Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 9 de 9
Filter
1.
BMC Public Health ; 23(1): 826, 2023 05 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20234374

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There are public health concerns about an increased risk of mortality after release from prison. The objectives of this scoping review were to investigate, map and summarise evidence from record linkage studies about drug-related deaths among former adult prisoners. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO and Web of Science were searched for studies (January 2011- September 2021) using keywords/index headings. Two authors independently screened all titles and abstracts using inclusion and exclusion criteria and subsequently screened full publications. Discrepancies were discussed with a third author. One author extracted data from all included publications using a data charting form. A second author independently extracted data from approximately one-third of the publications. Data were entered into Microsoft Excel sheets and cleaned for analysis. Standardised mortality ratios (SMRs) were pooled (where possible) using a random-effects DerSimonian-Laird model in STATA. RESULTS: A total of 3680 publications were screened by title and abstract, and 109 publications were fully screened; 45 publications were included. The pooled drug-related SMR was 27.07 (95%CI 13.32- 55.02; I 2 = 93.99%) for the first two weeks (4 studies), 10.17 (95%CI 3.74-27.66; I 2 = 83.83%) for the first 3-4 weeks (3 studies) and 15.58 (95%CI 7.05-34.40; I 2 = 97.99%) for the first 1 year after release (3 studies) and 6.99 (95%CI 4.13-11.83; I 2 = 99.14%) for any time after release (5 studies). However, the estimates varied markedly between studies. There was considerable heterogeneity in terms of study design, study size, location, methodology and findings. Only four studies reported the use of a quality assessment checklist/technique. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review found an increased risk of drug-related death after release from prison, particularly during the first two weeks after release, though drug-related mortality risk remained elevated for the first year among former prisoners. Evidence synthesis was limited as only a small number of studies were suitable for pooled analyses for SMRs due to inconsistencies in study design and methodology.


Subject(s)
Prisoners , Prisons , Humans , Adult , Risk , Checklist
2.
Euro Surveill ; 28(3)2023 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2215127

ABSTRACT

BackgroundPost-authorisation vaccine safety surveillance is well established for reporting common adverse events of interest (AEIs) following influenza vaccines, but not for COVID-19 vaccines.AimTo estimate the incidence of AEIs presenting to primary care following COVID-19 vaccination in England, and report safety profile differences between vaccine brands.MethodsWe used a self-controlled case series design to estimate relative incidence (RI) of AEIs reported to the national sentinel network, the Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioners Clinical Informatics Digital Hub. We compared AEIs (overall and by clinical category) 7 days pre- and post-vaccination to background levels between 1 October 2020 and 12 September 2021.ResultsWithin 7,952,861 records, 781,200 individuals (9.82%) presented to general practice with 1,482,273 AEIs, 4.85% within 7 days post-vaccination. Overall, medically attended AEIs decreased post-vaccination against background levels. There was a 3-7% decrease in incidence within 7 days after both doses of Comirnaty (RI: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.91-0.94 and RI: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.94-0.98, respectively) and Vaxzevria (RI: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.95-0.98). A 20% increase was observed after one dose of Spikevax (RI: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.00-1.44). Fewer AEIs were reported as age increased. Types of AEIs, e.g. increased neurological and psychiatric conditions, varied between brands following two doses of Comirnaty (RI: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.28-1.56) and Vaxzevria (RI: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.97-1.78).ConclusionCOVID-19 vaccines are associated with a small decrease in medically attended AEI incidence. Sentinel networks could routinely report common AEI rates, contributing to reporting vaccine safety.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , Humans , BNT162 Vaccine , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , England/epidemiology , Influenza Vaccines/adverse effects , Vaccination/adverse effects
5.
Lancet ; 400(10360): 1305-1320, 2022 10 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2069811

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Current UK vaccination policy is to offer future COVID-19 booster doses to individuals at high risk of serious illness from COVID-19, but it is still uncertain which groups of the population could benefit most. In response to an urgent request from the UK Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, we aimed to identify risk factors for severe COVID-19 outcomes (ie, COVID-19-related hospitalisation or death) in individuals who had completed their primary COVID-19 vaccination schedule and had received the first booster vaccine. METHODS: We constructed prospective cohorts across all four UK nations through linkages of primary care, RT-PCR testing, vaccination, hospitalisation, and mortality data on 30 million people. We included individuals who received primary vaccine doses of BNT162b2 (tozinameran; Pfizer-BioNTech) or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (Oxford-AstraZeneca) vaccines in our initial analyses. We then restricted analyses to those given a BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 (elasomeran; Moderna) booster and had a severe COVID-19 outcome between Dec 20, 2021, and Feb 28, 2022 (when the omicron (B.1.1.529) variant was dominant). We fitted time-dependent Poisson regression models and calculated adjusted rate ratios (aRRs) and 95% CIs for the associations between risk factors and COVID-19-related hospitalisation or death. We adjusted for a range of potential covariates, including age, sex, comorbidities, and previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. Stratified analyses were conducted by vaccine type. We then did pooled analyses across UK nations using fixed-effect meta-analyses. FINDINGS: Between Dec 8, 2020, and Feb 28, 2022, 16 208 600 individuals completed their primary vaccine schedule and 13 836 390 individuals received a booster dose. Between Dec 20, 2021, and Feb 28, 2022, 59 510 (0·4%) of the primary vaccine group and 26 100 (0·2%) of those who received their booster had severe COVID-19 outcomes. The risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes reduced after receiving the booster (rate change: 8·8 events per 1000 person-years to 7·6 events per 1000 person-years). Older adults (≥80 years vs 18-49 years; aRR 3·60 [95% CI 3·45-3·75]), those with comorbidities (≥5 comorbidities vs none; 9·51 [9·07-9·97]), being male (male vs female; 1·23 [1·20-1·26]), and those with certain underlying health conditions-in particular, individuals receiving immunosuppressants (yes vs no; 5·80 [5·53-6·09])-and those with chronic kidney disease (stage 5 vs no; 3·71 [2·90-4·74]) remained at high risk despite the initial booster. Individuals with a history of COVID-19 infection were at reduced risk (infected ≥9 months before booster dose vs no previous infection; aRR 0·41 [95% CI 0·29-0·58]). INTERPRETATION: Older people, those with multimorbidity, and those with specific underlying health conditions remain at increased risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation and death after the initial vaccine booster and should, therefore, be prioritised for additional boosters, including novel optimised versions, and the increasing array of COVID-19 therapeutics. FUNDING: National Core Studies-Immunity, UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council), Health Data Research UK, the Scottish Government, and the University of Edinburgh.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Aged , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , England/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Immunization, Secondary , Immunosuppressive Agents , Male , Northern Ireland , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Scotland , Vaccination , Wales/epidemiology
6.
Br J Psychiatry ; 221(6): 748-757, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1993410

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdowns were predicted to have a major impact on mental health, however current studies have produced contradictory findings with limited longitudinal data. AIMS: Nine years of linked, individual-level administrative data were used to examine changes in psychotropic medication uptake before and during the pandemic. METHOD: Medication data from a population-wide prescribing database were linked to demographic and socioeconomic indicators from healthcare registration records (n = 1 801 860). Monthly prescription uptake was split (pre-restrictions: January 2012 to February 2020 and during restrictions: March to October 2020). Auto regressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) models were trained in R taking into consideration trends and seasonal effects. Forecast ('expected') monthly values were compared with 'actual' values, stratified by demographic factors. RESULTS: Over the study period 38.5% of the study population were in receipt of ≥1 psychotropic medication. Uptake of these medications have been following a strong upward trend since January 2012. In March 2020 uptake of all medications increased beyond expected values, returning to expected trends from May 2020 for antidepressants, anxiolytics and antipsychotics. In the 8 months during restrictions uptake of hypnotic medication was 12% higher than expected among those <18 years, and anxiolytic medication higher than expected in those >65 years. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest an initial 'stockpiling' of medications in March 2020 before trends mostly returned to expected levels. The anticipated tsunami of mental ill health is not yet manifest in psychotropic medication uptake. There are indications of increased anxiety and sleep difficulties in some subgroups, although these conditions may resolve as we emerge from the pandemic without need for psychiatric intervention.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Communicable Disease Control , Cohort Studies , Research Design , Psychotropic Drugs/therapeutic use
7.
Br J Psychiatry ; 221(1): 417-424, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1731562

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has disproportionately affected people with mental health conditions. AIMS: We investigated the association between receiving psychotropic drugs, as an indicator of mental health conditions, and COVID-19 vaccine uptake. METHOD: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of a prospective cohort of the Northern Ireland adult population using national linked primary care registration, vaccination, secondary care and pharmacy dispensing data. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses investigated the association between anxiolytic, antidepressant, antipsychotic, and hypnotic use and COVID-19 vaccination status, accounting for age, gender, deprivation and comorbidities. Receiving any COVID-19 vaccine was the primary outcome. RESULTS: There were 1 433 814 individuals, of whom 1 166 917 received a COVID-19 vaccination. Psychotropic medications were dispensed to 267 049 people. In univariable analysis, people who received any psychotropic medication had greater odds of receiving COVID-19 vaccination: odds ratio (OR) = 1.42 (95% CI 1.41-1.44). However, after adjustment, psychotropic medication use was associated with reduced odds of vaccination (ORadj = 0.90, 95% CI 0.89-0.91). People who received anxiolytics (ORadj = 0.63, 95% CI 0.61-0.65), antipsychotics (ORadj = 0.75, 95% CI 0.73-0.78) and hypnotics (ORadj = 0.90, 95% CI 0.87-0.93) had reduced odds of being vaccinated. Antidepressant use was not associated with vaccination (ORadj = 1.02, 95% CI 1.00-1.03). CONCLUSIONS: We found significantly lower odds of vaccination in people who were receiving treatment with anxiolytic and antipsychotic medications. There is an urgent need for evidence-based, tailored vaccine support for people with mental health conditions.


Subject(s)
Anti-Anxiety Agents , Antipsychotic Agents , COVID-19 , Adult , Anti-Anxiety Agents/therapeutic use , Antidepressive Agents/therapeutic use , Antipsychotic Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Hypnotics and Sedatives/therapeutic use , Prospective Studies , Psychotropic Drugs/therapeutic use , Vaccination
8.
The Lancet ; 398, 2021.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1537134

ABSTRACT

Background The COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdowns were predicted to have a major impact on mental health;however, studies on this issue present contradictory findings. Mental ill-health indicators have exhibited strong upward trends over the past decade, but recent studies exploring psychotropic medication uptake have relied on simple counts in the year before and after lockdown, which can give a false impression of the scale of the pandemic's effect. This study uses 9 years of linked, individual-level, administrative data to identify changes in psychotropic medication uptake before and after the pandemic. Methods Psychotropic and antiepileptic (counterfactual comparator) medication data were extracted from the population-wide Enhanced Prescribing Database (EPD), which captures all medications dispensed in community pharmacies across Northern Ireland. Prescriptions remain free in Northern Ireland;therefore, EPD captures more than 99% of medications dispensed, but monthly scan rates can be lower. Individual-level demographic and socioeconomic indicators were obtained from general practitioner registration data for everyone aged older than 10 years (approximately 1·5 million). Denominators varied monthly, including all individuals alive and resident that month. Monthly prescription counts were split (prelockdown Jan 1, 2012 to Feb 29, 2020;post lockdown March 1 to Oct 31, 2020). Auto Regressive Integrated Moving Average models were trained in R, version 4.1.0, taking into consideration trends and seasonal effects. The forecast (expected) monthly values were compared to actual monthly values, stratified by demographic factors. Findings Over the study period, approximately 31·4% (n=566 594) of the study population had received antidepressant, 13·6% (n=244 515) hypnotic, 3·6% (n=65 565) antipsychotic, 17·4% (n=312 849) anxiolytic, and 9·3% (n=167 518) antiepileptic medications at some point, with strong upward trends for all medications 2012–20. In March, 2020, when restrictions began, all medication uptake increased beyond the CIs of the expected value, followed by a decrease April–May, 2020, mostly returning to the expected trend thereafter. Uptake of antidepressants, antipsychotics, and antiepileptics remained as expected when stratified by gender, age, single-person household, deprivation, and urbanicity. Significant increases were observed in uptake of hypnotics in people younger than 18 years and older than 65 years, and in anxiolytics for people older than 65 years. Interpretation Our results suggest stockpiling of medications in March, 2020, with lockdown associated with increased hypnotics in children, and hypnotics and anxiolytics in older people. There remains no evidence of restrictions impacting antidepressant or antipsychotic uptake. Funding UK Research and Innovation Administrative Data Research Centre Northern Ireland (grant number ES/S00744X/1) and the Northern Ireland Public Health Agency Health and Social Care Research and Development (grant number COM/5625/20).

9.
Lancet Respir Med ; 9(12): 1439-1449, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1440430

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The UK COVID-19 vaccination programme has prioritised vaccination of those at the highest risk of COVID-19 mortality and hospitalisation. The programme was rolled out in Scotland during winter 2020-21, when SARS-CoV-2 infection rates were at their highest since the pandemic started, despite social distancing measures being in place. We aimed to estimate the frequency of COVID-19 hospitalisation or death in people who received at least one vaccine dose and characterise these individuals. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study using the Early Pandemic Evaluation and Enhanced Surveillance of COVID-19 (EAVE II) national surveillance platform, which contained linked vaccination, primary care, RT-PCR testing, hospitalisation, and mortality records for 5·4 million people (around 99% of the population) in Scotland. Individuals were followed up from receiving their first dose of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (Oxford-AstraZeneca) COVID-19 vaccines until admission to hospital for COVID-19, death, or the end of the study period on April 18, 2021. We used a time-dependent Poisson regression model to estimate rate ratios (RRs) for demographic and clinical factors associated with COVID-19 hospitalisation or death 14 days or more after the first vaccine dose, stratified by vaccine type. FINDINGS: Between Dec 8, 2020, and April 18, 2021, 2 572 008 individuals received their first dose of vaccine-841 090 (32·7%) received BNT162b2 and 1 730 918 (67·3%) received ChAdOx1. 1196 (<0·1%) individuals were admitted to hospital or died due to COVID-19 illness (883 hospitalised, of whom 228 died, and 313 who died due to COVID-19 without hospitalisation) 14 days or more after their first vaccine dose. These severe COVID-19 outcomes were associated with older age (≥80 years vs 18-64 years adjusted RR 4·75, 95% CI 3·85-5·87), comorbidities (five or more risk groups vs less than five risk groups 4·24, 3·34-5·39), hospitalisation in the previous 4 weeks (3·00, 2·47-3·65), high-risk occupations (ten or more previous COVID-19 tests vs less than ten previous COVID-19 tests 2·14, 1·62-2·81), care home residence (1·63, 1·32-2·02), socioeconomic deprivation (most deprived quintile vs least deprived quintile 1·57, 1·30-1·90), being male (1·27, 1·13-1·43), and being an ex-smoker (ex-smoker vs non-smoker 1·18, 1·01-1·38). A history of COVID-19 before vaccination was protective (0·40, 0·29-0·54). INTERPRETATION: COVID-19 hospitalisations and deaths were uncommon 14 days or more after the first vaccine dose in this national analysis in the context of a high background incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and with extensive social distancing measures in place. Sociodemographic and clinical features known to increase the risk of severe disease in unvaccinated populations were also associated with severe outcomes in people receiving their first dose of vaccine and could help inform case management and future vaccine policy formulation. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council), Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund, Scottish Government, and Health Data Research UK.


Subject(s)
BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19 , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , BNT162 Vaccine/administration & dosage , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19/administration & dosage , Female , Hospitals , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Scotland/epidemiology , Vaccination , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL