Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
1.
Age Ageing ; 51(12)2022 Dec 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2151831

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: dementia may increase care home residents' risk of COVID-19, but there is a lack of evidence on this effect and on interactions with individual and care home-level factors. METHODS: we created a national cross-sectional retrospective cohort of care home residents in Wales for 1 September to 31 December 2020. Risk factors were analysed using multi-level logistic regression to model the likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality. RESULTS: the cohort included 9,571 individuals in 673 homes. Dementia was diagnosed in 5,647 individuals (59%); 1,488 (15.5%) individuals tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. We estimated the effects of age, dementia, frailty, care home size, proportion of residents with dementia, nursing and dementia services, communal space and region. The final model included the proportion of residents with dementia (OR for positive test 4.54 (95% CIs 1.55-13.27) where 75% of residents had dementia compared to no residents with dementia) and frailty (OR 1.29 (95% CIs 1.05-1.59) for severe frailty compared with no frailty). Analysis suggested 76% of the variation was due to setting rather than individual factors. Additional analysis suggested severe frailty and proportion of residents with dementia was associated with all-cause mortality, as was dementia diagnosis. Mortality analyses were challenging to interpret. DISCUSSION: whilst individual frailty increased the risk of COVID-19 infection, dementia was a risk factor at care home but not individual level. These findings suggest whole-setting interventions, particularly in homes with high proportions of residents with dementia and including those with low/no individual risk factors may reduce the impact of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Dementia , Frailty , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Nursing Homes , Retrospective Studies , Prevalence , Incidence , Cross-Sectional Studies , Frailty/diagnosis , Frailty/epidemiology , Dementia/diagnosis , Dementia/epidemiology , Dementia/therapy
2.
J R Soc Med ; : 1410768221107119, 2022 Jul 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1916722

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To better understand the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among healthcare workers, leading to recommendations for the prioritisation of personal protective equipment, testing, training and vaccination. DESIGN: Observational, longitudinal, national cohort study. SETTING: Our cohort were secondary care (hospital-based) healthcare workers employed by NHS Wales (United Kingdom) organisations from 1 April 2020 to 30 November 2020. PARTICIPANTS: We included 577,756 monthly observations among 77,587 healthcare workers. Using linked anonymised datasets, participants were grouped into 20 staff roles. Additionally, each role was deemed either patient-facing, non-patient-facing or undetermined. This was linked to individual demographic details and dates of positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We used univariable and multivariable logistic regression models to determine odds ratios (ORs) for the risk of a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test. RESULTS: Patient-facing healthcare workers were at the highest risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection with an adjusted OR (95% confidence interval [CI]) of 2.28 (95% CI 2.10-2.47). We found that after adjustment, foundation year doctors (OR 1.83 [95% CI 1.47-2.27]), healthcare support workers [OR 1.36 [95% CI 1.20-1.54]) and hospital nurses (OR 1.27 [95% CI 1.12-1.44]) were at the highest risk of infection among all staff groups. Younger healthcare workers and those living in more deprived areas were at a higher risk of infection. We also observed that infection rates varied over time and by organisation. CONCLUSIONS: These findings have important policy implications for the prioritisation of vaccination, testing, training and personal protective equipment provision for patient-facing roles and the higher risk staff groups.

3.
Age Ageing ; 51(5)2022 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1740783

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: defining features of the COVID-19 pandemic in many countries were the tragic extent to which care home residents were affected and the difficulty in preventing the introduction and subsequent spread of infection. Management of risk in care homes requires good evidence on the most important transmission pathways. One hypothesised route at the start of the pandemic, prior to widespread testing, was the transfer of patients from hospitals that were experiencing high levels of nosocomial events. METHODS: we tested the hypothesis that hospital discharge events increased the intensity of care home cases using a national individually linked health record cohort in Wales, UK. We monitored 186,772 hospital discharge events over the period from March to July 2020, tracking individuals to 923 care homes and recording the daily case rate in the homes populated by 15,772 residents. We estimated the risk of an increase in case rates following exposure to a hospital discharge using multi-level hierarchical logistic regression and a novel stochastic Hawkes process outbreak model. FINDINGS: in regression analysis, after adjusting for care home size, we found no significant association between hospital discharge and subsequent increases in care home case numbers (odds ratio: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.82, 1.90). Risk factors for increased cases included care home size, care home resident density and provision of nursing care. Using our outbreak model, we found a significant effect of hospital discharge on the subsequent intensity of cases. However, the effect was small and considerably less than the effect of care home size, suggesting the highest risk of introduction came from interaction with the community. We estimated that approximately 1.8% of hospital discharged patients may have been infected. INTERPRETATION: there is growing evidence in the UK that the risk of transfer of COVID-19 from the high-risk hospital setting to the high-risk care home setting during the early stages of the pandemic was relatively small. Although access to testing was limited to initial symptomatic cases in each care home at this time, our results suggest that reduced numbers of discharges, selection of patients and action taken within care homes following transfer all may have contributed to the mitigation. The precise key transmission routes from the community remain to be quantified.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospitals , Humans , Nursing Homes , Pandemics/prevention & control , Patient Discharge , United Kingdom/epidemiology
4.
Age Ageing ; 51(1)2022 01 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1545894

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: vaccinations for COVID-19 have been prioritised for older people living in care homes. However, vaccination trials included limited numbers of older people. AIM: we aimed to study infection rates of SARS-CoV-2 for older care home residents following vaccination and identify factors associated with increased risk of infection. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: we conducted an observational data-linkage study including 14,104 vaccinated older care home residents in Wales (UK) using anonymised electronic health records and administrative data. METHODS: we used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for the risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection following vaccination, after landmark times of either 7 or 21 days post-vaccination. We adjusted HRs for age, sex, frailty, prior SARS-CoV-2 infections and vaccination type. RESULTS: we observed a small proportion of care home residents with positive polymerase chain reaction (tests following vaccination 1.05% (N = 148), with 90% of infections occurring within 28 days. For the 7-day landmark analysis we found a reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection for vaccinated individuals who had a previous infection; HR (95% confidence interval) 0.54 (0.30, 0.95). For the 21-day landmark analysis, we observed high HRs for individuals with low and intermediate frailty compared with those without; 4.59 (1.23, 17.12) and 4.85 (1.68, 14.04), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: increased risk of infection after 21 days was associated with frailty. We found most infections occurred within 28 days of vaccination, suggesting extra precautions to reduce transmission risk should be taken in this time frame.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Aged , Cohort Studies , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Wales/epidemiology
5.
BMJ Paediatr Open ; 5(1): e001049, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1238538

ABSTRACT

Background: Better understanding of the role that children and school staff play in the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is essential to guide policy development on controlling infection while minimising disruption to children's education and well-being. Methods: Our national e-cohort (n=464531) study used anonymised linked data for pupils, staff and associated households linked via educational settings in Wales. We estimated the odds of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection for staff and pupils over the period August- December 2020, dependent on measures of recent exposure to known cases linked to their educational settings. Results: The total number of cases in a school was not associated with a subsequent increase in the odds of testing positive (staff OR per case: 0.92, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.00; pupil OR per case: 0.98, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.02). Among pupils, the number of recent cases within the same year group was significantly associated with subsequent increased odds of testing positive (OR per case: 1.12, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.15). These effects were adjusted for a range of demographic covariates, and in particular any known cases within the same household, which had the strongest association with testing positive (staff OR: 39.86, 95% CI 35.01 to 45.38; pupil OR: 9.39, 95% CI 8.94 to 9.88). Conclusions: In a national school cohort, the odds of staff testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection were not significantly increased in the 14-day period after case detection in the school. However, pupils were found to be at increased odds, following cases appearing within their own year group, where most of their contacts occur. Strong mitigation measures over the whole of the study period may have reduced wider spread within the school environment.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Child , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Schools , Semantic Web , Wales/epidemiology
6.
Influenza Other Respir Viruses ; 15(3): 371-380, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1066700

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The population of adult residential care homes has been shown to have high morbidity and mortality in relation to COVID-19. METHODS: We examined 3115 hospital discharges to a national cohort of 1068 adult care homes and subsequent outbreaks of COVID-19 occurring between 22 February and 27 June 2020. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to assess the impact of time-dependent exposure to hospital discharge on incidence of the first known outbreak, over a window of 7-21 days after discharge, and adjusted for care home characteristics, including size and type of provision. RESULTS: A total of 330 homes experienced an outbreak, and 544 homes received a discharge over the study period. Exposure to hospital discharge was not associated with a significant increase in the risk of a new outbreak (hazard ratio 1.15, 95% CI 0.89, 1.47, P = .29) after adjusting for care home characteristics. Care home size was the most significant predictor. Hazard ratios (95% CI) in comparison with homes of <10 residents were as follows: 3.40 (1.99, 5.80) for 10-24 residents; 8.25 (4.93, 13.81) for 25-49 residents; and 17.35 (9.65, 31.19) for 50+ residents. When stratified for care home size, the outbreak rates were similar for periods when homes were exposed to a hospital discharge, in comparison with periods when homes were unexposed. CONCLUSION: Our analyses showed that large homes were at considerably greater risk of outbreaks throughout the epidemic, and after adjusting for care home size, a discharge from hospital was not associated with a significant increase in risk.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , Nursing Homes , SARS-CoV-2 , Cohort Studies , Humans , Patient Discharge , Proportional Hazards Models
7.
J R Soc Interface ; 17(173): 20200775, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-969958

ABSTRACT

Controlling the regional re-emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) after its initial spread in ever-changing personal contact networks and disease landscapes is a challenging task. In a landscape context, contact opportunities within and between populations are changing rapidly as lockdown measures are relaxed and a number of social activities re-activated. Using an individual-based metapopulation model, we explored the efficacy of different control strategies across an urban-rural gradient in Wales, UK. Our model shows that isolation of symptomatic cases or regional lockdowns in response to local outbreaks have limited efficacy unless the overall transmission rate is kept persistently low. Additional isolation of non-symptomatic infected individuals, who may be detected by effective test-and-trace strategies, is pivotal to reducing the overall epidemic size over a wider range of transmission scenarios. We define an 'urban-rural gradient in epidemic size' as a correlation between regional epidemic size and connectivity within the region, with more highly connected urban populations experiencing relatively larger outbreaks. For interventions focused on regional lockdowns, the strength of such gradients in epidemic size increased with higher travel frequencies, indicating a reduced efficacy of the control measure in the urban regions under these conditions. When both non-symptomatic and symptomatic individuals are isolated or regional lockdown strategies are enforced, we further found the strongest urban-rural epidemic gradients at high transmission rates. This effect was reversed for strategies targeted at symptomatic individuals only. Our results emphasize the importance of test-and-trace strategies and maintaining low transmission rates for efficiently controlling SARS-CoV-2 spread, both at landscape scale and in urban areas.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Pandemics/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Asymptomatic Infections/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Computer Simulation , Contact Tracing , Humans , Models, Biological , Physical Distancing , Rural Population , Social Interaction , Urban Population , Wales/epidemiology
8.
BMJ Open ; 10(10): e043010, 2020 10 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-889902

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The emergence of the novel respiratory SARS-CoV-2 and subsequent COVID-19 pandemic have required rapid assimilation of population-level data to understand and control the spread of infection in the general and vulnerable populations. Rapid analyses are needed to inform policy development and target interventions to at-risk groups to prevent serious health outcomes. We aim to provide an accessible research platform to determine demographic, socioeconomic and clinical risk factors for infection, morbidity and mortality of COVID-19, to measure the impact of COVID-19 on healthcare utilisation and long-term health, and to enable the evaluation of natural experiments of policy interventions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Two privacy-protecting population-level cohorts have been created and derived from multisourced demographic and healthcare data. The C20 cohort consists of 3.2 million people in Wales on the 1 January 2020 with follow-up until 31 May 2020. The complete cohort dataset will be updated monthly with some individual datasets available daily. The C16 cohort consists of 3 million people in Wales on the 1 January 2016 with follow-up to 31 December 2019. C16 is designed as a counterfactual cohort to provide contextual comparative population data on disease, health service utilisation and mortality. Study outcomes will: (a) characterise the epidemiology of COVID-19, (b) assess socioeconomic and demographic influences on infection and outcomes, (c) measure the impact of COVID-19 on short -term and longer-term population outcomes and (d) undertake studies on the transmission and spatial spread of infection. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Secure Anonymised Information Linkage-independent Information Governance Review Panel has approved this study. The study findings will be presented to policy groups, public meetings, national and international conferences, and published in peer-reviewed journals.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Delivery of Health Care/standards , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Humans , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Wales/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL