COVID-19 vaccination uptake in people with epilepsy in wales.

PURPOSE: People with epilepsy (PWE) are at increased risk of severe COVID-19. Assessing COVID-19 vaccine uptake is therefore important. We compared COVID-19 vaccination uptake for PWE in Wales with a matched control cohort. METHODS: We performed a retrospective, population, cohort study using linked, anonymised, Welsh electronic health records within the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank (Welsh population=3.1 million).We identified PWE in Wales between 1st March 2020 and 31st December 2021 and created a control cohort using exact 5:1 matching (sex, age and socioeconomic status). We recorded 1st, 2nd and booster COVID-19 vaccinations. RESULTS: There were 25,404 adults with epilepsy (127,020 controls). 23,454 (92.3%) had a first vaccination, 22,826 (89.9%) a second, and 17,797 (70.1%) a booster. Comparative figures for controls were: 112,334 (87.8%), 109,057 (85.2%) and 79,980 (62.4%).PWE had higher vaccination rates in all age, sex and socioeconomic subgroups apart from booster uptake in older subgroups. Vaccination rates were higher in older subgroups, women and less deprived areas for both cohorts. People with intellectual disability and epilepsy had higher vaccination rates when compared with controls with intellectual disability. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccination uptake for PWE in Wales was higher than that for a matched control group.

Paying for inclusion and exclusion

Work by UNESCO (2009 and 2020a) has been framed by the argument that there are three main justifications for inclusive education: educational, social and economic. This paper aims to explore the economic justification that it is less costly to establish and maintain schools that educate all children together than to set up a complex system of different types of schools specializing in different groups of children. The paper examines the crucial role played by financing mechanisms in achieving more inclusive education systems. It provides an analytical discussion of key issues and findings emerging from international and European research and policy guidance. This paper also draws on 20 years of work by the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education with its 31 European countries, covering 35 jurisdictions, from across Europe. A consistent finding of European Agency work is that a higher amount of funding does not in itself guarantee better learning conditions and more inclusive schools. The successful implementation of inclusive education depends upon financing mechanisms and strategies that involve a range of stakeholders and take a preventative policy approach. Such financing mechanisms aim at paying for inclusion rather than paying for different forms of exclusion. The current impact of the COVID-19 pandemic is also considered as it further reinforces the need for prevention-based policy approaches. © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Did the UK's public health shielding policy protect the clinically extremely vulnerable during the COVID-19 pandemic in Wales? Results of EVITE Immunity, a linked data retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: The UK shielding policy intended to protect people at the highest risk of harm from COVID-19 infection. We aimed to describe intervention effects in Wales at 1 year. METHODS: Retrospective comparison of linked demographic and clinical data for cohorts comprising people identified for shielding from 23 March to 21 May 2020; and the rest of the population. Health records were extracted with event dates between 23 March 2020 and 22 March 2021 for the comparator cohort and from the date of inclusion until 1 year later for the shielded cohort. RESULTS: The shielded cohort included 117,415 people, with 3,086,385 in the comparator cohort. The largest clinical categories in the shielded cohort were severe respiratory condition (35.5%), immunosuppressive therapy (25.9%) and cancer (18.6%). People in the shielded cohort were more likely to be female, aged ≥50 years, living in relatively deprived areas, care home residents and frail. The proportion of people tested for COVID-19 was higher in the shielded cohort (odds ratio [OR] 1.616; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.597-1.637), with lower positivity rate incident rate ratios 0.716 (95% CI 0.697-0.736). The known infection rate was higher in the shielded cohort (5.9% vs 5.7%). People in the shielded cohort were more likely to die (OR 3.683; 95% CI: 3.583-3.786), have a critical care admission (OR 3.339; 95% CI: 3.111-3.583), hospital emergency admission (OR 2.883; 95% CI: 2.837-2.930), emergency department attendance (OR 1.893; 95% CI: 1.867-1.919) and common mental disorder (OR 1.762; 95% CI: 1.735-1.789). CONCLUSION: Deaths and healthcare utilisation were higher amongst shielded people than the general population, as would be expected in the sicker population. Differences in testing rates, deprivation and pre-existing health are potential confounders; however, lack of clear impact on infection rates raises questions about the success of shielding and indicates that further research is required to fully evaluate this national policy intervention.

‘Every day was a learning curve’: implementing COVID-19 triage protocols in UK ambulance services – a qualitative study

BackgroundTRIM is an evaluation of the triage models used by emergency ambulance services caring for patients with suspected COVID-19 during the pandemic’s first wave in 2020. We aimed to understand experiences and concerns of staff about implementation of triage protocols.MethodResearch paramedics interviewed stakeholders from four ambulance services (call handlers, clinical advisors, paramedics, managers) and ED clinical staff from receiving hospitals. Interviews (n=23) were conducted remotely using MS Teams, recorded, and transcribed in full. Analysis generated themes from implicit and explicit ideas within participants’ accounts (Braun and Clarke 2021), conducted by researchers and PPI partners working together.ResultsWe identified the following themes:Constantly changing guidelines – at some points, updated several times a day.The ambulance service as part of the wider healthcare system - changes elsewhere in the system left ambulance services as the default.Peaks and troughs of demand - fluctuating greatly over time, and varying across the staff groups.A stretched system - resources were overextended by staff sickness and isolation, longer job times, and increased handover delays at ED.Emotional load of responding to the pandemic - including call centre staff. Doing the best they can in the face of uncertainty - a rapidly evolving situation unlike any which ambulance services had faced before.ConclusionImplementing triage protocols in response to the COVID-19 pandemic was complex and had to be actively managed by a range of frontline staff, dealing with external pressures and a heavy emotional load.Conflict of interestNone.FundingUKRI-DHSC Covid-19 Rapid Response Funding.

Cancer patients display diminished viral RNA clearance and altered T cell responses during SARS-CoV-2 infection

Cancer patients display immunomodulation related to malignancy and anti-cancer therapies, but how these factors impact COVID-19 remains unknown. To investigate immune responses in cancer patients with COVID-19, we undertook a prospective case-control study, enrolling hospitalized solid tumor patients with acute COVID-19, as well as age-, gender-, and comorbidity-matched COVID-19 patients without cancer as controls. Using biospecimens collected during hospitalization, we performed virologic measurements as well as in-depth immunophenotyping of cellular, antibody and cytokine responses. We enrolled 17 cancer patients (cases) admitted to Yale-New Haven Hospital between March 15 and June 30, 2020 with COVID-19, as well as 17 matched non-cancer patients (controls) admitted with COVID-19. No significant differences were observed between cases and controls based on patient characteristics (age, gender, race, co-morbidities, smoking history, days from symptom onset to COVID-19 diagnosis) or outcomes (COVID-19 severity, length of hospital stay, rate of intubation or mortality). The most common primary tumor sites were lung (4/17) and gastrointestinal (4/17);all cases had received cancer-directed therapy within 6 months of COVID-19 diagnosis, with 13/17 receiving treatment less than 1 month prior to hospitalization. Three of 17 cases had received immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies. Despite having similar SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA loads at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis when compared with controls, cancer cases had increased viral RNA abundance during hospitalization, suggesting slower clearance. Antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2 were preserved in cancer cases, with cases displaying similar levels of IgM and IgG antibodies directed against SARS-CoV-2 epitopes compared to controls. Cytokine profiling revealed higher plasma levels of CCL3, IL1A and CXCL12 in cancer cases compared to controls. Using flow cytometric immunophenotyping, we found that innate immune and non-T cell adaptive immune parameters were similar between cases and controls hospitalized with COVID-19. However, among cancer cases on conventional therapies, T cell lymphopenia was more profound, and these cases demonstrated higher levels of CD8+ exhausted (CD8+CD45RA-PD1+TIM3+ ), CD8+GranzymeB+ and CD4+CD38+HLA-DR+ and CD8+CD38+HLA-DR+ activated T cells when compared with controls;interestingly, these differences were not observed in patients who had received immune checkpoint inhibition. Thus, we found reduced viral RNA clearance and specific alterations in T cell and cytokine responses in cancer patients hospitalized with COVID-19 compared with matched controls with COVID-19. This dysregulated T cell response in cancer patients, which may reflect immune modulation due to chronic antigen stimulation as well as cancer therapies, may lead to altered virologic and clinical outcomes in this population.

Detection of Pneumococcal Pneumonia during SARS-CoV-2 Infection

Background. Streptococcus pneumoniae (pneumococcus) is a common colonizer of the upper respiratory tract and can progress to cause invasive and mucosal disease. Additionally, infection with pneumococcus can complicate respiratory viral infections (influenza, respiratory syncytial virus, etc.) by exacerbating the initial disease. Limited data exist describing the potential relationship of SARS-CoV-2 infection with pneumococcus and the role of co-infection in influencing COVID-19 severity. Methods. Inpatients and healthcare workers testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 during March-August 2020 were tested for pneumococcus through culture-enrichment of saliva followed by RT-qPCR (to identify carriage) and for inpatients only, serotype-specific urine antigen detection (UAD) assays (to identify pneumococcal pneumonia). A multinomial multivariate regression model was used to examine the relationship between pneumococcal detection and COVID-19 severity. Results. Among the 126 subjects who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, the median age was 62 years;54.9% of subjects were male;88.89% were inpatients;23.5% had an ICU stay;and 13.5% died. Pneumococcus was detected in 17 subjects (13.5%) by any method, including 5 subjects (4.0%) by RT-qPCR and 12 subjects (13.6%) by UAD. Little to no bacterial growth was observed on 21/235 culture plates. Detection by UAD was associated with both moderate and severe COVID-19 disease while RT-qPCR detection in saliva was not associated with severity. None of the 12 individuals who were UAD-positive died. Conclusion. Pneumococcal pneumonia (as determined by UAD) continues to occur during the ongoing pandemic and may be associated with more serious COVID-19 outcomes. Detection of pneumococcal carriage may be masked by high levels of antibiotic use. Future studies should better characterize the relationship between pneumococcus and SARS-CoV-2 across all disease severity levels.

Saliva as a Reliable Sample Type for Mass SARS-CoV-2 Testing Strategies

Background. Quickly detecting and isolating individuals positive for SARSCoV-2 is essential for limiting virus spread. Policy makers rely on the number of active cases to make decisions, and individuals use this information to evaluate risk should they return to public spaces. Robust testing strategies have been plagued with limited authorized diagnostic assays and high test prices, with large-scale implementation hampered by worldwide supply chain issues. Methods. Having identified its potential early in the pandemic, we simplified saliva-based COVID-19 diagnostic testing by (1) not requiring collection tubes with preservatives, (2) replacing nucleic acid extraction with a simple enzymatic and heating step, and (3) testing specimens for SARS-CoV-2 in dualplex RT-qPCR. Moreover, we validated this approach ("SalivaDirect") with reagents and instruments from multiple vendors to circumvent supply chain disruptions. Results. SalivaDirect's simplified protocol does not compromise on sensitivity. In our hospital cohort, we found a high positive agreement (94%) between saliva tested with SalivaDirect and nasopharyngeal swabs tested with a commercial RT-qPCR kit. With the National Basketball Association we tested 3,779 saliva specimens from healthy individuals and detected low rates of invalid (0.3%) and false-positive (< 0.05%) results. Using comparative assays and sample types, we also demonstrated SalivaDirect to efficiently detect SARS-CoV-2 in asymptomatic individuals. SalivaDirect is a simplified method for SARS-CoV-2 detection (A) Schematic overview of SalivaDirect workflow depicting the main steps of mixing saliva with proteinase K, heat inactivation, and dualplex qRT-PCR testing. Figure created with Biorender.com. (B) SARS-CoV-2 is stable in saliva for at least 7 days at 4C, room temperature (RT;19C), and 30C without addition of stabilizing buffers. Spiked-in saliva samples of low virus concentrations (12, 25, and 50 SARSCoV-2 copies/mL) were kept at the indicated temperature for 7 days and then tested with SalivaDirect. N1 cycle threshold (Ct) values were lower when kept for 7 days at 30C as compared to fresh specimens (Kruskal-Wallis;p = 0.03). Horizontal bars indicate the median. (C) Comparing Ct values for saliva treated with proteinase K and heat as compared to nucleic extraction yields higher N1 Ct values without extraction (Wilcoxon;p < 0.01). (D) Testing extracted nucleic acid from saliva with the N1 primer-probe set (singleplex) as compared to a multiplex assay showed stronger N1 detection in multiplex (Wilcoxon;p < 0.01). The dotted line in (B)-(D) indicates the limit of detection. Conclusion. Saliva is a valid alternative to swabs for SARS-CoV-2 screening. Importantly, SalivaDirect enables labs to utilize existing infrastructure, improving test implementation time and requiring limited investment to scale-up to meet mass testing needs. With the safe and reliable self-collection of saliva, our vision is to help provide accessible and equitable testing solutions, especially in low-resource and remote settings.

Implementation and Outcomes of a Program to Coordinate and Administer Monoclonal Antibody Therapy to Long-Term Care Facility Residents with COVID-19

Background. Long-term care facility (LTCF) residents are at increased risk of severe COVID-19, with CMS data indicating > 20% mortality. BLAZE-1 trial noted lower hospitalization rates in high-risk patients receiving monoclonal antibody (mAb) vs placebo (4.2% vs 14.6%) for mild to moderate infections, making it a treatment option for LTCF residents;however, many LTCF lack staff to prepare and administer mAb therapy. To address this need, Region VII Disaster Health Response Ecosystem (R7DHRE) coordinated via NE Medical Emergency Operations Center (NEMEOC) an ASPR pilot project to facilitate infusion of COVID-19 mAb therapeutics for LTCF residents in the state. Methods. R7DHRE partnered with Great Plains Health, Nebraska DHHS, Nebraska Antimicrobial Stewardship Assessment and Promotion Program (ASAP) and Infection Control Assessment and Promotion Program (ICAP) to surveil cases in the state, establish distribution/administration pathways, and educate providers on mAb therapeutics. A multi-hub-and-spoke model was created to allow LTCF to work with regional hospitals or pharmacy services to administer drug in their facilities, reducing time to therapy and transmission risk associated with patient transport. A centralized request process was created using a REDCap platform and verification of patient eligibility by ASAP. This request link, informational documents, fact sheets, and custom-built order form templates were hosted on a dedicated ASAP webpage, and details were shared during weekly ICAP LTCF webinars. Outcomes data, including 14- and 28-day COVID-related hospitalizations and mortality, were collected using databases from Nebraska Health Information Initiative and Nebraska DHHS. Results. Through this program, 513 doses were administered to LTCF residents. Average time from symptom onset to infusion was 2.6 days. COVID- related hospitalization and mortality rates were lower than previously reported for LTCF residents (Table 1). Conclusion. By utilizing existing relationships with LTCFs in the region, we established a program to promptly distribute, prepare, and administer monoclonal antibody therapy to LTCF residents in need, preventing COVID-related hospitalizations and deaths.