Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 16 de 16
Filter
1.
Int J Drug Policy ; 116: 104026, 2023 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2298450

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In Montreal (Canada), high hepatitis C virus (HCV) seroincidence (21 per 100 person-years in 2017) persists among people who have injected drugs (PWID) despite relatively high testing rates and coverage of needle and syringe programs (NSP) and opioid agonist therapy (OAT). We assessed the potential of interventions to achieve HCV elimination (80% incidence reduction and 65% reduction in HCV-related mortality between 2015 and 2030) in the context of COVID-19 disruptions among all PWID and PWID living with HIV. METHODS: Using a dynamic model of HCV-HIV co-transmission, we simulated increases in NSP (from 82% to 95%) and OAT (from 33% to 40%) coverage, HCV testing (every 6 months), or treatment rate (100 per 100 person-years) starting in 2022 among all PWID and PWID living with HIV. We also modeled treatment scale-up among active PWID only (i.e., people who report injecting in the past six months). We reduced intervention levels in 2020-2021 due to COVID-19-related disruptions. Outcomes included HCV incidence, prevalence, and mortality, and proportions of averted chronic HCV infections and deaths. RESULTS: COVID-19-related disruptions could have caused temporary rebounds in HCV transmission. Further increasing NSP/OAT or HCV testing had little impact on incidence. Scaling-up treatment among all PWID achieved incidence and mortality targets among all PWID and PWID living with HIV. Focusing treatment on active PWID could achieve elimination, yet fewer projected deaths were averted (36% versus 48%). CONCLUSIONS: HCV treatment scale-up among all PWID will be required to eliminate HCV in high-incidence and prevalence settings. Achieving elimination by 2030 will entail concerted efforts to restore and enhance pre-pandemic levels of HCV prevention and care.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , HIV Infections , Hepatitis C , Substance Abuse, Intravenous , Humans , Hepacivirus , Substance Abuse, Intravenous/complications , Substance Abuse, Intravenous/epidemiology , Substance Abuse, Intravenous/drug therapy , Public Health , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Harm Reduction , COVID-19/epidemiology , Hepatitis C/drug therapy , HIV Infections/drug therapy
2.
Can Liver J ; 6(1): 56-69, 2023 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2275776

ABSTRACT

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) affects approximately 204,000 Canadians. Safe and effective direct-acting antiviral therapies have contributed to decreased rates of chronic HCV infection and increased treatment uptake in Canada, but major challenges for HCV elimination remain. The 11th Canadian Symposium on Hepatitis C Virus took place in Ottawa, Ontario on May 13, 2022 as a hybrid conference themed 'Getting back on track towards hepatitis C elimination.' It brought together research scientists, clinicians, community health workers, patient advocates, community members, and public health officials to discuss priorities for HCV elimination in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, which had devastating effects on HCV care in Canada, particularly on priority populations. Plenary sessions showcased topical research from prominent international and national researchers, complemented by select abstract presentations. This event was hosted by the Canadian Network on Hepatitis C (CanHepC), with support from the Public Health Agency of Canada and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and in partnership with the Canadian Liver Meeting. CanHepC has an established record in HCV research and in advocacy activities to address improved diagnosis and treatment, and immediate and long-term needs of those affected by HCV infection. The Symposium addressed the remaining challenges and barriers to HCV elimination in priority populations and principles for meaningful engagement of Indigenous communities and individuals with living and lived experience in HCV research. It emphasized the need for disaggregated data and simplified pathways for creating and monitoring interventions for equitably achieving elimination targets.

3.
Vaccine ; 41(8): 1419-1425, 2023 02 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2184297

ABSTRACT

Education is key to behavioural adoption and acceptability of health interventions. We evaluated the impact of an educational intervention administered 1:1 to individuals incarcerated in four Canadian federal prisons on COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Eligible individuals (those who had refused all COVID-19 vaccines) were randomized 2:1 to receive the educational intervention or not (control group); those who received the intervention completed questionnaires assessing COVID-19 vaccine-related knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs pre- and post-educational intervention. The primary and secondary outcome measures were COVID-19 vaccine uptake and vaccine confidence, respectively. Between May 3 and September 9, 2022, 202 participants were randomized to receive the intervention, of whom 127 (63 %) agreed to participate. Participants who were randomized to the intervention had higher COVID-19 vaccine uptake vs. the control group (5 % vs 1 %, p = 0.046). COVID-19 vaccine-related knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs improved post-intervention. Education increases COVID-19 vaccine uptake and confidence among people in Canadian federal correctional facilities.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Papillomavirus Vaccines , Humans , COVID-19 Vaccines , Prisons , Prospective Studies , COVID-19/prevention & control , Vaccination , Canada
4.
Int J Prison Health ; 2022 Dec 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2161322

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: People who use drugs (PWUD) have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aims to examine changes in illicit opioid use and related factors among incarcerated PWUD in Quebec, Canada, during the pandemic. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: The authors conducted an observational, cross-sectional study in three Quebec provincial prisons. Participants completed self-administered questionnaires. The primary outcome, "changes in illicit opioid consumption," was measured using the question "Has your consumption of opioid drugs that were not prescribed to you by a medical professional changed since March 2020?" The association of independent variables and recent changes (past six months) in opioid consumption were examined using mixed-effects Poisson regression models with robust standard errors. Crude and adjusted risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated. FINDINGS: A total of 123 participants (median age 37, 76% White) were included from January 19 to September 15, 2021. The majority (72; 59%) reported decreased illicit opioid consumption since March 2020. Individuals over 40 were 11% less likely (95% CI 14-8 vs 18-39) to report a decrease, while those living with others and with a history of opioid overdose were 30% (95% CI 9-55 vs living alone) and 9% (95% CI 0-18 vs not) more likely to report decreased illicit opioid consumption since March 2020, respectively. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The authors identified possible factors associated with changes in illicit opioid consumption among incarcerated PWUD in Quebec. Irrespective of opioid consumption patterns, increased access to opioid agonist therapy and enhanced discharge planning for incarcerated PWUD are recommended to mitigate the harms from opioids and other drugs.

5.
Front Public Health ; 10: 1021871, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2142354

ABSTRACT

Background: Correctional workers are at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We examined the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2, determined the effects of carceral and occupational exposures on seropositivity, and explored predictors of COVID-19 vaccine uptake among correctional workers in Quebec, Canada. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional seroprevalence study in three provincial prisons. The primary and secondary outcomes were SARS-CoV-2 antibody seropositivity (Roche Elecsys® serology test) and self-reported COVID-19 vaccination status ("fully vaccinated" defined as two doses or prior infection plus one dose), respectively. Poisson regression models with robust standard error were used to examine the effect of occupational variables with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity and predictors of COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Estimates are presented as crude and adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Results: From 14 July to 15 November 2021, 105/600 (18%) correctional workers tested positive across three prisons (range 11-21%); 76% were fully vaccinated. Seropositivity was affected by prison occupation (aPR 1.59, 95% CI 1.11-2.27 for correctional officers vs. all other occupations) and low perceived concern of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition (aPR 1.62, 95% CI 1.11-2.38 for not/hardly worried vs. somewhat/extremely worried). Predictors of being fully vaccinated included race/ethnicity (aPR 0.86, 95% CI 0.76-0.99 for visible minority vs. White), presence of comorbidities (aPR 1.14, 95% CI 1.02-1.28 for > 2 vs. none), and prison occupation (aPR 0.82, 95% CI 0.73-0.92 for correctional officers vs. all other occupations). Conclusions: Correctional officers were most likely to have acquired SARS-CoV-2, but least likely to be vaccinated, underscoring the importance of addressing both occupational risks and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy to mitigate future outbreaks.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , Seroepidemiologic Studies , COVID-19 Vaccines , Cross-Sectional Studies , Quebec/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Vaccination , Occupations
6.
CMAJ Open ; 10(4): E922-E929, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2090864

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Maximizing uptake of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines among people in prison is essential in mitigating future outbreaks. We aimed to determine factors associated with willingness to receive SARS-CoV-2 vaccination before vaccine availability. METHODS: We chose 3 Canadian federal prisons based on their low uptake of influenza vaccines in 2019-2020. Participants completed a self-administered questionnaire on knowledge, attitude and beliefs toward vaccines. The primary outcome was participant willingness to receive a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, measured using a 5-point Likert scale to the question, "If a safe and effective COVID-19 vaccine becomes available in prison, how likely are you to get vaccinated?" We calculated the association of independent variables (age, ethnicity, chronic health conditions, 2019-2020 influenza vaccine uptake and prison security level), identified a priori, with vaccine willingness using logistic regression and crude and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: We recruited 240 participants from Mar. 31 to Apr. 19, 2021 (median age 46 years; 19.2% female, 25.8% Indigenous). Of these, 178 (74.2%) were very willing to receive a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Participants who received the 2019-2020 influenza vaccine (adjusted OR 5.20, 95% CI 2.43-12.00) had higher odds of vaccine willingness than those who did not; those who self-identified as Indigenous (adjusted OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.11-0.60) and in medium- or maximum-security prisons (adjusted OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.12-0.92) had lower odds of vaccine willingness than those who identified as white or those in minimum-security prisons, respectively. INTERPRETATION: Most participants were very willing to receive vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 before vaccine roll-out. Vaccine promotion campaigns should target groups with low vaccine willingness (i.e., those who have declined influenza vaccine, identify as Indigenous or reside in high-security prisons).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Prisoners , Humans , Female , Middle Aged , Male , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Influenza Vaccines/therapeutic use , Prisons , Cross-Sectional Studies , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Canada/epidemiology
7.
JMIR Res Protoc ; 11(8): e35760, 2022 Aug 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1993681

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: People with COVID-19 are instructed to self-isolate at home. During self-isolation, they may experience anxiety and insufficient care. Patient portals can allow patients to self-monitor and remotely share their health status with health care professionals, but little data are available on their feasibility. OBJECTIVE: This paper presents the protocol of the Opal-COVID Study. Its objectives are to assess the implementation of the Opal patient portal for distance monitoring of self-isolating patients with COVID-19, identify influences on the intervention's implementation, and describe service and patient outcomes of this intervention. METHODS: This mixed methods pilot study aims to recruit 50 patient participants with COVID-19 tested at the McGill University Health Centre (Montreal, Canada) for 14 days of follow-up. With access to an existing patient portal through a smartphone app, patients will complete a daily self-assessment of symptoms, vital signs, and mental health monitored by a nurse, and receive teleconsultations as needed. Study questionnaires will be administered to collect data on sociodemographic characteristics, medical background, implementation outcomes (acceptability, usability, and respondent burden), and patient satisfaction. Coordinator logbook entries will inform on feasibility outcomes, namely, on recruitment, retention, and fidelity, as well as on the frequency and nature of contacts with health care professionals. The statistical analyses for objectives 1 (implementation outcomes), 3 (service outcomes), and 4 (patient outcomes) will evaluate the effects of time and sociodemographic characteristics on the outcomes. For objectives 1 (implementation outcomes) and 4 (patient outcomes), the statistical analyses will also examine the attainment of predefined success thresholds. As for the qualitative analyses, for objective 2 (influences on implementation), semistructured qualitative interviews will be conducted with 4 groups of stakeholders (ie, patient participants, health care professionals, technology developers, and study administrators) and submitted for content analysis, guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to help identify barriers to and facilitators of implementation. For objective 3 (service outcomes), reasons for contacting health care professionals through Opal will also be submitted for content analysis. RESULTS: Between December 2020 and March 2021, a total of 51 patient participants were recruited. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 39 stakeholders from April to September 2021. Delays were experienced owing to measures taken at the McGill University Health Centre to address COVID-19. The quantitative and qualitative analyses began in May 2022. As of June 2022, a total of 2 manuscripts (on the implementation and the patient outcomes) were being prepared, and 3 conference presentations had been given on the study's methods. CONCLUSIONS: This protocol is designed to generate multidisciplinary knowledge on the implementation of a patient portal-based COVID-19 care intervention and will lead to a comprehensive understanding of feasibility, stakeholder experience, and influences on implementation that may prove useful for scaling up similar interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04978233; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04978233. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/35760.

8.
Int J Infect Dis ; 121: 1-10, 2022 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1920941

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Epidemics of COVID-19 strained hospital resources. We describe temporal trends in mortality risk and length of stays in hospital and intensive care units (ICUs) among patients with COVID-19 hospitalized through the first three epidemic waves in Canada. METHODS: We used population-based provincial hospitalization data from the epicenters of Canada's epidemics (Ontario and Québec). Adjusted estimates were obtained using marginal standardization of logistic regression models, accounting for patient-level and hospital-level determinants. RESULTS: Using all hospitalizations from Ontario (N = 26,538) and Québec (N = 23,857), we found that unadjusted in-hospital mortality risks peaked at 31% in the first wave and was lowest at the end of the third wave at 6-7%. This general trend remained after adjustments. The odds of in-hospital mortality in the highest patient load quintile were 1.2-fold (95% CI: 1.0-1.4; Ontario) and 1.6-fold (95% CI: 1.3-1.9; Québec) that of the lowest quintile. Mean hospital and ICU length of stays decreased over time but ICU stays were consistently higher in Ontario than Québec. CONCLUSIONS: In-hospital mortality risks and length of ICU stays declined over time despite changing patient demographics. Continuous population-based monitoring of patient outcomes in an evolving epidemic is necessary for health system preparedness and response.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Epidemics , Cohort Studies , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Length of Stay , Ontario/epidemiology , Quebec/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies
9.
PLoS One ; 17(3): e0264145, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1896446

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Vaccine uptake rates have been historically low in correctional settings. To better understand vaccine hesitancy in these high-risk settings, we explored reasons for COVID-19 vaccine refusal among people in federal prisons. METHODS: Three maximum security all-male federal prisons in British Columbia, Alberta, and Ontario (Canada) were chosen, representing prisons with the highest proportions of COVID-19 vaccine refusal. Using a qualitative descriptive design and purposive sampling, individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with incarcerated people who had previously refused at least one COVID-19 vaccine until data saturation was achieved. An inductive-deductive thematic analysis of audio-recorded interview transcripts was conducted using the Conceptual Model of Vaccine Hesitancy. RESULTS: Between May 19-July 8, 2021, 14 participants were interviewed (median age: 30 years; n = 7 Indigenous, n = 4 visible minority, n = 3 White). Individual-, interpersonal-, and system-level factors were identified. Three were particularly relevant to the correctional setting: 1) Risk perception: participants perceived that they were at lower risk of COVID-19 due to restricted visits and interactions; 2) Health care services in prison: participants reported feeling "punished" and stigmatized due to strict COVID-19 restrictions, and failed to identify personal benefits of vaccination due to the lack of incentives; 3) Universal distrust: participants expressed distrust in prison employees, including health care providers. INTERPRETATION: Reasons for vaccine refusal among people in prison are multifaceted. Educational interventions could seek to address COVID-19 risk misconceptions in prison settings. However, impact may be limited if trust is not fostered and if incentives are not considered in vaccine promotion.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Prisoners/psychology , Vaccination Refusal/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Alberta , Attitude , British Columbia , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , Interviews as Topic , Male , Middle Aged , Ontario , Risk , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Social Norms , Social Responsibility , Young Adult
10.
Clin Infect Dis ; 75(1): e165-e173, 2022 08 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1816030

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: People in prison are at increased risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We examined the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 and associated carceral risk factors among incarcerated adult men in Quebec, Canada. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional seroprevalence study in 2021 across 3 provincial prisons, representing 45% of Quebec's incarcerated male provincial population. The primary outcome was SARS-CoV-2 antibody seropositivity (Roche Elecsys serology test). Participants completed self-administered questionnaires on sociodemographic, clinical, and carceral characteristics. The association of carceral variables with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity was examined using Poisson regression models with robust standard errors. Crude and adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated. RESULTS: Between 19 January 2021 and 15 September 2021, 246 of 1100 (22%) recruited individuals tested positive across 3 prisons (range, 15%-27%). Seropositivity increased with time spent in prison since March 2020 (aPR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.53-3.07 for "all" vs "little time"), employment during incarceration (aPR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.28-2.11 vs not), shared meal consumption during incarceration ("with cellmates": aPR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.08-1.97 vs "alone"; "with sector": aPR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.03-1.74 vs "alone"), and incarceration post-prison outbreak (aPR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.69-3.18 vs "pre-outbreak"). CONCLUSIONS: The seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 among incarcerated individuals was high and varied among prisons. Several carceral factors were associated with seropositivity, underscoring the importance of decarceration and occupational safety measures, individual meal consumption, and enhanced infection prevention and control measures including vaccination during incarceration.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Prisoners , Adult , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Male , Quebec/epidemiology , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Seroepidemiologic Studies
11.
CMAJ ; 194(7): E242-E251, 2022 02 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1714791

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The role of remdesivir in the treatment of patients in hospital with COVID-19 remains ill defined in a global context. The World Health Organization Solidarity randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluated remdesivir in patients across many countries, with Canada enrolling patients using an expanded data collection format in the Canadian Treatments for COVID-19 (CATCO) trial. We report on the Canadian findings, with additional demographics, characteristics and clinical outcomes, to explore the potential for differential effects across different health care systems. METHODS: We performed an open-label, pragmatic RCT in Canadian hospitals, in conjunction with the Solidarity trial. We randomized patients to 10 days of remdesivir (200 mg intravenously [IV] on day 0, followed by 100 mg IV daily), plus standard care, or standard care alone. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included changes in clinical severity, oxygen- and ventilator-free days (at 28 d), incidence of new oxygen or mechanical ventilation use, duration of hospital stay, and adverse event rates. We performed a priori subgroup analyses according to duration of symptoms before enrolment, age, sex and severity of symptoms on presentation. RESULTS: Across 52 Canadian hospitals, we randomized 1282 patients between Aug. 14, 2020, and Apr. 1, 2021, to remdesivir (n = 634) or standard of care (n = 648). Of these, 15 withdrew consent or were still in hospital, for a total sample of 1267 patients. Among patients assigned to receive remdesivir, in-hospital mortality was 18.7%, compared with 22.6% in the standard-of-care arm (relative risk [RR] 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67 to 1.03), and 60-day mortality was 24.8% and 28.2%, respectively (95% CI 0.72 to 1.07). For patients not mechanically ventilated at baseline, the need for mechanical ventilation was 8.0% in those assigned remdesivir, and 15.0% in those receiving standard of care (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.75). Mean oxygen-free and ventilator-free days at day 28 were 15.9 (± standard deviation [SD] 10.5) and 21.4 (± SD 11.3) in those receiving remdesivir and 14.2 (± SD 11) and 19.5 (± SD 12.3) in those receiving standard of care (p = 0.006 and 0.007, respectively). There was no difference in safety events of new dialysis, change in creatinine, or new hepatic dysfunction between the 2 groups. INTERPRETATION: Remdesivir, when compared with standard of care, has a modest but significant effect on outcomes important to patients and health systems, such as the need for mechanical ventilation. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT04330690.


Subject(s)
Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Antiviral Agents/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Hospital Mortality , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Adenosine Monophosphate/administration & dosage , Adenosine Monophosphate/adverse effects , Aged , Alanine/administration & dosage , Alanine/adverse effects , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/mortality , Canada/epidemiology , Comorbidity , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2
12.
Vaccine X ; 10: 100150, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1693177

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Canadian correctional institutions have been prioritized for COVID-19 vaccination given the multiple outbreaks that have occurred since the start of the pandemic. Given historically low vaccine uptake, we aimed to explore barriers and facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination acceptability among people incarcerated in federal prisons. METHODS: Three federal prisons in Quebec, Ontario, and British Columbia (Canada) were chosen based on previously low influenza vaccine uptake among those incarcerated. Using a qualitative design, semi-structured interviews were conducted with a diverse sample (gender, age, and ethnicity) of incarcerated people. An inductive-deductive analysis of audio-recorded interview transcripts was conducted to identify and categorize barriers and facilitators within the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). RESULTS: From March 22-29, 2021, a total of 15 participants (n = 5 per site; n = 5 women; median age = 43 years) were interviewed, including five First Nations people and six people from other minority groups. Eleven (73%) expressed a desire to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, including two who previously refused influenza vaccination. We identified five thematic barriers across three TDF domains: social influences (receiving strict recommendations, believing in conspiracies to harm), beliefs about consequences (believing that infection control measures will not be fully lifted, concerns with vaccine-related side effects), and knowledge (lack of vaccine-specific information), and eight thematic facilitators across five TDF domains: environmental context and resources (perceiving correctional employees as sources of outbreaks, perceiving challenges to prevention measures), social influences (receiving recommendations from trusted individuals), beliefs about consequences (seeking individual and collective protection, believing in a collective "return to normal", believing in individual privileges), knowledge (reassurance about vaccine outcomes), and emotions (having experienced COVID-19-related stress). CONCLUSIONS: Lack of information and misinformation were important barriers to COVID-19 vaccine acceptability among people incarcerated in Canadian federal prisons. This suggests that educational interventions, delivered by trusted health care providers, may improve COVID-19 vaccine uptake going forward.

13.
Am Heart J ; 247: 76-89, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1670114

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Renin-angiotensin aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASi) are commonly used among patients hospitalized with a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We evaluated whether continuation versus discontinuation of RAASi were associated with short term clinical or biochemical outcomes. METHODS: The RAAS-COVID-19 trial was a randomized, open label study in adult patients previously treated with RAASi who are hospitalized with COVID-19 (NCT04508985). Participants were randomized 1:1 to discontinue or continue RAASi. The primary outcome was a global rank score calculated from baseline to day 7 (or discharge) incorporating clinical events and biomarker changes. Global rank scores were compared between groups using the Wilcoxon test statistic and the negative binomial test (using incident rate ratio [IRR]) and the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: Overall, 46 participants were enrolled; 21 participants were randomized to discontinue RAASi and 25 to continue. Patients' mean age was 71.5 years and 43.5% were female. Discontinuation of RAASi, versus continuation, resulted in a non-statistically different mean global rank score (discontinuation 6 [standard deviation [SD] 6.3] vs continuation 3.8 (SD 2.5); P = .60). The negative binomial analysis identified that discontinuation increased the risk of adverse outcomes (IRR 1.67 [95% CI 1.06-2.62]; P = .027); RAASi discontinuation increased brain natriuretic peptide levels (% change from baseline: +16.7% vs -27.5%; P = .024) and the incidence of acute heart failure (33% vs 4.2%, P = .016). CONCLUSION: RAASi continuation in participants hospitalized with COVID-19 appears safe; discontinuation increased brain natriuretic peptide levels and may increase risk of acute heart failure; where possible, RAASi should be continued.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Heart Failure , Adult , Aged , Aldosterone , Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/adverse effects , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/adverse effects , Antihypertensive Agents/therapeutic use , Female , Heart Failure/drug therapy , Hospitals , Humans , Natriuretic Peptide, Brain , Renin-Angiotensin System
14.
AIDS Care ; 34(5): 663-669, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1155731

ABSTRACT

People living with HIV (PLWH) often have worse health outcomes compared to HIV-uninfected individuals. We characterized PLWH followed at a tertiary care clinic in Montreal who acquired COVID-19 and described their outcomes during the first wave of the pandemic. A retrospective chart review was performed for PLWH followed at the Chronic Viral Illness Service with a positive COVID-19 nasopharyngeal PCR or symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 between 1 March and 15 June 2020. Data on demographics, socioeconomic status, co-morbidities and severity of COVID-19 and outcomes were extracted. Of 1702 individuals, 32 (1.9%) had a positive COVID-19 test (n = 24) or symptoms suspicious for COVID-19 (n = 3). Median age was 52 years [IQR 40, 62]. Nearly all (97%) earned $34,999 Canadian dollars or less. Eleven (34%) individuals worked in long-term care (LTC) homes while 5 (6%) lived in LTC homes. Median CD4 count was 566 cells/mm3 [347, 726] and six had detectable plasma HIV viral loads. Median duration of HIV was 17 years [7, 22] and 30 individuals had been prescribed antiretroviral therapy. Five persons were asymptomatic. Of symptomatic persons, 21 (12%), 1 (4%) and 3 (12%) individuals had mild, moderate and severe disease, respectively. Three individuals died with COVID-19. In one case, the cause of death was due to COVID-19, whereas in the other two cases, the individuals died with positive COVID-19 test results but the immediate cause of death is unclear. PLWH who tested positive for COVID-19 had low socioeconomic status and had employment or living conditions that put them at high risk. PLWH may be disproportionately impacted by the social determinants of health which predispose them to COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , HIV Infections , COVID-19/epidemiology , Canada , HIV Infections/diagnosis , HIV Infections/epidemiology , Humans , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Tertiary Care Centers
15.
Trials ; 22(1): 115, 2021 Feb 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1067267

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the RAAS-COVID-19 randomized control trial is to evaluate whether an upfront strategy of temporary discontinuation of renin angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibition versus continuation of RAAS inhibition among patients admitted with established COVID-19 infection has an impact on short term clinical and biomarker outcomes. We hypothesize that continuation of RAAS inhibition will be superior to temporary discontinuation with regards to the primary endpoint of a global rank sum score. The global rank sum score has been successfully used in previous cardiovascular clinical trials. TRIAL DESIGN: This is an open label parallel two arm (1,1 ratio) randomized control superiority trial of approximately 40 COVID-19 patients who are on chronic RAAS inhibitor therapy. PARTICIPANTS: Adults who are admitted to hospital within the McGill University Health Centre systems (MUHC) including Royal Victoria Hospital (RVH), Montreal General Hospital (MGH) and Jewish General Hospital (JGH) and who are within 96 hours of COVID-19 diagnosis (confirmed via PCR on any biological sample) will be considered for the trial. Of note, the initial protocol to screen and enrol within 48 hours of COVID-19 diagnosis was extended through an amendment, to 96 hours to increase feasibility. Participants have to be 18 years or older and would have to be on RAAS inhibitors for at least a month to be considered eligible for the study. Additionally, RAAS inhibitors should not have been held for more than 48 hours before randomization. A list of inclusion and exclusion criteria can be found in the full protocol document. In order to prevent heart failure exacerbation, patients with reduced ejection fraction were excluded from the trial. Once a patient is admitted on the ward with a diagnosis of COVID-19, we will confirm with the treating physician if the participant is suitable for the RAAS-COVID trial and meets all the inclusion and exclusion criteria. If the patient is eligible and informed consent has been obtained we will collect data on sex, age, ethnicity, past medical history and list of medications (e.g. other anti-hypertensives or anticoagulants), for further analysis. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: All the study participants will be randomized to a strategy of temporarily holding the RAAS inhibitor [intervention] versus continuing the RAAS inhibitor [continued standard of care]. Among participants who are randomized to the intervention arm, alternative guide-line directed anti-hypertensive medication will be provided to the treating physician team (detail in study protocol). In the intervention arm RAAS inhibitor will be withheld for a total of 7 days with the possibility of the withdrawn medication being initiated at any point after day 7 or on the day of discharge. The recommendation for re-initiating the withdrawn medication will be made to the treating physician. The re-initiation of these therapies are according to standard convention and follow-up as per Canadian guidelines. Additionally, the date of restarting the withdrawn medication or whether the medication was re-prescribed on discharge or not, will be collected. This will be used to conduct a sensitivity analysis. Furthermore, biomarkers such as troponin, c-reactive protein (CRP) and lymphocyte count will be assessed during the same time period. Samples will be collected on randomization, day 4 and day 7. MAIN OUTCOMES: PRIMARY ENDPOINT: In this study the primary end point is a global rank score calculated for all participants, regardless of treatment assignment ( score from 0 to 7). Please refer to table 4 in the full protocol. In the context of the current trial, it is estimated that death is the most meaningful endpoint, and therefore has the highest score ( score of 7). This is followed by admission to ICU, the need for mechanical ventilation etc. The lowest scores ( score of 1) are assigned to biomarker changes (e.g. change in troponin, change in CRP). This strategy has been used successfully in cardiovascular disease trials and therefore is applicable to the current trial. The primary endpoint for the present trial is assessed from baseline to day 7 (or discharge). Participants are ranked across the clinical and biomarker domains. Lower values indicate better health (or stability). Participants who died during the 7th day of the study will be ranked based on all events occurring before their death and also including the fatal event in the score. Next, participants who did not die but were transferred to ICU for invasive ventilation will be ranked based on all the events occurring before the ICU entry and also including the ICU admission in the score. Those participants who did not die were not transferred to ICU for invasive ventilation, will be ranked based on the subsequent outcomes. The mean rank score will then be compared between groups. In this scheme, a lower mean rank score indicates greater overall stability for participants. Secondary endpoints : The key secondary endpoints are the individual components of the primary components and include the following: death, transfer to ICU primarily for invasive ventilation, transfer to ICU for other indication, non-fatal MACE ( any of following, MI, stroke, acute HF, new onset Afib), length of stay > 4 days, development of acute kidney injury ( > 40% decline in eGFR or doubling of serum creatinine), urgent intravenous treatment for high blood pressure, 30% increase in baseline high sensitivity troponin, 30% increase in baseline BNP, increase in CRP to > 30% in 48 hours and lymphocyte count drop> 30%. We will also look at the World Health Organization (WHO) ordinal scale for clinical improvement (in COVID-19) in our data. In this scale death will be assigned the highest score of 8. Patients with no limitation of activity will be assigned a score of 1 which indicates overall more stability (3). Additionally, we will evaluate the potential effects of discontinuing RAAS inhibition on alternative schedules (longer/shorter than 7 days, intermittent discontinuation) using a mechanistic mathematical model of COVID-19 immunopathology calibrated to data collected from our patient cohort. In particular, we will assess the impact of alternative schedules on primary and secondary endpoints including increases to baseline CRP and lymphocyte counts. RANDOMIZATION: Participants will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio. Randomization will be performed within an electronic database system at the time of enrolment using a random number generator, an approach that has been successfully used in other clinical trials. Neither participant, study team, or treating team will be blinded to the intervention arm. BLINDING: This is an open label study with no blinding. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): The approximate number of participants required for this trial is 40 patients (randomized 1:1 to continuation versus discontinuation of RAAS inhibitors). This number was calculated based on previous rates of outcomes for COVID-19 in the literature (e.g. death, ICU transfer) and statistical power calculations. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol number: MP-37-2021-6641, Version 4: 01-10-2020. Trial start date September 1st 2020 and currently enrolling participants. Estimated end date for recruitment of participants : July 2021. Estimated end date for study completion: September 1st 2021. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration: ClincalTrials.gov : NCT04508985 , date of registration: August 11th , 2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.


Subject(s)
Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2/antagonists & inhibitors , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Antihypertensive Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Patient Admission , Renin-Angiotensin System/drug effects , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/virology , Canada , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Polymerase Chain Reaction , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Treatment Outcome , Withholding Treatment , Young Adult
16.
EClinicalMedicine ; 31: 100659, 2021 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-987555
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL