ABSTRACT
Background: The EVITE Immunity study investigates the effects of shielding Clinically Extremely Vulnerable (CEV) people during the COVID-19 pandemic on health outcomes and healthcare costs in Wales, UK, to help prepare for future pandemics. Shielding was intended to protect those at highest risk of serious harm from COVID-19. We report the cost of implementing shielding in Wales. Methods: The number of people shielding was extracted from the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank. Resources supporting shielding between March and June 2020 were mapped using published reports, web pages, freedom of information requests to Welsh Government and personal communications (e.g. the office of the Chief Medical Officer for Wales). Results: At the beginning of shielding, 117,415 people were on the shielding list. The total additional cost to support those advised to stay home during the initial 14 weeks of the pandemic was £13,307,654 (£113 per person shielded). This included the new resources required to compile the shielding list, inform CEV people of the shielding intervention and provide medicine and food deliveries. The list was adjusted weekly over the 3-month period (130,000 people identified by June 2020) therefore the cost per person shielded lies between £102 and £113. Conclusion: This is the first evaluation of the cost of the measures put in place to support those identified to shield in Wales. However, no data on opportunity cost was available. The true cost of shielding including its budget impact and opportunity costs need to be investigated to decide whether shielding is a worthwhile policy for future health emergencies.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
BackgroundPeople experiencing homelessness are at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. This study reports the point prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection during testing conducted at sites serving people experiencing homelessness in Toronto during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. We also explored the association between site characteristics and prevalence rates. MethodsThe study included individuals who were staying at shelters, encampments, COVID-19 physical distancing sites, and drop-in and respite sites and completed outreach-based testing for SARS-CoV-2 during the period April 17 to July 31, 2020. We examined test positivity rates over time and compared them to rates in the general population of Toronto. Negative binomial regression was used to examine the relationship between each shelter-level characteristic and SARS-CoV-2 positivity rates. We also compared the rates across 3 time periods (T1: April 17-April 25; T2: April 26-May 23; T3: May 24-June 25). ResultsThe overall prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was 8.5% (394/4657). Site-specific rates showed great heterogeneity with infection rates ranging from 0% to 70.6%. Compared to T1, positivity rates were 0.21 times lower (95% CI: 0.06, 0.75) during T2 and 0.14 times lower (95% CI: 0.043, 0.44) during T3. Most cases were detected during outbreak testing (384/394 [97.5%]) rather than active case finding. InterpretationDuring the first wave of the pandemic, rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection at sites for people experiencing homelessness in Toronto varied significantly over time. The observation of lower rates at certain sites may be attributable to overall time trends, expansion of outreach-based testing to include sites without known outbreaks and/or individual site characteristics.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
The socio-economic impacts of COVID-19 on society have yet to be truly revealed;there is no doubt that the pandemic has severely affected the daily lives of most of humanity. It is to be expected that the research activities of scientists could be impacted to varying degrees, but no data exist on how COVID-19 has affected research specifically. Here, we show that the still ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has already diversely and negatively affected bee research at a global level. An online survey disseminated through the global COLOSS honey bee research association showed that every participant (n = 230 from 56 countries) reported an impact on one or more of their activities. Activities that require travelling or the physical presence of people (meetings and conferences, teaching and extension) were affected the most, but also laboratory and field activities, daily operations, supervision and other activities were affected to varying degrees. Since the basic activities are very similar for many research fields, it appears as if our findings for bee research can be extrapolated to other fields. In the light of our data, we recommend that stakeholders such as governments and funding bodies who support research should facilitate the wide implementation of web-based information technology required for efficient online communication for research and education, as well as adequately loosened restriction measures with respect to field and laboratory work. Finally, increased flexibility in administration and extension of research grants and fellowships seem to be needed. It is apparent that adequate responses by all stakeholders are required to limit the impact of COVID-19 and future pandemics on bee science and other research fields.