STIMULATE-ICP-Delphi (Symptoms, Trajectory, Inequalities and Management: Understanding Long-COVID to Address and Transform Existing Integrated Care Pathways Delphi): Study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: As mortality rates from COVID-19 disease fall, the high prevalence of long-term sequelae (Long COVID) is becoming increasingly widespread, challenging healthcare systems globally. Traditional pathways of care for Long Term Conditions (LTCs) have tended to be managed by disease-specific specialties, an approach that has been ineffective in delivering care for patients with multi-morbidity. The multi-system nature of Long COVID and its impact on physical and psychological health demands a more effective model of holistic, integrated care. The evolution of integrated care systems (ICSs) in the UK presents an important opportunity to explore areas of mutual benefit to LTC, multi-morbidity and Long COVID care. There may be benefits in comparing and contrasting ICPs for Long COVID with ICPs for other LTCs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study aims to evaluate health services requirements for ICPs for Long COVID and their applicability to other LTCs including multi-morbidity and the overlap with medically not yet explained symptoms (MNYES). The study will follow a Delphi design and involve an expert panel of stakeholders including people with lived experience, as well as clinicians with expertise in Long COVID and other LTCs. Study processes will include expert panel and moderator panel meetings, surveys, and interviews. The Delphi process is part of the overall STIMULATE-ICP programme, aimed at improving integrated care for people with Long COVID. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for this Delphi study has been obtained (Research Governance Board of the University of York) as have approvals for the other STIMULATE-ICP studies. Study outcomes are likely to inform policy for ICPs across LTCs. Results will be disseminated through scientific publication, conference presentation and communications with patients and stakeholders involved in care of other LTCs and Long COVID. REGISTRATION: Researchregistry: https://www.researchregistry.com/browse-the-registry#home/registrationdetails/6246bfeeeaaed6001f08dadc/.

Epidemiological model based periodic intervention policies for COVID-19 mitigation in the United Kingdom.

As the UK, together with numerous countries in the world, moves towards a new phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, there is a need to be able to predict trends in sufficient time to limit the pressure faced by the National Health Service (NHS) and maintain low hospitalisation levels. In this study, we explore the use of an epidemiological compartmental model to devise a periodic adaptive suppression/intervention policy to alleviate the pressure on the NHS. The proposed model facilitates the understanding of the progression of the specific stages of COVID-19 in communities in the UK including: the susceptible population, the infected population, the hospitalised population, the recovered population, the deceased population, and the vaccinated population. We identify the parameters of the model by relying on past data within the period from 1 October 2020 to 1 June 2021. We use the total number of hospitalised patients and the fraction of those infected who are being admitted to hospital to develop adaptive policies: these modulate the recommended level of social restriction measures and realisable vaccination target adjustments. The analysis over the period 1 October 2020 to 1 June 2021 demonstrates our periodic adaptive policies have the potential to reduce the hospitalisation by 58% on average per month. In a further prospective analysis over the period August 2021 to May 2022, we analyse several future scenarios, characterised by the relaxation of restrictions, the vaccination ineffectiveness and the gradual decay of the vaccination-induced immunity within the population. In addition, we simulate the surge of plausible variants characterised by an higher transmission rate. In such scenarios, we show that our periodic intervention is effective and able to maintain the hospitalisation rate to a manageable level.

Development and presentation of an objective risk stratification tool for healthcare workers when dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: risk modelling based on hospitalisation and mortality statistics compared with epidemiological data

ObjectivesHealthcare workers have greater exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and an estimated 2.5-fold increased risk of contracting COVID-19 than the general population. We wished to explore the predictive role of basic demographics to establish a simple tool that could help risk stratify healthcare workers.SettingWe undertook a review of the published literature (including multiple search strategies in MEDLINE with PubMed interface) and critically assessed early reports on preprint servers. We explored the relative risk of mortality from readily available demographics to identify the population at the highest risk.ResultsThe published studies specifically assessing the risk of healthcare workers had limited demographics available;therefore, we explored the general population in the literature. Clinician demographics: Mortality increased with increasing age from 50 years onwards. Male sex at birth, and people of black and minority ethnicity groups had higher susceptibility to both hospitalisation and mortality. Comorbid disease. Vascular disease, renal disease, diabetes and chronic pulmonary disease further increased risk. Risk stratification tool: A risk stratification tool was compiled using a white female aged <50 years with no comorbidities as a reference. A point allocated to risk factors was associated with an approximate doubling in risk. This tool provides numerical support for healthcare workers when determining which team members should be allocated to patient facing clinical duties compared with remote supportive roles.ConclusionsWe generated a tool that provides a framework for objective risk stratification of doctors and healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic, without requiring disclosure of information that an individual may not wish to share with their direct line manager during the risk assessment process. This tool has been made freely available through the British Medical Association website and is widely used in the National Health Service and other external organisations.

Meeting the Challenge of Virtual Diabetes Care: A Consensus Viewpoint on the Positioning and Value of Oral Semaglutide in Routine Clinical Practice.

While glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), such as semaglutide, are among the most effective drugs for treating people with type 2 diabetes (T2D), they are clinically under-utilised. Until recently, the only route for semaglutide administration was via subcutaneous injection. However, an oral formulation of semaglutide was recently licensed, with the potential to address therapy inertia and increase patient adherence to treatment, which is essential in controlling blood glucose and reducing complications. The availability of oral semaglutide provides a new option for both clinicians and patients who are reluctant to use an injectable agent. This has been of particular importance in addressing the challenge of virtual diabetes care during the COVID-19 pandemic, circumventing the logistical problems that are often associated with subcutaneous medication administration. However, there remains limited awareness of the clinical and economic value of oral semaglutide in routine clinical practice. In this article, we present our consensus opinion on the role of oral semaglutide in routine clinical practice and discuss its value in reducing the burden of delivering diabetes care in the post-COVID-19 pandemic period of chronic disease management.