The Lived Experience of Implementing Infection Control Measures in Care Homes during two waves of the COVID-19 Pandemic. A mixed-methods study (preprint)

ContextDuring COVID-19 care-homes had to implement strict Infection Control Measures (ICMs), impacting on care and staff morale. ObjectivesTo explore the lived experiences of care-home staff in implementing ICMs. MethodsMixed-methods study comprising 238 online survey responses and 15 in-depth interviews with care-home staff, November 2020-January 2021 in England. ResultsThree themes were identified: Integrating COVID-19 ICMs with caring, Conveying knowledge and information, Professional and personal impacts of care-work during the pandemic. Reported adherence to ICMs was high but fatalistic attitudes towards COVID-19 infection were present. Challenges of providing care using personal protective equipment (PPE), especially for residents with dementia, were highlighted. Interviewees reported dilemmas between strictly implementing ICMs and conflicts with providing best care to residents and preserving personal space. Nine months into COVID-19, official guidance was reported as confusing, constantly changing and poorly suited to care-homes. Care-home staff appreciated opportunities to work with other care-homes and experts to interpret and implement guidance. ICM training was undertaken using multiple techniques but with little evaluation of these or how to sustain behaviour change. LimitationsResults may not be generalizable to other countries. ImplicationsCOVID-19 has had a profound effect on well-being of care-home staff. Despite challenges, participants reported broadly good morale, potentially a consequence of supportive colleagues and management. Nevertheless, clear, concise and care-home focussed ICM guidance is still needed. This should include evidence-based assessments on implementing and sustaining adherence. Groups of care-home staff and ICM experts working together to co-create, interpret and implement guidance were viewed positively.

The spatio-temporal distribution of COVID-19 infection in England between January and June 2020. (preprint)

The spatio-temporal dynamics of an outbreak provide important insights to help direct public health resources intended to control transmission. They also provide a focus for detailed epidemiological studies and allow the timing and impact of interventions to be assessed. A common approach is to aggregate case data to administrative regions. Whilst providing a good visual impression of change over space, this method masks spatial variation and assumes that disease risk is constant across space. Risk factors for COVID-19 (e.g. population density, deprivation and ethnicity) vary from place to place across England so it follows that risk will also vary spatially. Kernel density estimation compares the spatial distribution of cases relative to the underlying population, unfettered by arbitrary geographical boundaries, to produce a continuous estimate of spatially varying risk. Using test results from healthcare settings in England (Pillar 1 of the UK Government testing strategy) and freely available methods and software, we estimated the spatial and spatio-temporal risk of COVID-19 infection across England for the first six months of 2020. Widespread transmission was underway when partial lockdown measures were introduced on the 23rd March 2020 and the greatest risk erred towards large urban areas. The rapid growth phase of the outbreak coincided with multiple introductions to England from the European mainland. The spatio-temporal risk was highly labile throughout. In terms of controlling transmission, the most important practical application is the accurate identification of areas within regions that may require tailored intervention strategies. We recommend that this approach is absorbed into routine surveillance outputs in England. Further risk characterisation using widespread community testing (Pillar 2) data is needed as is the increased use of predictive spatial models at fine spatial scales.

The COVID University Challenge: a Hazard Analysis of Critical Control Points Assessment of the Return of Students to Higher Education Establishments (preprint)

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted economies and societies throughout the world in 2020. Education was especially affected, with schools and universities widely closed for long periods. People under 25 years have the lowest risk of severe disease but their activities can be key to persistent ongoing community transmission. A challenge arose for how to provide education, including university level, without the activities of students increasing wider community SARS- CoV-2 infections. We used a Hazard Analysis of Critical Control Points (HACCP) framework to assess the risks associated with university student activity and recommend how to mitigate these risks. This tool appealed because it relies on multi-agency collaboration and interdisciplinary expertise and yet is low cost, allowing rapid generation of evidence-based recommendations. We identified key critical control points associated with university student activities, lifestyle and interaction patterns both on-and-off campus. Unacceptable contact thresholds and the most up-to-date guidance were used to identify levels of risk for potential SARS-CoV-2 transmission, as well as recommendations based on existing research and emerging evidence for strategies that can reduce the risks of transmission. Employing the preventative measures we suggest can reduce the risks of SARS-CoV-2 transmission among and from university students. Reduction of infectious disease transmission in this demographic will reduce overall community transmission, lower demands on health services and reduce risk of harm to clinically vulnerable individuals while allowing vital education activity to continue. HACCP assessment proved a flexible tool for risk analysis in a specific setting in response to an emerging infectious disease threat.