OpenSAFELY NHS Service Restoration Observatory 2: changes in primary care clinical activity in England during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted healthcare activity across a broad range of clinical services. The NHS stopped non-urgent work in March 2020, later recommending services be restored to near-normal levels before winter where possible. AIM: To describe changes in the volume and variation of coded clinical activity in general practice across six clinical areas: cardiovascular disease, diabetes, mental health, female and reproductive health, screening and related procedures, and processes related to medication. DESIGN AND SETTING: With the approval of NHS England, a cohort study was conducted of 23.8 million patient records in general practice, in situ using OpenSAFELY. METHOD: Common primary care activities were analysed using Clinical Terms Version 3 codes and keyword searches from January 2019 to December 2020, presenting median and deciles of code usage across practices per month. RESULTS: Substantial and widespread changes in clinical activity in primary care were identified since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, with generally good recovery by December 2020. A few exceptions showed poor recovery and warrant further investigation, such as mental health (for example, for 'Depression interim review' the median occurrences across practices in December 2020 was down by 41.6% compared with December 2019). CONCLUSION: Granular NHS general practice data at population-scale can be used to monitor disruptions to healthcare services and guide the development of mitigation strategies. The authors are now developing real-time monitoring dashboards for the key measures identified in this study, as well as further studies using primary care data to monitor and mitigate the indirect health impacts of COVID-19 on the NHS.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic and Associated Control Measures on the Mental Health of the General Population : A Systematic Review and Dose-Response Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: To what extent the COVID-19 pandemic and its containment measures influenced mental health in the general population is still unclear. PURPOSE: To assess the trajectory of mental health symptoms during the first year of the pandemic and examine dose-response relations with characteristics of the pandemic and its containment. DATA SOURCES: Relevant articles were identified from the living evidence database of the COVID-19 Open Access Project, which indexes COVID-19-related publications from MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase via Ovid, and PsycInfo. Preprint publications were not considered. STUDY SELECTION: Longitudinal studies that reported data on the general population's mental health using validated scales and that were published before 31 March 2021 were eligible. DATA EXTRACTION: An international crowd of 109 trained reviewers screened references and extracted study characteristics, participant characteristics, and symptom scores at each timepoint. Data were also included for the following country-specific variables: days since the first case of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the stringency of governmental containment measures, and the cumulative numbers of cases and deaths. DATA SYNTHESIS: In a total of 43 studies (331 628 participants), changes in symptoms of psychological distress, sleep disturbances, and mental well-being varied substantially across studies. On average, depression and anxiety symptoms worsened in the first 2 months of the pandemic (standardized mean difference at 60 days, -0.39 [95% credible interval, -0.76 to -0.03]); thereafter, the trajectories were heterogeneous. There was a linear association of worsening depression and anxiety with increasing numbers of reported cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection and increasing stringency in governmental measures. Gender, age, country, deprivation, inequalities, risk of bias, and study design did not modify these associations. LIMITATIONS: The certainty of the evidence was low because of the high risk of bias in included studies and the large amount of heterogeneity. Stringency measures and surges in cases were strongly correlated and changed over time. The observed associations should not be interpreted as causal relationships. CONCLUSION: Although an initial increase in average symptoms of depression and anxiety and an association between higher numbers of reported cases and more stringent measures were found, changes in mental health symptoms varied substantially across studies after the first 2 months of the pandemic. This suggests that different populations responded differently to the psychological stress generated by the pandemic and its containment measures. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Swiss National Science Foundation. (PROSPERO: CRD42020180049).

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Global Delivery of Mental Health Services and Telemental Health: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic required mental health services around the world to adapt quickly to the new restrictions and regulations put in place to reduce the risk of transmission. As face-to-face contact became difficult, virtual methods were implemented to continue to safely provide mental health care. However, it is unclear to what extent service provision transitioned to telemental health worldwide. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to systematically review the global research literature on how mental health service provision adapted during the first year of the pandemic. METHODS: We searched systematically for quantitative papers focusing on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health services published until April 13, 2021, in the PubMed, Embase, medRxiv, and bioXriv electronic bibliographic databases, using the COVID-19 Open Access Project online platform. The screening process and data extraction were independently completed by at least two authors, and any disagreement was resolved by discussion with a senior member of the team. The findings were summarized narratively in the context of each country's COVID-19 Stringency Index, which reflects the stringency of a government's response to COVID-19 restrictions at a specific time. RESULTS: Of the identified 24,339 records, 101 papers were included after the screening process. Reports on general services (n=72) showed that several countries' face-to-face services reduced their activities at the start of the pandemic, with reductions in the total number of delivered visits and with some services forced to close. In contrast, telemental health use rapidly increased in many countries across the world at the beginning of the pandemic (n=55), with almost complete virtualization of general and specialistic care services by the end of the first year. Considering the reported COVID-19 Stringency Index values, the increased use of virtual means seems to correspond to periods when the Stringency Index values were at their highest in several countries. However, due to specific care requirements, telemental health could not be used in certain subgroups of patients, such as those on clozapine or depot treatments and those who continued to need face-to-face visits. CONCLUSIONS: During the pandemic, mental health services had to adapt quickly in the short term, implementing or increasing the use of telemental health services across the globe. Limited access to digital means, poor digital skills, and patients' preferences and individual needs may have contributed to differences in implementing and accessing telemental health services during the pandemic. In the long term, a blended approach, combining in-person and virtual modalities, that takes into consideration the needs, preferences, and digital skills of patients may better support the future development of mental health services. It will be required to improve confidence with digital device use, training, and experience in all modalities for both clinicians and service users.

A systematic review and meta-analysis on prevalence of and risk factors associated with depression, anxiety and insomnia in infectious diseases, including COVID-19: a call to action.

Infectious disease epidemics have become more frequent and more complex during the 21st century, posing a health threat to the general public and leading to psychological symptoms. The current study was designed to investigate the prevalence of and risk factors associated with depression, anxiety and insomnia symptoms during epidemic outbreaks, including COVID-19. We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, OVID, Medline, Cochrane databases, bioRxiv and medRxiv to identify studies that reported the prevalence of depression, anxiety or insomnia during infectious disease epidemics, up to August 14th, 2020. Prevalence of mental symptoms among different populations including the general public, health workers, university students, older adults, infected patients, survivors of infection, and pregnant women across all types of epidemics was pooled. In addition, prevalence of mental symptoms during COVID-19 was estimated by time using meta-regression analysis. A total of 17,506 papers were initially retrieved, and a final of 283 studies met the inclusion criteria, representing a total of 948,882 individuals. The pooled prevalence of depression ranged from 23.1%, 95% confidential intervals (95% CI: [13.9-32.2]) in survivors to 43.3% (95% CI: [27.1-59.6]) in university students, the pooled prevalence of anxiety ranged from 25.0% (95% CI: [12.0-38.0]) in older adults to 43.3% (95% CI: [23.3-63.3]) in pregnant women, and insomnia symptoms ranged from 29.7% (95% CI: [24.4-34.9]) in the general public to 58.4% (95% CI: [28.1-88.6]) in university students. Prevalence of moderate-to-severe mental symptoms was lower but had substantial variation across different populations. The prevalence of mental problems increased over time during the COVID-19 pandemic among the general public, health workers and university students, and decreased among infected patients. Factors associated with increased prevalence for all three mental health symptoms included female sex, and having physical disorders, psychiatric disorders, COVID infection, colleagues or family members infected, experience of frontline work, close contact with infected patients, high exposure risk, quarantine experience and high concern about epidemics. Frequent exercise and good social support were associated with lower risk for these three mental symptoms. In conclusion, mental symptoms are common during epidemics with substantial variation across populations. The population-specific psychological crisis management are needed to decrease the burden of psychological problem and improve the mental wellbeing during epidemic.

Harnessing Twitter data to survey public attention and attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccines in the UK.

Attitudes to COVID-19 vaccination vary considerably within and between countries. Although the contribution of socio-demographic factors to these attitudes has been studied, the role of social media and how it interacts with news about vaccine development and efficacy is uncertain. We examined around 2 million tweets from 522,893 persons in the UK from November 2020 to January 2021 to evaluate links between Twitter content about vaccines and major scientific news announcements about vaccines. The proportion of tweets with negative vaccine content varied, with reductions of 20-24% on the same day as major news announcement. However, the proportion of negative tweets reverted back to an average of around 40% within a few days. Engagement rates were higher for negative tweets. Public health messaging could consider the dynamics of Twitter-related traffic and the potential contribution of more targeted social media campaigns to address vaccine hesitancy.

Prevalence and correlates of suicidal ideation among the general population in China during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is a major threat to the public. However, the comprehensive profile of suicidal ideation among the general population has not been systematically investigated in a large sample in the age of COVID-19. METHODS: A national online cross-sectional survey was conducted between February 28, 2020 and March 11, 2020 in a representative sample of Chinese adults aged 18 years and older. Suicidal ideation was assessed using item 9 of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. The prevalence of suicidal ideation and its risk factors was evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 56,679 participants (27,149 males and 29,530 females) were included. The overall prevalence of suicidal ideation was 16.4%, including 10.9% seldom, 4.1% often, and 1.4% always suicidal ideation. The prevalence of suicidal ideation was higher in males (19.1%) and individuals aged 18-24 years (24.7%) than in females (14.0%) and those aged 45 years and older (11.9%). Suicidal ideation was more prevalent in individuals with suspected or confirmed infection (63.0%), frontline workers (19.2%), and people with pre-existing mental disorders (41.6%). Experience of quarantine, unemployed, and increased psychological stress during the pandemic were associated with an increased risk of suicidal ideation and its severity. However, paying more attention to and gaining a better understanding of COVID-19-related knowledge, especially information about psychological interventions, could reduce the risk. CONCLUSIONS: The estimated prevalence of suicidal ideation among the general population in China during COVID-19 was significant. The findings will be important for improving suicide prevention strategies during COVID-19.

Prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder after infectious disease pandemics in the twenty-first century, including COVID-19: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

Pandemics have become more frequent and more complex during the twenty-first century. Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) following pandemics is a significant public health concern. We sought to provide a reliable estimate of the worldwide prevalence of PTSD after large-scale pandemics as well as associated risk factors, by a systematic review and meta-analysis. We systematically searched the MedLine, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang, medRxiv, and bioRxiv databases to identify studies that were published from the inception up to August 23, 2020, and reported the prevalence of PTSD after pandemics including sudden acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), H1N1, Poliomyelitis, Ebola, Zika, Nipah, Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), H5N1, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). A total of 88 studies were included in the analysis, with 77 having prevalence information and 70 having risk factors information. The overall pooled prevalence of post-pandemic PTSD across all populations was 22.6% (95% confidence interval (CI): 19.9-25.4%, I2: 99.7%). Healthcare workers had the highest prevalence of PTSD (26.9%; 95% CI: 20.3-33.6%), followed by infected cases (23.8%: 16.6-31.0%), and the general public (19.3%: 15.3-23.2%). However, the heterogeneity of study findings indicates that results should be interpreted cautiously. Risk factors including individual, family, and societal factors, pandemic-related factors, and specific factors in healthcare workers and patients for post-pandemic PTSD were summarized and discussed in this systematic review. Long-term monitoring and early interventions should be implemented to improve post-pandemic mental health and long-term recovery.

Managing outbreaks of highly contagious diseases in prisons: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: There are reports of outbreaks of COVID-19 in prisons in many countries. Responses to date have been highly variable and it is not clear whether public health guidance has been informed by the best available evidence. We conducted a systematic review to synthesise the evidence on outbreaks of highly contagious diseases in prison. METHODS: We searched seven electronic databases for peer-reviewed articles and official reports published between 1 January 2000 and 28 July 2020. We included quantitative primary research that reported an outbreak of a given contagious disease in a correctional facility and examined the effects of interventions. We excluded studies that did not provide detail on interventions. We synthesised common themes using the Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) guideline, identified gaps in the literature and critically appraised the effectiveness of various containment approaches. RESULTS: We identified 28 relevant studies. Investigations were all based in high-income countries and documented outbreaks of tuberculosis, influenza (types A and B), varicella, measles, mumps, adenovirus and COVID-19. Several themes were common to these reports, including the public health implications of infectious disease outbreaks in prison, and the role of interagency collaboration, health communication, screening for contagious diseases, restriction, isolation and quarantine, contact tracing, immunisation programmes, epidemiological surveillance and prison-specific guidelines in addressing any outbreaks. DISCUSSION: Prisons are high-risk settings for the transmission of contagious diseases and there are considerable challenges in managing outbreaks in them. A public health approach to managing COVID-19 in prisons is required. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020178827.