Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
BMC Public Health ; 23(1): 988, 2023 05 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20242605

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Policy responses to COVID-19 in Victoria, Australia over 2020-2021 have been supported by evidence generated through mathematical modelling. This study describes the design, key findings, and process for policy translation of a series of modelling studies conducted for the Victorian Department of Health COVID-19 response team during this period. METHODS: An agent-based model, Covasim, was used to simulate the impact of policy interventions on COVID-19 outbreaks and epidemic waves. The model was continually adapted to enable scenario analysis of settings or policies being considered at the time (e.g. elimination of community transmission versus disease control). Model scenarios were co-designed with government, to fill evidence gaps prior to key decisions. RESULTS: Understanding outbreak risk following incursions was critical to eliminating community COVID-19 transmission. Analyses showed risk depended on whether the first detected case was the index case, a primary contact of the index case, or a 'mystery case'. There were benefits of early lockdown on first case detection and gradual easing of restrictions to minimise resurgence risk from undetected cases. As vaccination coverage increased and the focus shifted to controlling rather than eliminating community transmission, understanding health system demand was critical. Analyses showed that vaccines alone could not protect health systems and need to be complemented with other public health measures. CONCLUSIONS: Model evidence offered the greatest value when decisions needed to be made pre-emptively, or for questions that could not be answered with empiric data and data analysis alone. Co-designing scenarios with policy-makers ensured relevance and increased policy translation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Victoria/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Communicable Disease Control , Policy
2.
American journal of obstetrics and gynecology ; 224(2):S7-S8, 2021.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2278664
3.
Lancet ; 398(10294): 41-52, 2021 07 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1575225

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Little evidence is available on the use of telehealth for antenatal care. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, we developed and implemented a new antenatal care schedule integrating telehealth across all models of pregnancy care. To inform this clinical initiative, we aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of telehealth in antenatal care. METHODS: We analysed routinely collected health data on all women giving birth at Monash Health, a large health service in Victoria (Australia), using an interrupted time-series design. We assessed the impact of telehealth integration into antenatal care from March 23, 2020, across low-risk and high-risk care models. Allowing a 1-month implementation period from March 23, 2020, we compared the first 3 months of telehealth integrated care delivered between April 20 and July 26, 2020, with conventional care delivered between Jan 1, 2018, and March 22, 2020. The primary outcomes were detection and outcomes of fetal growth restriction, pre-eclampsia, and gestational diabetes. Secondary outcomes were stillbirth, neonatal intensive care unit admission, and preterm birth (birth before 37 weeks' gestation). FINDINGS: Between Jan 1, 2018, and March 22, 2020, 20 031 women gave birth at Monash Health during the conventional care period and 2292 women gave birth during the telehealth integrated care period. Of 20 154 antenatal consultations provided in the integrated care period, 10 731 (53%) were delivered via telehealth. Overall, compared with the conventional care period, no significant differences were identified in the integrated care period with regard to the number of babies with fetal growth restriction (birthweight below the 3rd percentile; 2% in the integrated care period vs 2% in the conventional care period, p=0·72, for low-risk care models; 5% in the integrated care period vs 5% in the conventional care period, p=0·50 for high-risk care models), number of stillbirths (1% vs 1%, p=0·79; 2% vs 2%, p=0·70), or pregnancies complicated by pre-eclampsia (3% vs 3%, p=0·70; 9% vs 7%, p=0·15), or gestational diabetes (22% vs 22%, p=0·89; 30% vs 26%, p=0·06). Interrupted time-series analysis showed a significant reduction in preterm birth among women in high-risk models (-0·68% change in incidence per week [95% CI -1·37 to -0·002]; p=0·049), but no significant differences were identified in other outcome measures for low-risk or high-risk care models after telehealth integration compared with conventional care. INTERPRETATION: Telehealth integrated antenatal care enabled the reduction of in-person consultations by 50% without compromising pregnancy outcomes. This care model can help to minimise in-person interactions during the COVID-19 pandemic, but should also be considered in post-pandemic health-care models. FUNDING: None.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pregnancy Complications/therapy , Prenatal Care/organization & administration , Telemedicine/economics , Telemedicine/organization & administration , Adult , Female , Humans , Interrupted Time Series Analysis , Pregnancy , Retrospective Studies , Victoria
4.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(3): e808-e810, 2021 08 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1338679

ABSTRACT

Countries worldwide are experiencing a second wave of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which is proving to be difficult to control. We describe the combination of physical distancing, mandatory mask wearing, movement restrictions, and enhanced test, trace, and isolation efforts that can be used to successfully suppress community transmission to zero.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , Physical Distancing , Victoria/epidemiology
6.
Women Birth ; 34(5): 473-476, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-817023

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Universal screening has been proposed as a strategy to identify asymptomatic individuals infected with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and mitigate transmission. AIM: To investigate the rate of positive tests among pregnant women in Melbourne, Australia. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional prevalence study at three maternity hospitals (one tertiary referral hospital and two secondary maternities) in Melbourne, Australia. SARS-CoV-2 testing was offered to all pregnant women attending face-to-face antenatal visits and to those attending the hospital with symptoms of possible coronavirus disease, between 6th and 19th of May 2020. Testing was performed by multiplex-tandem polymerase chain reaction (PCR) on combined oropharyngeal and nasopharyngeal swabs. The primary outcome was the proportion of positive SARS-CoV-2 tests. FINDINGS: SARS-CoV-2 testing was performed in 350 women, of whom 19 had symptoms of possible COVID-19. The median maternal age was 32 years (IQR 28-35 years), and the median gestational age at testing was 33 weeks and four days (IQR 28 weeks to 36 weeks and two days). All 350 tests returned negative results (p̂=0%, 95% CI 0-1.0%). CONCLUSION: In a two-week period of low disease prevalence, the rate of asymptomatic coronavirus infection among pregnant women in Australia during the study period was negligible, reflecting low levels of community transmission.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious , COVID-19 Testing , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Infant , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/diagnosis , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/epidemiology , Prenatal Care , SARS-CoV-2
7.
PLoS One ; 15(6): e0234187, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-526663

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has created an extraordinary global health crisis. However, with limited understanding of the effects of COVID-19 during pregnancy, clinicians and patients are forced to make uninformed decisions. OBJECTIVES: To systematically evaluate the literature and report the maternal and neonatal outcomes associated with COVID-19. SEARCH STRATEGY: PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE were searched from November 1st, 2019 and March 28th, 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: Primary studies, reported in English, investigating COVID-19-positive pregnant women and reporting their pregnancy and neonatal outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data in relation to clinical presentation, investigation were maternal and neonatal outcomes were extracted and analysed using summary statistics. Hypothesis testing was performed to examine differences in time-to-delivery. Study quality was assessed using the ICROMS tool. MAIN RESULTS: Of 73 identified articles, nine were eligible for inclusion (n = 92). 67.4% (62/92) of women were symptomatic at presentation. RT-PCR was inferior to CT-based diagnosis in 31.7% (26/79) of cases. Maternal mortality rate was 0% and only one patient required intensive care and ventilation. 63.8% (30/47) had preterm births, 61.1% (11/18) fetal distress and 80% (40/50) a Caesarean section. 76.92% (11/13) of neonates required NICU admission and 42.8% (40/50) had a low birth weight. There was one indeterminate case of potential vertical transmission. Mean time-to-delivery was 4.3±3.08 days (n = 12) with no difference in outcomes (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19-positive pregnant women present with fewer symptoms than the general population and may be RT-PCR negative despite having signs of viral pneumonia. The incidence of preterm births, low birth weight, C-section, NICU admission appear higher than the general population.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/virology , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Betacoronavirus/physiology , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Cesarean Section , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/pathology , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/pathology , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Outcome , Premature Birth/virology , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL