Global value chains for medical gloves during the COVID-19 pandemic: Confronting forced labour through public procurement and crisis

This paper evaluates ways in which labour issues in global value chains for medical gloves have been affected by, and addressed through, the COVID-19 pandemic. It focuses on production in Malaysia and supply to the United Kingdom's National Health Service and draws on a large-scale survey with workers and interviews with UK government officials, suppliers and buyers. Adopting a Global Value Chain (GVC) framework, the paper shows how forced labour endemic in the sector was exacerbated during the pandemic in the context of increased demand for gloves. Attempts at remediation are shown to operate through both a reconfigured value chain in which power shifted dramatically to the manufacturers and a context where public procurement became higher in profile than ever before. It is argued that the purchasing power of governments must be leveraged in ways that more meaningfully address labour issues, and that this must be part of value chain resilience. © 2022 The Authors. Global Networks published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Trends in osteoporosis care patterns during the COVID-19 pandemic in Alberta, Canada.

PURPOSE/INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to describe osteoporosis-related care patterns during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Alberta, Canada, relative to the 3-year preceding. METHODS: A repeated cross-sectional study design encompassing 3-month periods of continuous administrative health data between March 15, 2017, and September 14, 2020, described osteoporosis-related healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and treatment patterns. Outcomes included patients with osteoporosis-related healthcare encounters, physician visits, diagnostic and laboratory test volumes, and treatment initiations and disruptions. The percent change between outcomes was calculated, averaged across the control periods (2017-2019), relative to the COVID-19 periods (2020). RESULTS: Relative to the average control March to June period, all HCRU declined during the corresponding COVID-19 period. There was a reduction of 14% in patients with osteoporosis healthcare encounters, 13% in general practitioner visits, 9% in specialist practitioner visits, 47% in bone mineral density tests, and 13% in vitamin D tests. Treatment initiations declined 43%, 26%, and 35% for oral bisphosphonates, intravenous bisphosphonates, and denosumab, respectively. Slight increases were observed in the proportion of patients with treatment disruptions. In the subsequent June to September period, HCRU either returned to or surpassed pre-pandemic levels, when including telehealth visits accounting for 33-45% of healthcare encounters during the COVID periods. Oral bisphosphonate treatment initiations remained lower than pre-pandemic levels. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the COVID-19 pandemic and corresponding public health lockdowns further heightened the "crisis" around the known gap in osteoporosis care and altered the provision of care (e.g., use of telehealth and initiation of treatment). Osteoporosis has a known substantial care and management disparity, which has been classified as a crisis. The COVID-19 pandemic created additional burden on osteoporosis patient care with healthcare encounters, physician visits, diagnostic and laboratory tests, and treatment initiations all declining during the initial pandemic period, relative to previous years.

Trends in osteoporotic fracture and related in-hospital complications during the COVID-19 pandemic in Alberta, Canada.

Fragility fractures (i.e., low-energy fractures) account for most fractures among older Canadians and are associated with significant increases in morbidity and mortality. Study results suggest that low-energy fracture rates (associated with surgical intervention and outcomes) declined slightly, but largely remained stable in the first few months of the COVID-19 pandemic. PURPOSE/INTRODUCTION: This study describes rates of low-energy fractures, time-to-surgery, complications, and deaths post-surgery in patients with fractures during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic in Alberta, Canada, compared to the three years prior. METHODS: A repeated cross-sectional study was conducted using provincial-level administrative health data. Outcomes were assessed in 3-month periods in the 3 years preceding the COVID-19 pandemic and in the first two 3-month periods after restrictions were implemented. Patterns of fracture- and hospital-related outcomes over the control years (2017-2019) and COVID-19 restrictions periods (2020) were calculated. RESULTS: Relative to the average from the control periods, there was a slight decrease in the absolute number of low-energy fractures (n = 4733 versus n = 4308) during the first COVID-19 period, followed by a slight rise in the second COVID-19 period (n = 4520 versus n = 4831). While the absolute number of patients with low-energy fractures receiving surgery within the same episode of care decreased slightly during the COVID-19 periods, the proportion receiving surgery and the proportion receiving surgery within 24 h of admission remained stable. Across all periods, hip fractures accounted for the majority of patients with low-energy fractures receiving surgery (range: 58.9-64.2%). Patients with complications following surgery and in-hospital deaths following fracture repair decreased slightly during the COVID-19 periods. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that low-energy fracture rates, associated surgeries, and surgical outcomes declined slightly, but largely remained stable in the first few months of the pandemic. Further investigation is warranted to explore patterns during subsequent COVID-19 waves when the healthcare system experienced severe strain.

Anaesthetists' current practice and perceptions of aerosol-generating procedures: a mixed-methods study.

The evidence base surrounding the transmission risk of 'aerosol-generating procedures' has evolved primarily through quantification of aerosol concentrations during clinical practice. Consequently, infection prevention and control guidelines are undergoing continual reassessment. This mixed-methods study aimed to explore the perceptions of practicing anaesthetists regarding aerosol-generating procedures. An online survey was distributed to the Membership Engagement Group of the Royal College of Anaesthetists during November 2021. The survey included five clinical scenarios to identify the personal approach of respondents to precautions, their hospital's policies and the associated impact on healthcare provision. A purposive sample was selected for interviews to explore the reasoning behind their perceptions and behaviours in greater depth. A total of 333 survey responses were analysed quantitatively. Transcripts from 18 interviews were coded and analysed thematically. The sample was broadly representative of the UK anaesthetic workforce. Most respondents and their hospitals were aware of, supported and adhered to UK guidance. However, there were examples of substantial divergence from these guidelines at both individual and hospital level. For example, 40 (12%) requested respiratory protective equipment and 63 (20%) worked in hospitals that required it to be worn whilst performing tracheal intubation in SARS-CoV-2 negative patients. Additionally, 173 (52%) wore respiratory protective equipment whilst inserting supraglottic airway devices. Regarding the use of respiratory protective equipment and fallow times in the operating theatre: 305 (92%) perceived reduced efficiency; 376 (83%) perceived a negative impact on teamworking; 201 (64%) were worried about environmental impact; and 255 (77%) reported significant problems with communication. However, 269 (63%) felt the negative impacts of respiratory protection equipment were appropriately balanced against the risks of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Attitudes were polarised about the prospect of moving away from using respiratory protective equipment. Participants' perceived risk from COVID-19 correlated with concern regarding stepdown (Spearman's test, R = 0.36, p < 0.001). Attitudes towards aerosol-generating procedures and the need for respiratory protective equipment are evolving and this information can be used to inform strategies to facilitate successful adoption of revised guidelines.

Which animals are at risk? Predicting species susceptibility to Covid-19

In only a few months, the novel coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused a global pandemic, leaving physicians, scientists, and public health officials racing to understand, treat, and contain this zoonotic disease. SARS-CoV-2 has made the leap from animals to humans, but little is known about variations in species susceptibility that could identify potential reservoir species, animal models, and the risk to pets, wildlife, and livestock. While there is evidence that certain species, such as cats, are susceptible, the vast majority of animal species, including those in close contact with humans, have unknown susceptibility. Hence, methods to predict their infection risk are urgently needed. SARS-CoV-2 spike protein binding to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) is critical for viral cell entry and infection. Here we identified key ACE2 residues that distinguish susceptible from resistant species using in-depth sequence and structural analyses of ACE2 and its binding to SARS-CoV-2. Our findings have important implications for identification of ACE2 and SARS-CoV-2 residues for therapeutic targeting and identification of animal species with increased susceptibility for infection on which to focus research and protection measures for environmental and public health.