Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Int J Epidemiol ; 2022 Aug 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20234797

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: To understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mortality, this study investigates overall, sex- and age-specific excess all-cause mortality in 20 countries, during 2020. METHODS: Total, sex- and age-specific weekly all-cause mortality for 2015-2020 was collected from national vital statistics databases. Excess mortality for 2020 was calculated by comparing weekly 2020 observed mortality against expected mortality, estimated from historical data (2015-2019) accounting for seasonality, long- and short-term trends. Crude and age-standardized rates were analysed for total and sex-specific mortality. RESULTS: Austria, Brazil, Cyprus, England and Wales, France, Georgia, Israel, Italy, Northern Ireland, Peru, Scotland, Slovenia, Sweden, and the USA displayed substantial excess age-standardized mortality of varying duration during 2020, while Australia, Denmark, Estonia, Mauritius, Norway, and Ukraine did not. In sex-specific analyses, excess mortality was higher in males than females, except for Slovenia (higher in females) and Cyprus (similar in both sexes). Lastly, for most countries substantial excess mortality was only detectable (Austria, Cyprus, Israel, and Slovenia) or was higher (Brazil, England and Wales, France, Georgia, Italy, Northern Ireland, Sweden, Peru and the USA) in the oldest age group investigated. Peru demonstrated substantial excess mortality even in the <45 age group. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights that excess all-cause mortality during 2020 is context dependent, with specific countries, sex- and age-groups being most affected. As the pandemic continues, tracking excess mortality is important to accurately estimate the true toll of COVID-19, while at the same time investigating the effects of changing contexts, different variants, testing, quarantine, and vaccination strategies.

2.
PLoS One ; 17(8): e0271834, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1993480

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To explore COVID-19 vaccination uptake, facilitators and barriers in ethnically-diverse pregnant women. DESIGN AND SETTING: An anonymous quality improvement questionnaire survey exploring COVID-19 vaccination uptake, causes of vaccine hesitancy and trusted sources of information among pregnant women in two acute district general hospitals in England (Berkshire and Surrey) between 1.9.21 and 28.2.22. POPULATION: 441 pregnant women attending routine antenatal clinic appointments. METHODS: Consented pregnant women completed the survey either electronically using a QR code or on paper. Descriptive data were summarised and free text responses were thematically analysed. RESULTS: 441 pregnant women, mean age 32 years (range 17-44), completed the survey. Twenty-six percent were from ethnic minority groups, and 31% had a co-morbid health condition. Most respondents (66.2%) had been vaccinated against COVID-19 with at least one dose (White British 71.9%, Asian 67.9%, White-other 63.6%, Black 33%). The most common reasons for not being vaccinated were concerns about effects on the unborn baby and future pregnancies, anxiety about possible adverse impact on the mother, not enough known about the vaccine, and lack of trust in vaccines. Comments included: "I'd rather not risk injecting the unknown into my body", and "I don't trust it." Although 23% used social media for information on COVID-19 vaccination, the most trusted sources were the patient's GP and midwife (43%) and official health-related websites such as NHS (39%). CONCLUSIONS: A third of these pregnant women had not been vaccinated against COVID-19. Trusted health professionals like midwives and GPs could have a crucial role in increasing vaccination uptake.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pregnant Women , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Ethnicity , Female , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Humans , Minority Groups , Pregnancy , Vaccination , Young Adult
3.
BJPsych Open ; 8(4): e144, 2022 Jul 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1962922

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Internationally, an increasing proportion of emergency department visits are mental health related. Concurrently, psychiatric wards are often occupied above capacity. Healthcare providers have introduced short-stay, hospital-based crisis units offering a therapeutic space for stabilisation, assessment and appropriate referral. Research lags behind roll-out, and a review of the evidence is urgently needed to inform policy and further introduction of similar units. AIMS: This systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of short-stay, hospital-based mental health crisis units. METHOD: We searched EMBASE, Medline, CINAHL and PsycINFO up to March 2021. All designs incorporating a control or comparison group were eligible for inclusion, and all effect estimates with a comparison group were extracted and combined meta-analytically where appropriate. We assessed study risk of bias with Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies - of Interventions and Risk of Bias in Randomized Trials. RESULTS: Data from twelve studies across six countries (Australia, Belgium, Canada, The Netherlands, UK and USA) and 67 505 participants were included. Data indicated that units delivered benefits on many outcomes. Units could reduce psychiatric holds (42% after intervention compared with 49.8% before intervention; difference = 7.8%; P < 0.0001) and increase out-patient follow-up care (χ2 = 37.42, d.f. = 1; P < 0.001). Meta-analysis indicated a significant reduction in length of emergency department stay (by 164.24 min; 95% CI -261.24 to -67.23 min; P < 0.001) and number of in-patient admissions (odds ratio 0.55, 95% CI 0.43-0.68; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Short-stay mental health crisis units are effective for reducing emergency department wait times and in-patient admissions. Further research should investigate the impact of units on patient experience, and clinical and social outcomes.

4.
Lancet Infect Dis ; 22(9): e254-e266, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1795983

ABSTRACT

Understanding why some migrants in Europe are at risk of underimmunisation and show lower vaccination uptake for routine and COVID-19 vaccines is critical if we are to address vaccination inequities and meet the goals of WHO's new Immunisation Agenda 2030. We did a systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42020219214) exploring barriers and facilitators of vaccine uptake (categorised using the 5As taxonomy: access, awareness, affordability, acceptance, activation) and sociodemographic determinants of undervaccination among migrants in the EU and European Economic Area, the UK, and Switzerland. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO from 2000 to 2021 for primary research, with no restrictions on language. 5259 data sources were screened, with 67 studies included from 16 countries, representing 366 529 migrants. We identified multiple access barriers-including language, literacy, and communication barriers, practical and legal barriers to accessing and delivering vaccination services, and service barriers such as lack of specific guidelines and knowledge of health-care professionals-for key vaccines including measles-mumps-rubella, diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus, human papillomavirus, influenza, polio, and COVID-19 vaccines. Acceptance barriers were mostly reported in eastern European and Muslim migrants for human papillomavirus, measles, and influenza vaccines. We identified 23 significant determinants of undervaccination in migrants (p<0·05), including African origin, recent migration, and being a refugee or asylum seeker. We did not identify a strong overall association with gender or age. Tailored vaccination messaging, community outreach, and behavioural nudges facilitated uptake. Migrants' barriers to accessing health care are already well documented, and this Review confirms their role in limiting vaccine uptake. These findings hold immediate relevance to strengthening vaccination programmes in high-income countries, including for COVID-19, and suggest that tailored, culturally sensitive, and evidence-informed strategies, unambiguous public health messaging, and health system strengthening are needed to address access and acceptance barriers to vaccination in migrants and create opportunities and pathways for offering catch-up vaccinations to migrants.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Measles , Transients and Migrants , Vaccines , COVID-19 Vaccines , Europe , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Vaccination
5.
Int J Epidemiol ; 51(1): 35-53, 2022 02 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1317917

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to investigate overall and sex-specific excess all-cause mortality since the inception of the COVID-19 pandemic until August 2020 among 22 countries. METHODS: Countries reported weekly or monthly all-cause mortality from January 2015 until the end of June or August 2020. Weekly or monthly COVID-19 deaths were reported for 2020. Excess mortality for 2020 was calculated by comparing weekly or monthly 2020 mortality (observed deaths) against a baseline mortality obtained from 2015-2019 data for the same week or month using two methods: (i) difference in observed mortality rates between 2020 and the 2015-2019 average and (ii) difference between observed and expected 2020 deaths. RESULTS: Brazil, France, Italy, Spain, Sweden, the UK (England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland) and the USA demonstrated excess all-cause mortality, whereas Australia, Denmark and Georgia experienced a decrease in all-cause mortality. Israel, Ukraine and Ireland demonstrated sex-specific changes in all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: All-cause mortality up to August 2020 was higher than in previous years in some, but not all, participating countries. Geographical location and seasonality of each country, as well as the prompt application of high-stringency control measures, may explain the observed variability in mortality changes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Female , France , Humans , Italy , Male , Mortality , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL