ABSTRACT
Background: Despite high numbers of children and young people (CYP) having acute COVID, there has been no prospective follow-up of CYP to establish the pattern of health and well-being over a year following infection. Methods: A non-hospitalised, national sample of 5086 (2909 SARS-COV-2 Positive; 2177 SARS-COV-2 Negative at baseline) CYP aged 11-17 completed questionnaires 6- and 12-months after PCR-tests between October 2020 and March 2021 confirming SARS-CoV-2 infection (excluding CYP with subsequent (re)infections). SARS-COV-2 Positive CYP was compared to age, sex and geographically-matched test-negative CYP. Findings: Ten of 21 symptoms had a prevalence less than 10% at baseline, 6- and 12-months post-test in both test-positives and test-negatives. Of the other 11 symptoms, in test-positives who had these at baseline, the prevalence of all symptoms declined greatly by 12-months. For CYP first describing one of these at 6-months, there was a decline in prevalence by 12-months. The overall prevalence of 9 of 11 symptoms declined by 12-months. As many CYP first described shortness of breath and tiredness at either 6- or 12-months, the overall prevalence of these two symptoms in test-positives appeared to increase by 6-months and increase further by 12-months. However, within-individual examination demonstrated that the prevalence of shortness of breath and tiredness actually declined in those first describing these two symptoms at either baseline or 6-months. This pattern was also evident for these two symptoms in test-negatives. Similar patterns were observed for validated measures of poor quality of life, emotional and behavioural difficulties, poor well-being and fatigue. Moreover, broadly similar patterns and results were noted for the sub-sample (N = 1808) that had data at baseline, 3-, 6- and 12-months post-test. Interpretation: In CYP, the prevalence of adverse symptoms reported at the time of a positive PCR-test declined over 12-months. Some test-positives and test-negatives reported adverse symptoms for the first time at six- and 12-months post-test, particularly tiredness, shortness of breath, poor quality of life, poor well-being and fatigue suggesting they are likely to be caused by multiple factors. Funding: NIHR/UKRI (ref: COVLT0022).
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Vaccine hesitancy has affected COVID-19 adult vaccination programs in many countries. Data on hesitancy amongst child and adolescent populations is largely confined to parent opinion. We investigated the characteristics of vaccine hesitant children and adolescents using results from a large, school-based self-report survey of the willingness to have a COVID-19 vaccination in students aged 9 -18 years in England. METHODS: Data from the OxWell Student Survey on mental health, life experiences and behaviours were used, collected from four counties across England. Local authority partners recruited schools. The vaccine hesitancy question gave six response options and were clustered to inform delivery: eager and willing were categorised as vaccination 'opt-in', don't know and not bothered categorised as 'undecided', and unwilling and anti-vaccination categorised as 'opt-out'. We conducted a multinomial regression to determine associations between vaccine hesitancy and sociodemographic, health behaviour and social connection variables. FINDINGS: 27,910 students from 180 schools answered the vaccine hesitancy question between 14th May and 21st July 2021, of whom 13984 (50.1%) would opt-in to take a vaccination, 10322 (37.0%) were undecided, and 3604 (12.9%) would opt-out. A lower percentage of younger students reported that they would opt-in to vaccination, for example, 35.7% of 9-year-olds and 51.3% of 13-year-olds compared to 77.8% of 17-year-olds would opt-in to take a vaccination. Students who were 'opt-out' or 'undecided' (a combined 'vaccine hesitant' group) were more likely to come from deprived socioeconomic contexts with higher rates of home rental versus home ownership and their school locations were more likely to be in areas of greater deprivation. They were more likely to smoke or vape, spend longer on social media, feel that they did not belong in their school community but had lower levels of anxiety and depression. The vaccine hesitant students- the undecided and opt-out groups- were similar in profile, although the opt-out students had higher reported confirmed or probable previous COVID-19 infection than the opt-in group, whereas those undecided, did not. INTERPRETATION: If government vaccination strategies move towards vaccinating younger school-aged students, efforts to increase vaccination uptake may be necessary. Compared with students who would opt-in, those who were vaccine hesitant had greater indicators of social deprivation and felt a lack of community cohesion by not feeling a sense of belonging at their school. There were indications that those students who would opt-out had higher levels of marginalisation and mistrust. If programmes are rolled out, focus on hesitant younger students will be important, targeting more marginalised and deprived young people with information from trusted sources utilising social media; improving access to vaccination centres with provision both in and outside school; and addressing fears and worries about the effects of the vaccine. The main limitation of this study is that the participant group may not be wholly representative of England or the UK, which may bias population-level estimates of willingness to be vaccinated. FUNDING: The Westminster Foundation, the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration Oxford and Thames Valley at Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust and the NIHR Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre.
ABSTRACT
Objectives: Face-to-face healthcare, including psychiatric provision, must continue despite reduced interpersonal contact during the COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus) pandemic. Community-based services might use domiciliary visits, consultations in healthcare settings, or remote consultations. Services might also alter direct contact between clinicians. We examined the effects of appointment types and clinician-clinician encounters upon infection rates. Design: Computer simulation. Methods: We modelled a COVID-19-like disease in a hypothetical community healthcare team, their patients, and patients' household contacts (family). In one condition, clinicians met patients and briefly met family (e.g., home visit or collateral history). In another, patients attended alone (e.g., clinic visit), segregated from each other. In another, face-to-face contact was eliminated (e.g., videoconferencing). We also varied clinician-clinician contact; baseline and ongoing "external" infection rates; whether overt symptoms reduced transmission risk behaviourally (e.g., via personal protective equipment, PPE); and household clustering. Results: Service organisation had minimal effects on whole-population infection under our assumptions but materially affected clinician infection. Appointment type and inter-clinician contact had greater effects at low external infection rates and without a behavioural symptom response. Clustering magnified the effect of appointment type. We discuss infection control and other factors affecting appointment choice and team organisation. Conclusions: Distancing between clinicians can have significant effects on team infection. Loss of clinicians to infection likely has an adverse impact on care, not modelled here. Appointments must account for clinical necessity as well as infection control. Interventions to reduce transmission risk can synergize, arguing for maximal distancing and behavioural measures (e.g., PPE) consistent with safe care.