ABSTRACT
Background: Melbourne's 2020 pandemic lockdown was associated with an increase in stillbirths and a reduction in preterm births (PTB) among singleton pregnancies. Twin pregnancies may be particularly susceptible due to higher background risk. We aimed to compare the rates of adverse pregnancy outcomes in twin pregnancies exposed and unexposed to Melbourne's lockdown. Method(s): Multicentre retrospective cohort study of all twin pregnancies > 20 weeks birthing in all 12 public maternity hospitals in Melbourne. Multivariable log-binominal regressions were used to compare outcomes between a pre-pandemic control group ('unexposed') independently with two lockdown-exposed groups: exposure 1 from 22 March 2020 to 21 March 2021 (pre-vaccination era) and exposure 2 from 22 March 2021 to 27 March 2022 (vaccination era). Result(s): We included 2259 pregnancies. There were fewer PTBs < 37 weeks during exposure 1 compared with the pre-pandemic era (63.1% vs. 68.3%;adjusted risk-ratio (aRR) 0.95;95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88-0.98, P = 0.01). This lower rate was most prominent in iatrogenic PTB for suspected fetal compromise (13.4% vs. 20.3%;aRR 0.94 95% CI 0.90-0.99, P = 0.01). There were correspondingly fewer special care nursery admissions during exposure 1 (38.5% vs. 43.5%;aRR 0.91 95% CI 0.87-0.95, P < 0.001), but no changes in stillbirth (1.5% vs. 1.4%;aRR 1.00, 95% CI 0.99-1.01, P = 0.85). Compared with the pre-pandemic period, exposure 2 was associated with a trend to more PTB < 28 weeks and significantly higher neonatal intensive care unit admissions (25.0% vs. 19.6%;aRR 1.06 95% CI 1.03-1.10, P < 0.001). Conclusion(s): Melbourne's first lockdown-exposure period was associated with fewer preterm twin births for suspected fetal compromise, without any increase in stillbirth.
ABSTRACT
Background: We aimed to measure COVID-19 vaccine uptake among women giving birth in Melbourne and to compare perinatal outcomes by vaccination status. Method(s): Routinely-collected data from all 12 public maternity hospitals in Melbourne were extracted on births >=20 weeks' from 01.07.21 to 31.03.22. Sociodemographic characteristics and perinatal outcomes were compared between COVID-19 vaccinated and unvaccinated women. The primary outcomes were stillbirth and preterm birth in singletons >24 weeks. We calculated the adjusted odds ratio of perinatal outcomes among vaccinated versus unvaccinated women using inverse propensity score weighting regression adjustment with multiple covariates;P < 0.05 was considered significant. Result(s): Births from 32 536 women were analysed: 17 365 (53.4%) were vaccinated and 15 171 (47.6%) were unvaccinated. Vaccination status was significantly associated with multiple sociodemographic factors. Vaccinated women had a significantly lower rate of stillbirth compared with unvaccinated women (0.2% vs. 0.8%, aOR 0.18, 95% CI 0.09- 0.37, P < 0.001). Vaccination was associated with a significant reduction in total preterm births <37 weeks (5.1% vs. 9.2%, aOR 0.60, 95% CI 0.51-0.71, P < 0.001), spontaneous preterm birth (2.4% vs. 4.0%, aOR 0.73 95% CI 0.56-0.96, P = 0.02) and iatrogenic preterm birth (2.7% vs. 5.2%, aOR 0.52, 95% CI 0.41-0.65, P < 0.001). There was no significant increase in congenital anomalies or foetal growth restriction among vaccinated women. Conclusion(s): COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy was associated with a reduction in stillbirth and preterm birth, and not associated with any adverse impacts on foetal growth or development. Vaccine coverage was significantly influenced by known social determinants of health.
ABSTRACT
Introduction Delivery of the World Health Organisation elimination agenda for Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) requires active case finding, to engage hard to reach risk groups. Surrey is a relatively affluent part of the country, but contains pockets of significant unmet need, which are a barrier to the HCV care cascade. In 2020 the Surrey HCV Operational Delivery Network (ODN) piloted 'pop up clinics' for housed homeless populations during the COVID 19 pandemic. Based on this experience the ODN lead successfully bid for NHS England funding for a Mobile Outreach Van (MOV). Methods Detailed mapping of the ODN was undertaken jointly with the Hepatitis C Trust to identify potential locations to screen e.g., Opiate Substation Therapy dispensing pharmacies, and areas with high numbers of homeless people. MOV procurement and governance obtained in accordance with Trust policy. Individuals complete a brief liver health questionnaire including Blood Bourne Virus (BBV) risk factors. HCV screening is undertaken using Oraquick point of care testing. Those screening HCV Antibody positive (Ab +ve) receive a Clinical Nurse Specialist (CNS) assessment for therapy including a BBV screen HCV PCR and Fibro Scan. Hepatitis C Trust peer support is available to all individuals. Other significant findings prompt onward referral e.g., cirrhosis surveillance. Results First six months of operation the team have undertaken 50 testing days in 16 venues. 761 individuals have accepted HCV Ab screening. 40 (5.2%) tested HCV Ab +ve. 10 individuals confirmed viraemic and eligible for treatment. Another 7 individuals were re-engaged to undertake end of treatment or Sustained Virologic Response 12/48 PCR. In addition, 1 HCV Ab +ve (PCR negative), patient was diagnosed with Human Immunodeficiency Virus and referred to the local sexual health team. 16 individuals identified with advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis were referred to hospital for Hepatocellular Carcinoma surveillance. Patients engaged through the MOV service have received their treatment in the community via this service delivered by a CNS. Conclusions Nurse led MOV screen test treat model has proven to be safe and effective in engaging difficult to reach populations. Hepatitis C Trust peers accessibility help to address the anxiety/stigma surrounding HCV. MOV wider benefits include engagement with drug and alcohol services, and harm reduction. The next phase of implementation, the team plan to deliver needle exchange and naloxone in a partnership agreement with Surrey County Council.
ABSTRACT
Chronic pain produces the largest non-fatal burden of disease, yet our understanding of factors that contribute to the transition from acute chronic pain are poorly understood. The Acute to Chronic Pain Signatures Program (A2CPS) is a longitudinal, multi-site observational study to identify biomarkers (individual or biosignature combinations) that predict susceptibility or resilience to the development of chronic pain after surgery (knee replacement or thoracotomy). Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, however, travel between sites was restricted just as the study was preparing to begin enrollment. Here, we present multiple training protocol adaptations that were successfully implemented to facilitate remote research-related training. The A2CPS consortium includes 2 Multisite Clinical Centers (MCCs, 10 recruitment sites), a Clinical Coordinating Center (CCC), a Data Integration and Resource Center (DIRC), 3 Omics Data Generation Centers, and representation from the NIH Pain Consortium, Common Fund, and National Institute of Drug Abuse. The A2CPS is collecting candidate and exploratory biomarkers including pain, fatigue, function, sleep, psychosocial factors, quantitative sensory testing (QST), genomics, proteomics, metabolomics, lipidomics, and brain imaging. The CCC adapted the A2CPS training and evaluation techniques for certifying the MCCs to ensure competency with recruitment, assessments (surveys, QST, function), and data entry across clinical sites using a combination of virtual training sessions, standardized quantitative measurements, video demonstrations, and reliability assessments. Staff at data collection sites have been successfully certified in all psychophysical assessments (QST, function). This included use of stop watches and metronomes to ensure standard application rates, completion of application-rate and inter-rater-reliability worksheets at each clinical site, designation of site-specific master examiners, training rubrics and video demonstration to verify competency was harmonized across sites. Adaptation of training protocols to a remote format enabled initiation of subject enrollment while maintaining documented standards with high data completion rates for surveys and assessments. The A2CPS Consortium is supported by the National Institutes of Health Common Fund, which is managed by the OD/Office of Strategic Coordination (OSC). Consortium components include: Clinical Coordinating Center (UO1NS077179), Data Integration and Resource Center (UO1NS077352), Omics Data Generation Centers (U54DA049116, U54DA049115, U54DA09113), and Multisite Clinical Centers: MCC 1 (UM1NS112874) and MCC 2 (UM1NS118922). Postdoctoral support for GB provided by the National Institutes of Neurological Disease and Stroke (NINDS) of the NIH under Award Number U24NS112873-03S2.
ABSTRACT
Background. Half of all urinary tract infections (UTI) are probably unnecessary. We conducted a cluster-randomized trial in which a toolkit to enhance the diagnosis and treatment of UTIs was introduced in study NHs via usual implementation versus an enhanced implementation approach based on external facilitation and peer comparison reporting. Methods. Thirty Wisconsin NHs were randomized to each treatment arm in a 1.5:1 ratio. NHs used an online portal to report urine culture and antibiotic treatment data over a 6-month pre-intervention period (Jan-June 2019), a pre-COVID 8-month post intervention period (July 2019-Feb 2020) and an 8-month post-COVID intervention period (Mar-Oct 2020). Study outcomes included urine culture (UC), antibiotic start (AS), and antibiotic days of therapy (DOT) rates per 1,000 resident days. A generalized estimating equation model for panel data was used to assess differences in study outcomes between treatment arms before and after onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. STATA 16.1 was used for all analyses. Results. A total of 802 UCs (457 pre-COVID, 345 post-COVID), 724 AS (401 pre-COVID, 323 post-COVID), and 6,454 DOT (3553 pre-COVID and 2901 post-COVID) were reported over the 16-month intervention period. No significant differences in the study outcomes were observed during the pre-COVID intervention period, however, UC rates in NHs assigned to the usual care arm of the study increased while those in the enhanced arm declined following onset of COVID-19 (Figure 1). AS and DOT rates followed a similar pattern although the differences between the study arms were not statistically significant. Conclusion. Our findings suggest that NHs assigned to usual implementation regressed in their diagnosis and treatment of UTIs during the COVID-19 pandemic while those receiving external facilitation and peer comparison reports were more resilient to the effects of COVID-19.