A scoping review on the impact of austerity on healthcare access in the European Union: rethinking austerity for the most vulnerable.

BACKGROUND: There is consensus that the 2008 financial and economic crisis and related austerity measures adversely impacted access to healthcare. In light of the growing debt caused by the COVID-19 crisis, it is uncertain whether a period of austerity will return. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to provide a structured overview of the impact of austerity policies in the EU-28 zone, applied in response to the Great Recession, on access to health care for the adult population, using the five access dimensions by Levesque et al. (2013). METHODS: This study followed the PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews guideline. Medline (PubMed) and Web of Science were searched between February 2021 and June 2021. Primary studies in the English language published after the 1st of January 2008 reporting on the possible change in access to the healthcare system for the adult population induced by austerity in an EU28 country were included. RESULTS: The final search strategy resulted in 525 articles, of which 75 studies were reviewed for full-text analysis, and a total of 21 studies were included. Results revealed that austerity policy has been primarily associated with a reduction in access to healthcare, described through four main categories: i) Increase in rates of reported unmet needs (86%); ii) Affordability (38%); iii) Appropriateness (38%); iv) and Availability and Accommodation (19%). Vulnerable populations were more affected by austerity measures than the general population when specific safeguards were not in place. The main affected adult vulnerable population groups were: patients with chronic diseases, elderly people, (undocumented) migrants, unemployed, economically inactive people and individuals with lower levels of education or socioeconomic status. CONCLUSION: Austerity measures have led to a deterioration in access to healthcare in the vast majority of the countries studied in the EU-28 zone. Findings should prompt policymakers to rethink the fiscal agenda across all policies in times of economic crisis and focus on the needs of the most vulnerable populations from the health perspective.

It takes a pirate to know one: ethical hackers for healthcare cybersecurity.

Healthcare cybersecurity is increasingly targeted by malicious hackers. This sector has many vulnerabilities and health data is very sensitive and valuable. Consequently, any damage caused by malicious intrusions is particularly alarming. The consequences of these attacks can be enormous and endanger patient care. Amongst the already-implemented cybersecurity measures and the ones that need to be further improved, this paper aims to demonstrate how penetration tests can greatly benefit healthcare cybersecurity. It is already proven that this approach has enforced cybersecurity in other sectors. However, it is not popular in healthcare since many prejudices still surround the hacking practice and there is a lack of education on hackers' categories and their ethics. The present analysis aims to comprehend what hacker ethics is and who ethical hackers are. Currently, hacker ethics has the status of personal ethics; however, to employ penetration testers in healthcare, it is recommended to draft an official code of ethics, comprising principles, standards, expectations, and best practices. Additionally, it is important to distinguish between malicious hackers and ethical hackers. Amongst the latter, penetration testers are only a sub-category. Acknowledging the subtle differences between ethical hackers and penetration testers allows to better understand why and how the latter can offer their services to healthcare facilities.

Vaccination status and intensive care unit triage: Is it fair to give unvaccinated Covid-19 patients equal priority?

This article provides a systematic analysis of the proposal to use Covid-19 vaccination status as a criterion for admission of patients with Covid-19 to intensive care units (ICUs) under conditions of resource scarcity. The general consensus is that it is inappropriate to use vaccination status as a criterion because doing so would be unjust; many health systems, including the UK National Health Service, are based on the principle of equality of access to care. However, the analysis reveals that there are several unique features of Covid vaccination status in the context of a pandemic that make this issue disanalogous to cases (such as lung cancer caused by smoking) discussed previously. First, there is equality in access to care at the point of vaccination; the unvaccinated refuse the offer of preventive care when they decline vaccination, weakening their claim to ongoing care if they become ill (this is qualitatively different from 'poor lifestyle choices' such as smoking). Second, the decision of one person to refuse vaccination substantially increases the risk that they will become seriously ill and need ICU care; the person who chooses not to get vaccinated thus potentially increases the pressure on intensive care bed provision, as well as increasing the risk that he or she will infect others who in turn might end up needing ICU care. Third, justice cuts both ways, and giving unvaccinated patients equal priority may itself be unjust when other patients have reduced their risk of ending up on the ICU by getting vaccinated.

SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant escapes neutralizing antibodies and T cell responses more efficiently than other variants in mild COVID-19 convalescents.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) convalescents living in regions with low vaccination rates rely on post-infection immunity for protection against re-infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We evaluate humoral and T cell immunity against five variants of concern (VOCs) in mild-COVID-19 convalescents at 12 months after infection with ancestral virus. In this cohort, ancestral, receptor-binding domain (RBD)-specific antibody and circulating memory B cell levels are conserved in most individuals, and yet serum neutralization against live B.1.1.529 (Omicron) is completely abrogated and significantly reduced for other VOCs. Likewise, ancestral SARS-CoV-2-specific memory T cell frequencies are maintained in >50% of convalescents, but the cytokine response in these cells to mutated spike epitopes corresponding to B.1.1.529 and B.1.351 (Beta) VOCs were impaired. These results indicate that increased antigen variability in VOCs impairs humoral and spike-specific T cell immunity post-infection, strongly suggesting that COVID-19 convalescents are vulnerable and at risk of re-infection with VOCs, thus stressing the importance of vaccination programs.

Ensemble cryo-EM reveals conformational states of the nsp13 helicase in the SARS-CoV-2 helicase replication-transcription complex.

The SARS-CoV-2 nonstructural proteins coordinate genome replication and gene expression. Structural analyses revealed the basis for coupling of the essential nsp13 helicase with the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) where the holo-RdRp and RNA substrate (the replication-transcription complex or RTC) associated with two copies of nsp13 (nsp132-RTC). One copy of nsp13 interacts with the template-RNA in an opposing polarity to the RdRp and is envisaged to drive the RdRp backward on the RNA template (backtracking), prompting questions as to how the RdRp can efficiently synthesize RNA in the presence of nsp13. Here we use cryogenic-electron microscopy and molecular dynamics simulations to analyze the nsp132-RTC, revealing four distinct conformational states of the helicases. The results indicate a mechanism for the nsp132-RTC to turn backtracking on and off, using an allosteric mechanism to switch between RNA synthesis or backtracking in response to stimuli at the RdRp active site.

Suboptimal COVID-19 vaccine uptake among hospitalised patients: an opportunity to improve vulnerable, hard-to-reach population vaccine rates.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccination represents a key preventative part of the Australian public health approach to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. Hospital inpatients are frequently high risk for severe COVID-19 and death. Anecdotes of high-risk inpatients being unvaccinated and a lack of electronic medical record (EMR) visibility of COVID-19 vaccination status prompted the present study as these patients could represent a risk to themselves, staff, other patients and service provision. AIMS: To determine the uptake of COVID-19 vaccine among inpatients at an adult Australian tertiary public hospital and identify reasons for non-vaccination. METHODS: A point-prevalence study of patient-reported COVID-19 vaccine status was conducted on 26 October 2021 through an in-person interview with collection of demographic factors and reasons for non-vaccination. RESULTS: Of 368 (68% of inpatients) participants, 280 (76%) reported receiving at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose. Vaccination status was associated with older age, having received the flu vaccine, being born in Australia and not requiring an English-language interpreter. The majority (88%) of participants had at least one comorbid risk factor for severe COVID-19. Of the unvaccinated (n = 88), 67% were willing to be vaccinated with 54% of those indicating vaccination in hospital would be helpful and 42% requesting approval from their doctor. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccine uptake in our cohort is suboptimal. Existing public health programmes have failed to reach this high-risk, vulnerable population. Changes to the national vaccination strategy to include a parallel inhospital programme for all hospital encounters and target culturally and linguistically diverse individuals might improve uptake among this high-risk, hard-to-reach group of patients.

Avoiding a crisis at Christmas: a systematic review of adverse health effects or 'Chrishaps' caused by traditional hazard sources and COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To complement the 2020 ANZJPH editorial "How COVID-safe Santa can save Christmas". In addition to a concise update regarding SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19, we aimed to explore some risks of Christmas in terms of adverse health effects, which we call 'Chrishaps'. Our overall study question was "which hazards have been scientifically associated with old Christmas essentials such as decoration, gifts, menus, and Santa himself, as well as new challenges associated with COVID-19?" METHOD: We searched the PubMed, Web of Science, and Open Grey databases systematically and Google unsystematically. RESULTS: Thirty-six pertinent articles - most of them case reports or retrospective analyses - documented Chrishaps. CONCLUSION: Overall results suggested that Chrishaps come in different shapes and guises. Implications for public health: Chrishaps pose a potential minor public health threat that should be borne in mind every festive season. Assessing and discussing specific public health implications of Chrishaps requires systematic risk research to be conducted.

Risk, Responsibility, Rudeness, and Rules: The Loneliness of the Social Distance Warrior.

We have a responsibility to obey COVID-19 rules, in order to minimize risk. Yet it is still seen as rude to challenge people who do not respect those rules, when in fact the opposite is true; it is rude to increase risk to others. In this paper I analyse the relationship between risk, responsibility, and rudeness by analysing the evolution of the main governmental slogans and rules and explore the complex relationship between simplicity, safety, and perceived fairness of these rules, and how these features in turn influence the extent to which we act responsibly. I begin by exploring the relationship between rudeness and risk in our interactions about coronavirus, before going on to analyse the importance of clear rules in minimizing tension between us, illustrating the argument with various slogans including "stay at home," "stay alert," and the now infamous "rule of six," which is actually at least three different rules. Ultimately, we are faced with a paradox: people annoyed about complex/unfair rules are less likely to obey them, even if that means rules will apply for longer and even though it was noncompliance with earlier simpler rules that means new rules are necessary. And if rules make less or no sense it is harder to try to get people to follow them in your own capacity as a citizen; it is hard to police rules that are seen as arbitrary or unfair.

COVID-19 conscience tracing: mapping the moral distances of coronavirus.

One of the many problems posed by the collective effort to tackle COVID-19 is non-compliance with restrictions. Some people would like to obey restrictions but cannot due to their job or other life circumstances; others are not good at following rules that restrict their liberty, even if the potential consequences of doing so are repeatedly made very clear to them. Among this group are a minority who simply do not care about the consequences of their actions. But many others fail to accurately perceive the harms that they might be causing. One of the main reasons for this is that the harms done by transmitting COVID-19 to someone else are morally distant from the agent, particularly in cases where infection is asymptomatic. In this paper, I describe seven different aspects of moral distance in the context of COVID-19, explore how they affect (lack of) motivation to obey restrictions, and suggest several ways in which such moral distance can be reduced - primarily through enhanced-contact tracing that makes it clear to individuals and the public precisely who they could be harming and how.

Structural basis for backtracking by the SARS-CoV-2 replication-transcription complex.

Backtracking, the reverse motion of the transcriptase enzyme on the nucleic acid template, is a universal regulatory feature of transcription in cellular organisms but its role in viruses is not established. Here we present evidence that backtracking extends into the viral realm, where backtracking by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) may aid viral transcription and replication. Structures of SARS-CoV-2 RdRp bound to the essential nsp13 helicase and RNA suggested the helicase facilitates backtracking. We use cryo-electron microscopy, RNA-protein cross-linking, and unbiased molecular dynamics simulations to characterize SARS-CoV-2 RdRp backtracking. The results establish that the single-stranded 3' segment of the product RNA generated by backtracking extrudes through the RdRp nucleoside triphosphate (NTP) entry tunnel, that a mismatched nucleotide at the product RNA 3' end frays and enters the NTP entry tunnel to initiate backtracking, and that nsp13 stimulates RdRp backtracking. Backtracking may aid proofreading, a crucial process for SARS-CoV-2 resistance against antivirals.

Changes in the incidence of invasive disease due to Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, and Neisseria meningitidis during the COVID-19 pandemic in 26 countries and territories in the Invasive Respiratory Infection Surveillance Initiative: a prospective analysis of surveillance data.

BACKGROUND: Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, and Neisseria meningitidis, which are typically transmitted via respiratory droplets, are leading causes of invasive diseases, including bacteraemic pneumonia and meningitis, and of secondary infections subsequent to post-viral respiratory disease. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence of invasive disease due to these pathogens during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: In this prospective analysis of surveillance data, laboratories in 26 countries and territories across six continents submitted data on cases of invasive disease due to S pneumoniae, H influenzae, and N meningitidis from Jan 1, 2018, to May, 31, 2020, as part of the Invasive Respiratory Infection Surveillance (IRIS) Initiative. Numbers of weekly cases in 2020 were compared with corresponding data for 2018 and 2019. Data for invasive disease due to Streptococcus agalactiae, a non-respiratory pathogen, were collected from nine laboratories for comparison. The stringency of COVID-19 containment measures was quantified using the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker. Changes in population movements were assessed using Google COVID-19 Community Mobility Reports. Interrupted time-series modelling quantified changes in the incidence of invasive disease due to S pneumoniae, H influenzae, and N meningitidis in 2020 relative to when containment measures were imposed. FINDINGS: 27 laboratories from 26 countries and territories submitted data to the IRIS Initiative for S pneumoniae (62 837 total cases), 24 laboratories from 24 countries submitted data for H influenzae (7796 total cases), and 21 laboratories from 21 countries submitted data for N meningitidis (5877 total cases). All countries and territories had experienced a significant and sustained reduction in invasive diseases due to S pneumoniae, H influenzae, and N meningitidis in early 2020 (Jan 1 to May 31, 2020), coinciding with the introduction of COVID-19 containment measures in each country. By contrast, no significant changes in the incidence of invasive S agalactiae infections were observed. Similar trends were observed across most countries and territories despite differing stringency in COVID-19 control policies. The incidence of reported S pneumoniae infections decreased by 68% at 4 weeks (incidence rate ratio 0·32 [95% CI 0·27-0·37]) and 82% at 8 weeks (0·18 [0·14-0·23]) following the week in which significant changes in population movements were recorded. INTERPRETATION: The introduction of COVID-19 containment policies and public information campaigns likely reduced transmission of S pneumoniae, H influenzae, and N meningitidis, leading to a significant reduction in life-threatening invasive diseases in many countries worldwide. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust (UK), Robert Koch Institute (Germany), Federal Ministry of Health (Germany), Pfizer, Merck, Health Protection Surveillance Centre (Ireland), SpID-Net project (Ireland), European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (European Union), Horizon 2020 (European Commission), Ministry of Health (Poland), National Programme of Antibiotic Protection (Poland), Ministry of Science and Higher Education (Poland), Agencia de Salut Pública de Catalunya (Spain), Sant Joan de Deu Foundation (Spain), Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation (Sweden), Swedish Research Council (Sweden), Region Stockholm (Sweden), Federal Office of Public Health of Switzerland (Switzerland), and French Public Health Agency (France).

The Cost of Coronavirus Obligations: Respecting the Letter and Spirit of Lockdown Regulations.

We all now know that the novel coronavirus is anything but a common cold. The pandemic has created many new obligations for all of us, several of which come with serious costs to our quality of life. But in some cases, the guidance and the law are open to a degree of interpretation, leaving us to decide what is the ethical (or unethical but desired) course of action. Because of the high cost of some of the obligations, a conflict of interest can arise between what we want to do and what it is right to do. And so, some people choose to respect only the letter of the law, but not the spirit, or not to respect even the spirit of the guidelines. This paper identifies and describes the new obligations imposed on us all by the pandemic, considers their costs in terms of the good life, and provides an ethical analysis of two personal and two public cases in terms of the letter and spirit of the guidance and legislation.

Triaging ethical issues in the coronavirus pandemic: how to prioritize bioethics research during public health emergencies.

Much of the ethical discourse concerning the coronavirus pandemic has focused on the allocation of scarce resources, be it potentially beneficial new treatments, ventilators, intensive care beds, or oxygen. Somewhat ironically, the more important ethical issues may lie elsewhere, just as the more important medical issues do not concern intensive care or treatment for COVID-19 patients, but rather the diversion towards these modes of care at the expense of non-Covid patients and treatment. In this article I explore how ethicists can and should prioritize which ethical issues to deal with, and develop a method of triage for identification and prioritization of ethical issues both in the next public health emergency and in bioethics more widely.

COVID-19 in Australia: our national response to the first cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection during the early biocontainment phase.

BACKGROUND: On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization recognised clusters of pneumonia-like cases due to a novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). COVID-19 became a pandemic 71 days later. AIM: To report the clinical and epidemiological features, laboratory data and outcomes of the first group of 11 returned travellers with COVID-19 in Australia. METHODS: This is a retrospective, multi-centre case series. All patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection were admitted to tertiary referral hospitals in New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria and South Australia. RESULTS: The median age of the patient cohort was 42 years (interquartile range (IQR), 24-53 years) with six men and five women. Eight (72.7%) patients had returned from Wuhan, one from Shenzhen, one from Japan and one from Europe. Possible human-to-human transmission from close family contacts in gatherings overseas occurred in two cases. Symptoms on admission were fever, cough and sore throat (n = 9, 81.8%). Co-morbidities included hypertension (n = 3, 27.3%) and hypercholesterolaemia (n = 2, 18.2%). No patients developed severe acute respiratory distress nor required intensive care unit admission or mechanical ventilation. After a median hospital stay of 14.5 days (IQR, 6.75-21), all patients were discharged. CONCLUSIONS: This is a historical record of the first COVID-19 cases in Australia during the early biocontainment phase of the national response. These findings were invaluable for establishing early inpatient and outpatient COVID-19 models of care and informing the management of COVID-19 over time as the outbreak evolved. Future research should extend this Australian case series to examine global epidemiological variation of this novel infection.

WHAT IS THE ROLE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION IN THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC?

Whereas the heart of the purpose and activity of the European Union is concerned with economic harmonisation, its internal market, and the freedom of movement of people, goods, services, and capital, necessarily require public health measures. The EU is committed to both human rights and to "Health in All Policies". This paper considers how that agenda has been confronted by the COVID-19 pandemic. It considers how the EU Treaties limit the possible scope of that response. The paper considers responses in relation to freedom of movement, the work of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, issues relating to the operation of the General Data Protection Regulation, and the Clinical Trials Directive and Medical Devices Directive. It concludes with a brief examination of the economic responses of the EU to the COVID-19 pandemic. An Appendix gives a brief introduction to EU (health) law and history.

Data protection during the coronavirus crisis.

Smartphone apps to track SARS-CoV 2 infections need to fulfill certain minimal requirements to guarantee privacy and justify their use under data protection laws.

COVID-19 and "natural" experiments arising from physical distancing: a hypothetical case study from chronobiology.

With countless "natural" experiments triggered by the COVID-19-associated physical distancing, one key question comes from chronobiology: "When confined to homes, how does the reduced exposure to natural daylight arising from the interruption of usual outdoor activities plus lost temporal organization ordinarily provided from workplaces and schools affect the circadian timing system (the internal 24 h clock) and, consequently, health of children and adults of all ages?" Herein, we discuss some ethical and scientific facets of exploring such natural experiments by offering a hypothetical case study of circadian biology.

CRITCON-Pandemic levels: A stepwise ethical approach to clinician responsibility

CRITCON-Pandemic levels with an associated operational responsibility matrix were recently published by the Intensive Care Society as a modification to Winter Flu CRITCON levels, to better account for differences between a winter flu surge in critical care activity and the capacity challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic. In this paper, we propose an expansion and explanation of the operational matrix to suggest a stepwise ethical approach to clinician responsibility. We propose and outline the main ethical risks created at each level and discuss how those risks can be mitigated through a balanced application of the predominant ethical principle which in turn provides practical guidance to clinician responsibility. We thus seek to specify the ethical and legal principles that should be used in applying the operational matrix, and what the practical effects could be.