramine. Acetaminophen-involved overdoses increased 71% (67.4%-74.9%) in 2021 and 58.0% (54.5%-61.6%) in 2022. Diphenhydramine-involved overdoses increased 24.2% (19.9%-28.7%) in 2021 and 35.8% (31.2%-40.5%) in 2022. A comprehensive public health approach to suicide prevention, focused on children and adolescents and involving a partnership between families, school teachers, mental health professionals, and public health leadership is needed. The 9-8-8 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline provides crisis support for persons experiencing mental health-related distress and assists community members who are concerned about persons experiencing a mental health crisis.

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.

Management of patients with advanced prostate cancer-metastatic and/or castration-resistant prostate cancer: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2022.

BACKGROUND: Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation together with novel treatment options have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. However, we still lack high-level evidence in many areas relevant to making management decisions in daily clinical practise. The 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) addressed some questions in these areas to supplement guidelines that mostly are based on level 1 evidence. OBJECTIVE: To present the voting results of the APCCC 2022. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The experts voted on controversial questions where high-level evidence is mostly lacking: locally advanced prostate cancer; biochemical recurrence after local treatment; metastatic hormone-sensitive, non-metastatic, and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; oligometastatic prostate cancer; and managing side effects of hormonal therapy. A panel of 105 international prostate cancer experts voted on the consensus questions. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The panel voted on 198 pre-defined questions, which were developed by 117 voting and non-voting panel members prior to the conference following a modified Delphi process. A total of 116 questions on metastatic and/or castration-resistant prostate cancer are discussed in this manuscript. In 2022, the voting was done by a web-based survey because of COVID-19 restrictions. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The voting reflects the expert opinion of these panellists and did not incorporate a standard literature review or formal meta-analysis. The answer options for the consensus questions received varying degrees of support from panellists, as reflected in this article and the detailed voting results are reported in the supplementary material. We report here on topics in metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), non-metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), and oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: These voting results in four specific areas from a panel of experts in advanced prostate cancer can help clinicians and patients navigate controversial areas of management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting and can help research funders and policy makers identify information gaps and consider what areas to explore further. However, diagnostic and treatment decisions always have to be individualised based on patient characteristics, including the extent and location of disease, prior treatment(s), co-morbidities, patient preferences, and treatment recommendations and should also incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps where there is non-consensus and that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials. PATIENT SUMMARY: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with healthcare providers worldwide. At each APCCC, an expert panel votes on pre-defined questions that target the most clinically relevant areas of advanced prostate cancer treatment for which there are gaps in knowledge. The results of the voting provide a practical guide to help clinicians discuss therapeutic options with patients and their relatives as part of shared and multidisciplinary decision-making. This report focuses on the advanced setting, covering metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and both non-metastatic and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. TWITTER SUMMARY: Report of the results of APCCC 2022 for the following topics: mHSPC, nmCRPC, mCRPC, and oligometastatic prostate cancer. TAKE-HOME MESSAGE: At APCCC 2022, clinically important questions in the management of advanced prostate cancer management were identified and discussed, and experts voted on pre-defined consensus questions. The report of the results for metastatic and/or castration-resistant prostate cancer is summarised here.

Remote Cardiovascular Hypertension Program Enhanced Blood Pressure Control During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted traditional health care; one fallout was a drastic decrease in blood pressure (BP) assessment. We analyzed the pandemic's impact on our existing remote hypertension management program's effectiveness and adaptability. Methods and Results This retrospective observational analysis evaluated BP control in an entirely remote management program before and during the pandemic. A team of pharmacists, nurse practitioners, physicians, and nonlicensed navigators used an evidence-based clinical algorithm to optimize hypertensive treatment. The algorithm was adapted during the pandemic to simplify BP control. Overall, 1256 patients (605 enrolled in the 6 months before the pandemic shutdown in March 2020 and 651 in the 6 months after) were a median age of 63 years old, 57% female, and 38.2% non-White. Among enrolled patients with sustained hypertension, 51.1% reached BP goals. Within this group, rates of achieving goal BP improved to 94.6% during the pandemic from 75.8% prepandemic (P<0.0001). Mean baseline home BP was 141.7/81.9 mm Hg during the pandemic and 139.8/82.2 prepandemic, and fell ≈16/9 mm Hg in both periods (P<0.0001). Maintenance during the pandemic was achieved earlier (median 11.8 versus 19.6 weeks, P<0.0001), with more frequent monthly calls (8.2 versus 3.1, P<0.0001) and more monthly home BP recordings per patient (32.4 versus 18.9, P<0.0001), compared with the prepandemic period. Conclusions A remote clinical management program was successfully adapted and delivered significant improvements in BP control and increased home BP monitoring despite a nationally observed disruption of traditional hypertension care. Such programs have the potential to transform hypertension management and care delivery.

Evaluation of QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 interferon-γ release assay following SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination.

T cells are important in preventing severe disease from SARS-CoV-2, but scalable and field-adaptable alternatives to expert T-cell assays are needed. The interferon-gamma release assay QuantiFERON platform was developed to detect T-cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 from whole blood with relatively basic equipment and flexibility of processing timelines. Forty-eight participants with different infection and vaccination backgrounds were recruited. Whole blood samples were analysed using the QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 assay in parallel with the well-established 'Protective Immunity from T Cells in Healthcare workers' (PITCH) ELISpot, which can evaluate spike-specific T-cell responses. The primary aims of this cross-sectional observational cohort study were to establish if the QuantiFERON SARS-Co-V-2 assay could discern differences between specified groups and to assess the sensitivity of the assay compared with the PITCH ELISpot. The QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 distinguished acutely infected individuals (12-21 days post positive PCR) from naïve individuals (P < 0.0001) with 100% sensitivity and specificity for SARS-CoV-2 T cells, whilst the PITCH ELISpot had reduced sensitivity (62.5%) for the acute infection group. Sensitivity with QuantiFERON for previous infection was 12.5% (172-444 days post positive test) and was inferior to the PITCH ELISpot (75%). Although the QuantiFERON assay could discern differences between unvaccinated and vaccinated individuals (55-166 days since second vaccination), the latter also had reduced sensitivity (44.4%) compared to the PITCH ELISpot (66.6%). The QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 assay showed potential as a T- cell evaluation tool soon after SARS-CoV-2 infection but has lower sensitivity for use in reliable evaluation of vaccination or more distant infection.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 Causing Infection of Transplanted Lung Allograft: A Pitfall of Prolonged Shedding of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 Pretransplant.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to considerable morbidity and mortality across the world. Lung transplant is a viable option for a few with COVID-19-related lung disease. Whom and when to transplant has been the major question impacting the transplant community given the novelty of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We describe a pitfall of presumed prolonged shedding of SARS-CoV-2 in a patient with COVID-19 associated acute respiratory distress syndrome leading to COVID-19 pneumonia after lung transplant. This raises concerns that replication-competent SARS-CoV-2 virus can persist for months post-infection and can lead to re-infection of grafts in the future.

Critical care pharmacy workforce: a 2020 re-evaluation of the UK deployment and characteristics.

INTRODUCTION: Critical care pharmacists improve the quality and efficiency of medication therapy whilst reducing treatment costs where they are available. UK critical care pharmacist deployment was described in 2015, highlighting a deficit in numbers, experience level, and critical care access to pharmacy services over the 7-day week. Since then, national workforce standards have been emphasised, quality indicators published, and service commissioning documents produced, reinforced by care quality assessments. Whether these initiatives have resulted in further development of the UK critical care pharmacy workforce is unknown. This evaluation provides a 2020 status update. METHODS: The 2015 electronic data entry tool was updated and circulated for completion by UK critical care pharmacists. The tool captured workforce data disposition as it was just prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, at critical care unit level. MAIN FINDINGS: Data were received for 334 critical care units from 203 organisations (96% of UK critical care units). Overall, 98.2% of UK critical care units had specific clinical pharmacist time dedicated to the unit. The median weekday pharmacist input to each level 3 equivalent bed was 0.066 (0.043-0.088) whole time equivalents, a significant increase from the median position in 2015 (+ 0.021, p < 0.0001). Despite this progress, pharmacist availability remains below national minimum standards (0.1/level 3 equivalent bed). Most units (71.9%) had access to prescribing pharmacists. Geographical variation in pharmacist staffing levels were evident, and weekend services remain extremely limited. CONCLUSIONS: Availability of clinical pharmacists in UK adult critical care units is improving. However, national standards are not routinely met despite widely publicised quality indicators, commissioning specifications, and assessments. Additional measures are needed to address persistent deficits and realise gains in organisational and patient-level outcomes. These measures must include promotion of cross-professional collaborative working, adjusted funding models, and a nationally recognised training pathway for critical care pharmacists.

Rapid antigen testing in COVID-19 management for school-aged children: an observational study in Cheshire and Merseyside, UK.

BACKGROUND: Twice weekly lateral flow tests (LFTs) for secondary school children was UK Government policy from 8 March 2021. We evaluate use of LFTs (both supervised at test centres, and home test kits) in school-aged children in Cheshire and Merseyside. METHODS: We report (i) number of LFT positives (ii) proportion of LFT positive with confirmatory reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test within 2 days, and (iii) agreement between LFT-positive and confirmatory PCR, and dependence of (i-iii) on COVID-19 prevalence. FINDINGS: 1 248 468 LFTs were taken by 211 255 12-18 years old, and 163 914 by 52 116 5-11 years old between 6 November 2020 and 31 July 2021. Five thousand three hundred and fourteen (2.5%) 12-18 years old and 1996 (3.8%) 5-11 years old returned LFT positives, with 3829 (72.1%) and 1535 (76.9%) confirmatory PCRs, and 3357 (87.7%) and 1383 (90.1%) confirmatory PCR-positives, respectively.Monthly proportions of LFT positive with PCR negative varied between 4.7% and 35.3% in 12-18 years old (corresponding proportion of all tests positive: 9.7% and 0.3%).Deprivation and non-White ethnicity were associated with reduced uptake of confirmatory PCR. INTERPRETATION: Substantial inequalities in confirmatory testing need more attention to avoid further disadvantage through education loss. When prevalence is low additional measures, including confirmatory testing, are needed. Local Directors of Public Health taking more control over schools testing may be needed. FUNDING: DHSC, MRC, NIHR, EPSRC.