Are COVID-19 systematic reviews up to date and can we tell? A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 led to a rapid acceleration in the number of systematic reviews. Readers need to know how up to date evidence is when selecting reviews to inform decisions. This cross-sectional study aimed to evaluate how easily the currency of COVID-19 systematic reviews published early in the pandemic could be determined and how up to date these reviews were at the time of publication. METHODS: We searched for systematic reviews and meta-analyses relevant to COVID-19 added to PubMed in July 2020 and January 2021, including any that were first published as preprints. We extracted data on the date of search, number of included studies, and date first published online. For the search date, we noted the format of the date and where in the review this was reported. A sample of non-COVID-19 systematic reviews from November 2020 served as a comparator. RESULTS: We identified 246 systematic reviews on COVID-19. In the abstract of these reviews, just over half (57%) reported the search date (day/month/year or month/year) while 43% failed to report any date. When the full text was considered, the search date was missing from 6% of reviews. The median time from last search to publication online was 91 days (IQR 63-130). Time from search to publication was similar for the subset of 15 rapid or living reviews (92 days) but shorter for the 29 reviews published as preprints (37 days). The median number of studies or publications included per review was 23 (IQR 12-40). In the sample of 290 non-COVID SRs, around two-thirds (65%) reported the search date while a third (34%) did not include any date in the abstract. The median time from search to publication online was 253 days (IQR 153-381) and each review included a median of 12 studies (IQR 8-21). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the context of the pandemic and the need to easily ascertain the currency of systematic reviews, reporting of the search date information for COVID-19 reviews was inadequate. Adherence to reporting guidelines would improve the transparency and usefulness of systematic reviews to users.

Estimated Mask Use and Temporal Relationship to COVID-19 Epidemiology of Black Lives Matter Protests in 12 Cities.

BACKGROUND: There is an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission during mass gatherings and a risk of asymptomatic infection. We aimed to estimate the use of masks during Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests and whether these protests increased the risk of COVID-19. Two reviewers screened 496 protest images for mask use, with high inter-rater reliability. Protest intensity, use of tear gas, government control measures, and testing rates were estimated in 12 cities. A correlation analysis was conducted to assess the potential effect of mask use and other measures, adjusting for testing rates, on COVID-19 epidemiology 4 weeks (two incubation periods) post-protests. Mask use ranged from 69 to 96% across protests. There was no increase in the incidence of COVID-19 post-protest in 11 cities. After adjusting for testing rates, only Miami, which involved use of tear gas and had high protest intensity, showed a clear increase in COVID-19 after one incubation period post-protest. No significant correlation was found between incidence and protest factors. Our study showed that protests in most cities studied did not increase COVID-19 incidence in 2020, and a high level of mask use was seen. The absence of an epidemic surge within two incubation periods of a protest is indicative that the protests did not have a major influence on epidemic activity, except in Miami. With the globally circulating highly transmissible Alpha, Delta, and Omicron variants, layered interventions such as mandated mask use, physical distancing, testing, and vaccination should be applied for mass gatherings in the future.

Have Deaths of Despair Risen during the COVID-19 Pandemic? A Systematic Review.

This systematic review synthesized literature on potential impacts of protracted isolation and other disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic on deaths of despair (suicide, overdoses, and drug-related liver diseases). Five electronic databases were searched yielding 70 eligible articles. Extant evidence mostly from high-income countries indicates COVID-19-related disruption may not have influenced suicide rates so far, but there have been reports of increased drug-related and liver disease mortality. Minority groups and women were more vulnerable, indicating the need for stronger equity focus on pandemic recovery and resilience strategies. Further high-quality studies with longer-term follow-up, especially from low-income countries, will inform these strategies.

COVID-19 outbreaks in aged-care facilities in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Aged-care facilities (ACF's) provide unique challenges when implementing infection control methods for respiratory outbreaks such as COVID-19. Research on this highly vulnerable setting is lacking and there was no national reporting data of COVID-19 cases in ACFs in Australia early in the pandemic. We aimed to estimate the burden of aged-care worker (ACW) infections and outbreaks of COVID-19 in Australian aged-care. METHODS: A line list of publicly available aged-care related COVID-19 reported cases from January 25 to June 10, 2020 was created and was enhanced by matching data extracted from media reports of aged-care related COVID-19 relevant outbreaks and reports. Rate ratios (RR) were used to predict risk of infection in ACW and aged-care residents, and were calculated independently, by comparing overall cases to ACW and aged-care residents' cases. RESULTS: A total of 14 ACFs with COVID-19 cases were recorded by June 2020 nationwide, with a high case fatality rate (CFR) of 50% (n = 34) and 100% (n = 3) seen in two ACFs. Analysis on the resident risk found that the COVID-19 risk is 1.27 times higher (unadjusted RR 1.27 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00 to1.61; P = 0.047) as compared with the risk of infection in the general population. In over 60% of cases identified in ACFs, the source of infection in the index case was unknown. A total of 28 deaths associated within ACFs were reported, accounting for 54.9% of total deaths in New South Wales and 26.9% of total deaths in Australia. CONCLUSIONS: This high-risk population requires additional prevention and control measures, such as routine testing of all staff and patients regardless of symptoms. Prompt isolation and quarantine as soon as a case is confirmed within a facility is essential.

Mask use, risk-mitigation behaviours and pandemic fatigue during the COVID-19 pandemic in five cities in Australia, the UK and USA: A cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVES: To determine patterns of mask wearing and other infection prevention behaviours, over two time periods of the COVID-19 pandemic, in cities where mask wearing was not a cultural norm. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of masks and other preventive behaviours in adults aged ≥18 years was conducted in five cities: Sydney and Melbourne, Australia; London, UK; and Phoenix and New York, USA. Data were analysed according to the epidemiology of COVID-19, mask mandates and a range of predictors of mask wearing. RESULTS: The most common measures used were avoiding public areas (80.4%), hand hygiene (76.4%), wearing masks (71.8%) and distancing (67.6%). Over 40% of people avoided medical facilities. These measures decreased from March-July 2020. Pandemic fatigue was associated with younger age, low perceived severity of COVID-19 and declining COVID-19 prevalence. Predictors of mask wearing were location (US, UK), mandates, age <50 years, education, having symptoms and knowing someone with COVID-19. Negative experiences with mask wearing and low perceived severity of COVID-19 reduced mask wearing. Most respondents (98%) believed that hand washing and distancing were necessary, and 80% reported no change or stricter adherence to these measures when wearing masks. CONCLUSION: Pandemic mitigation measures were widely reported across all cities, but decreased between March and July 2020. Pandemic fatigue was more common in younger people. Cities with mandates had higher rates of mask wearing. Promotion of mask use for older people may be useful. Masks did not result in a reduction of other hygiene measures.

Estimating the burden of COVID-19 on the Australian healthcare workers and health system during the first six months of the pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: There are no publicly available national data on healthcare worker infections in Australia. It has been documented in many countries that healthcare workers (HCW) are at increased occupational risk of COVID-19. We aimed to estimate the burden of COVID-19 on Australia HCW and the health system by obtaining and organizing data on HCW infections, analyzing national HCW cases in regards to occupational risk and analyzing healthcare outbreak. METHODS: We searched government reports and websites and media reports to create a comprehensive line listing of Australian HCW infections and nosocomial outbreaks between January 25th and July 8th, 2020. A line list of HCW related COVID-19 reported cases was created and enhanced by matching data extracted from media reports of healthcare related COVID-19 relevant outbreaks and reports, using matching criteria. Rates of infections and odds ratios (ORs) for HCW were calculated per state, by comparing overall cases to HCW cases. To investigate the sources of infection amongst HCW, transmission data were collated and graphed to show distribution of sources. RESULTS: We identified 36 hospital outbreaks or HCW infection reports between January 25th and July 8th, 2020. According to our estimates, at least 536 HCW in Australia had been infected with COVID-19, comprising 6.03% of all reported infections. The rate of HCW infection was 90/100000 and of community infection 34/100,000. HCW were 2.69 times more likely to contract COVID-19 (95% CI 2.48 to 2.93; P < 0.001). The timing of hospital outbreaks did not always correspond to community peaks. Where data were available, a total of 131 HCW across 21 outbreaks led to 1656 HCW being furloughed for quarantine. In one outbreak, one hospital was closed and 1200 HCW quarantined. CONCLUSION: The study shows that HCW were at nearly 3 times the risk of infection. Of concern, this nearly tripling of risk occurred during a period of low community prevalence suggesting failures at multiple hazard levels including PPE policies within the work environment. Even in a country with relatively good control of COVID-19, HCW are at greater risk of infection than the general community and nosocomial outbreaks can have substantial effects on workforce capacity by the quarantine of numerous HCW during an outbreak. The occurrence of hospital outbreaks even when community incidence was low highlights the high risk setting that hospitals present. Australia faced a resurgence of COVID-19 after the study period, with multiple hospital outbreaks. We recommend formal reporting of HCW infections, testing protocols for nosocomial outbreaks, cohorting of workforce to minimize the impact, and improved PPE guidelines to provide precautionary and optimal protection for HCW.