Evaluation of the shielding initiative in Wales (EVITE Immunity): protocol for a quasiexperimental study.

INTRODUCTION: Shielding aimed to protect those predicted to be at highest risk from COVID-19 and was uniquely implemented in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinically extremely vulnerable people identified through algorithms and screening of routine National Health Service (NHS) data were individually and strongly advised to stay at home and strictly self-isolate even from others in their household. This study will generate a logic model of the intervention and evaluate the effects and costs of shielding to inform policy development and delivery during future pandemics. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a quasiexperimental study undertaken in Wales where records for people who were identified for shielding were already anonymously linked into integrated data systems for public health decision-making. We will: interview policy-makers to understand rationale for shielding advice to inform analysis and interpretation of results; use anonymised individual-level data to select people identified for shielding advice in March 2020 and a matched cohort, from routine electronic health data sources, to compare outcomes; survey a stratified random sample of each group about activities and quality of life at 12 months; use routine and newly collected blood data to assess immunity; interview people who were identified for shielding and their carers and NHS staff who delivered healthcare during shielding, to explore compliance and experiences; collect healthcare resource use data to calculate implementation costs and cost-consequences. Our team includes people who were shielding, who used their experience to help design and deliver this study. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has received approval from the Newcastle North Tyneside 2 Research Ethics Committee (IRAS 295050). We will disseminate results directly to UK government policy-makers, publish in peer-reviewed journals, present at scientific and policy conferences and share accessible summaries of results online and through public and patient networks.

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

BackgroundTRIM is an evaluation of the models used to triage and manage emergency ambulance service care for patients with suspected Covid-19 during the first wave of the pandemic in 2020. We aimed to understand experiences and concerns of clinical and managerial staff about implementation of triage protocols in call centre and on-scene.MethodsResearch paramedics in four study sites across England interviewed purposively selected stakeholders from ambulance services (call handlers, clinical advisors in call centres, clinicians providing emergency response, managers) and ED clinical staff from one hospital per site. Interviews (n=23) were conducted remotely using MS Teams, recorded, and transcribed in full. Analysis generated themes from the implicit and explicit ideas within participants’ accounts, following the six stages of analysis described by Braun and Clarke, conducted by a group of researchers and PPI partners working together.ResultsWe identified the following themes:Constantly changing guidelines – at some points, updates several times a dayThe ambulance service as part of the wider healthcare system - changes in other parts of the healthcare system left ambulance services as the default optionPeaks and troughs of demand - demand fluctuated greatly over time, with workload varying across the ambulance service, including an increased role for clinical advisorsA stretched system - resources to respond to patient demand were stretched thinner by staff sickness and isolation, longer job times, and increased handover delays at EDEmotional load of responding to the pandemic - particularly for call centre staffDoing the best they can in the face of uncertainty - in the face of a rapidly evolving situation unlike any which ambulance services had faced beforeDiscussionImplementing triage protocols in response to the Covid-19 pandemic was a complex and process which had to be actively managed by a range of front line staff, dealing with external pressures and a heavy emotional load.

Evaluation of the shielding initiative in Wales (EVITE Immunity): protocol for a quasiexperimental study

Introduction Shielding aimed to protect those predicted to be at highest risk from COVID-19 and was uniquely implemented in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinically extremely vulnerable people identified through algorithms and screening of routine National Health Service (NHS) data were individually and strongly advised to stay at home and strictly self-isolate even from others in their household. This study will generate a logic model of the intervention and evaluate the effects and costs of shielding to inform policy development and delivery during future pandemics. Methods and analysis This is a quasiexperimental study undertaken in Wales where records for people who were identified for shielding were already anonymously linked into integrated data systems for public health decision-making. We will: interview policy-makers to understand rationale for shielding advice to inform analysis and interpretation of results;use anonymised individual-level data to select people identified for shielding advice in March 2020 and a matched cohort, from routine electronic health data sources, to compare outcomes;survey a stratified random sample of each group about activities and quality of life at 12 months;use routine and newly collected blood data to assess immunity;interview people who were identified for shielding and their carers and NHS staff who delivered healthcare during shielding, to explore compliance and experiences;collect healthcare resource use data to calculate implementation costs and cost–consequences. Our team includes people who were shielding, who used their experience to help design and deliver this study. Ethics and dissemination The study has received approval from the Newcastle North Tyneside 2 Research Ethics Committee (IRAS 295050). We will disseminate results directly to UK government policy-makers, publish in peer-reviewed journals, present at scientific and policy conferences and share accessible summaries of results online and through public and patient networks.

Pesticides use and health impacts on farmers in Thailand, Vietnam, and Lao PDR: Protocol for a survey of knowledge, behaviours and blood acetyl cholinesterase concentrations.

Pesticides use in Southeast Asia has increased steadily, driven by the growth of large-scale commercial farming, as well as a desire to maximise food production in rural subsistence economies. Given that use of chemical pesticides, such as organophosphates and carbamates, has known potential health impacts, there are concerns about the safety of agricultural workers, and a need for a better evidence base to underpin regulation and worker education. This study, undertaken in 9 districts in Lao PDR, Thailand and Vietnam, will interview agricultural workers to investigate how they use pesticides, their knowledge of risks and self-protective practices, and their self-reported illness symptoms. In each district researchers will recruit and interview 120 participants engaged in vegetable farming, who have recently used pesticides, making a total of 1080 subjects divided equally between the three study countries. Workers' degree of pesticides exposure will be determined from acetyl cholinesterase concentrations in capillary blood samples collected using field test kits, and these data will be analysed together with the interview findings. Country findings will be compared and contrasted, and general patterns noted. Knowledge gained about risky behaviours, self-protective practices and degree of association with serious pesticides exposure will assist policy makers and inform health improvement programmes.

The take home naloxone intervention multicentre emergency setting feasibility (TIME) trial: an early perspective from one UK ambulance service

BackgroundDrug poisoning deaths in England and Wales have increased by 52% since 2011 with over half involving opioids. Deaths are preventable if naloxone is administered in time. Take Home Naloxone (THN) kits have been distributed through drug services;however, uptake is low and effectiveness unproven. The TIME trial tests the feasibility of conducting a full randomised controlled trial of providing THN administration and basic life support training to high-risk opioid-users in emergency care settings.MethodsA multi-site feasibility trial commenced in June 2019 with two hospitals and their surrounding ambulance services (Bristol Royal Infirmary (BRI) with South Western Ambulance NHS Foundation Trust (SWASFT) and Hull Royal Infirmary with Yorkshire Ambulance Service) randomly allocated to intervention arms;and sites in Wrexham and Sheffield allocated as ‘usual care’ controls. SWASFT began recruiting in October 2019 with the aim of recruiting and training 50% (n=111) of paramedics working within the BRI’s catchment area, to supply THN to at least 100 eligible patients during a 12-month period.ResultsThe trial was suspended between 17.03.2020-06.08.2020 and extended to 01.03.2021 (COVID-19). Despite this, 121 SWASFT paramedics undertook TIME training. TIME trained paramedics attended 30% (n=57) of the n=190 opioid-related emergency calls requiring naloxone administration during the study period. A total of n=29 potentially eligible patients were identified before and n=28 after the COVID-19 suspension. Two patients were supplied with THN during each period. During the COVID-19 suspension, twenty-two potentially eligible patients were missed. The majority of eligible patients presented with a reduced consciousness level, preventing recruitment (73%;n=42/48). These patients were transported to hospital for further treatment (n=39) or died on scene following advanced life support (n=3).ConclusionsThe lowered consciousness levels of prehospital emergency ambulance patients who present with opioid poisoning, often prevent the delivery of training required to enable the supply of THN.

Call volume, triage outcomes, and protocols during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom: Results of a national survey.

OBJECTIVES: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom (UK), to describe volume and pattern of calls to emergency ambulance services, proportion of calls where an ambulance was dispatched, proportion conveyed to hospital, and features of triage used. METHODS: Semistructured electronic survey of all UK ambulance services (n = 13) and a request for routine service data on weekly call volumes for 22 weeks (February 1-July 3, 2020). Questionnaires and data request were emailed to chief executives and research leads followed by email and telephone reminders. The routine data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and questionnaire data using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Completed questionnaires were received from 12 services. Call volume varied widely between services, with a UK peak at week 7 at 13.1% above baseline (service range -0.5% to +31.4%). All services ended the study period with a lower call volume than at baseline (service range -3.7% to -25.5%). Suspected COVID-19 calls across the UK totaled 604,146 (13.5% of all calls), with wide variation between services (service range 3.7% to 25.7%), and in service peaks of 11.4% to 44.5%. Ambulances were dispatched to 478,638 (79.2%) of these calls (service range 59.0% to 100.0%), with 262,547 (43.5%) resulting in conveyance to hospital (service range 32.0% to 53.9%). Triage models varied between services and over time. Two primary call triage systems were in use across the UK. There were a large number of products and arrangements used for secondary triage, with services using paramedics, nurses, and doctors to support decision making in the call center and on scene. Frequent changes to triage processes took place. CONCLUSIONS: Call volumes were highly variable. Case mix and workload changed significantly as COVID-19 calls displaced other calls. Triage models and prehospital outcomes varied between services. We urgently need to understand safety and effectiveness of triage models to inform care during further waves and pandemics.

The impact of COVID-19 on adjusted mortality risk in care homes for older adults in Wales, UK: a retrospective population-based cohort study for mortality in 2016-2020.

BACKGROUND: mortality in care homes has had a prominent focus during the COVID-19 outbreak. Care homes are particularly vulnerable to the spread of infectious diseases, which may lead to increased mortality risk. Multiple and interconnected challenges face the care home sector in the prevention and management of outbreaks of COVID-19, including adequate supply of personal protective equipment, staff shortages and insufficient or lack of timely COVID-19 testing. AIM: to analyse the mortality of older care home residents in Wales during COVID-19 lockdown and compare this across the population of Wales and the previous 4 years. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: we used anonymised electronic health records and administrative data from the secure anonymised information linkage databank to create a cross-sectional cohort study. We anonymously linked data for Welsh residents to mortality data up to the 14th June 2020. METHODS: we calculated survival curves and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for the risk of mortality. We adjusted HRs for age, gender, social economic status and prior health conditions. RESULTS: survival curves show an increased proportion of deaths between 23rd March and 14th June 2020 in care homes for older people, with an adjusted HR of 1.72 (1.55, 1.90) compared with 2016. Compared with the general population in 2016-2019, adjusted care home mortality HRs for older adults rose from 2.15 (2.11, 2.20) in 2016-2019 to 2.94 (2.81, 3.08) in 2020. CONCLUSIONS: the survival curves and increased HRs show a significantly increased risk of death in the 2020 study periods.

Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of carers of people with intellectual disabilities.

INTRODUCTION: The measures implemented to manage the COVID-19 pandemic have been shown to impair mental health. This problem is likely to be exacerbated for carers. METHOD: Informal carers (mainly parents) of children and adults with intellectual disabilities, and a comparison group of parents of children without disabilities, completed an online questionnaire. Almost all the data were collected while strict lockdown conditions were in place. RESULTS: Relative to carers of children without intellectual disability, carers of both children and adults with intellectual disability had significantly greater levels of a wish fulfilment coping style, defeat/entrapment, anxiety, and depression. Differences were 2-3 times greater than reported in earlier pre-pandemic studies. Positive correlations were found between objective stress scores and all mental health outcomes. Despite their greater mental health needs, carers of those with intellectual disability received less social support from a variety of sources. CONCLUSIONS: The greater mental health needs of carers in the context of lesser social support raises serious concerns. We consider the policy implications of these findings.