Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 39
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
1.
JMIR Ment Health ; 2021 Dec 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1595164

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Globally, there are fundamental shortcomings in mental health care systems, including restricted access, siloed services, interventions that are poorly matched to service users' needs, underutilisation of personal outcome monitoring to track progress, exclusion of family and carers, and suboptimal experiences of care. Health information technologies (HITs) hold great potential to improve these aspects that underpin enhanced quality of mental health care. OBJECTIVE: Project Synergy aimed to co-design, implement, and evaluate novel HITs, as exemplified by the InnoWell Platform, to work with standard health care organisations. The goals were to deliver improved outcomes for specific populations under focus and support organisations to enact significant system-level reforms. METHODS: Participating health care organisations included: Open Arms - Veterans & Families Counselling (in Sydney and Lismore, New South Wales (NSW)); NSW North Coast headspace centres for youth (Port Macquarie, Coffs Harbour, Grafton, Lismore, Tweed Heads); The Butterfly Foundation's National Helpline for eating disorders; Kildare Road Medical Centre for enhanced primary-care, and Connect to Wellbeing North Coast NSW (administered by Neami National) for population-based intake and assessment. Service users, families and carers, health professionals and administrators of services across Australia were actively engaged in configuration of the InnoWell Platform to meet service needs, identify barriers to and facilitators of quality mental health care, and highlight potentially the best points in the service pathway to integrate the InnoWell Platform. The locally configured InnoWell Platform was then implemented within the respective services. A mixed methods approach, including surveys, semi-structured interviews, and workshops, was used to evaluate the impact of the InnoWell Platform. A participatory systems modelling approach involving co-design with local stakeholders was also undertaken to simulate the likely impact of the platform in combination with other services being considered for implementation within the North Coast Primary Health Network to explore resulting impacts on mental health outcomes, including suicide prevention. RESULTS: Despite overwhelming support for integrating digital health solutions into mental health service settings, and promising impacts of the platform simulated under idealised implementation conditions, our results emphasized that successful implementation is dependent on health professional and service readiness for change, leadership at the local service level, the appropriateness and responsiveness of the technology for the target end users, and, critically, funding models being available to support implementation. The key places of interoperability of digital solutions and a willingness to use technology to coordinate health care system use were also highlighted. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in widespread acceptance of very basic digital health solutions, Project Synergy highlights the critical need to support equity of access to HITs, provide funding for digital infrastructure and digital mental health care, and, to promote actively the use of technology-enabled, coordinated systems of care.

2.
JMIR Serious Games ; 9(4): e29044, 2021 Nov 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1547124

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Poor self-management of heart failure (HF) contributes to devastating health consequences. Our innovative sensor-controlled digital game (SCDG) integrates data from sensors to trigger game rewards, progress, and feedback based on the real-time behaviors of individuals with HF. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare daily weight monitoring and physical activity behavior adherence by older adults using an SCDG intervention versus a sensors-only intervention in a feasibility randomized controlled trial. METHODS: English-speaking adults with HF aged 55 years or older who owned a smartphone and could walk unassisted were recruited from Texas and Oklahoma from November 2019 to August 2020. Both groups were given activity trackers and smart weighing scales to track behaviors for 12 weeks. The feasibility outcomes of recruitment, retention, intervention engagement, and satisfaction were assessed. In addition to daily weight monitoring and physical activity adherence, the participants' knowledge, functional status, quality of life, self-reported HF behaviors, motivation to engage in behaviors, and HF-related hospitalization were also compared between the groups at baseline and at 6, 12, and 24 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 38 participants with HF-intervention group (IG; 19/38, 50%) and control group (CG; 19/38, 50%)-were enrolled in the study. Of the 38 participants, 18 (47%) were women, 18 (47%) were aged 65 years or older, 21 (55%) had been hospitalized with HF in the past 6 months, and 29 (76%) were White. Furthermore, of these 38 participants, 31 (82%)-IG (15/19, 79%) and CG (16/19, 84%)-had both weight monitoring and physical activity data at the end of 12 weeks, and 27 (71%)-IG (14/19, 74%) and CG (13/19, 68%)-participated in follow-up assessments at 24 weeks. For the IG participants who installed the SCDG app (15/19, 79%), the number of days each player opened the game app was strongly associated with the number of days the player engaged in weight monitoring (r=0.72; P=.04) and the number of days with physical activity step data (r=0.9; P<.001). The IG participants who completed the satisfaction survey (13/19, 68%) reported that the SCDG was easy to use. Trends of improvement in daily weight monitoring and physical activity in the IG, as well as within-group improvements in HF functional status, quality of life, knowledge, self-efficacy, and HF hospitalization in both groups, were observed in this feasibility trial. CONCLUSIONS: Playing an SCDG on smartphones was feasible and acceptable for older adults with HF for motivating daily weight monitoring and physical activity. A larger efficacy trial of the SCDG intervention will be needed to validate trends of improvement in daily weight monitoring and physical activity behaviors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03947983; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03947983.

3.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2021 Nov 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1522160

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Since its emergence in late 2019, SARS-CoV-2 continues to pose a risk to healthcare personnel (HCP) and patients in healthcare settings. Although all clinical interactions likely carry some risk of transmission, human actions like coughing and care activities like aerosol-generating procedures likely have a higher risk of transmission. The rapid emergence and global spread of SARS-CoV-2 continues to create significant challenges in healthcare facilities, particularly with shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) used by HCP. Evidence-based recommendations for what PPE to use in conventional, contingency, and crisis standards of care continue to be needed. Where evidence is lacking, the development of specific research questions can help direct funders and investigators. OBJECTIVE: Develop evidence-based rapid guidelines intended to support HCP in their decisions about infection prevention when caring for patients with suspected or known COVID-19. METHODS: IDSA formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel including frontline clinicians, infectious disease specialists, experts in infection control, and guideline methodologists with representation from the disciplines of public health, medical microbiology, pediatrics, critical care medicine and gastroenterology. The process followed a rapid recommendation checklist. The panel prioritized questions and outcomes. Then a systematic review of the peer-reviewed and grey literature was conducted. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations. RESULTS: The IDSA guideline panel agreed on eight recommendations, including two updated recommendations and one new recommendation added since the first version of the guideline. Narrative summaries of other interventions undergoing evaluations are also included. CONCLUSIONS: Using a combination of direct and indirect evidence, the panel was able to provide recommendations for eight specific questions on the use of PPE for HCP providing care for patients with suspected or known COVID-19. Where evidence was lacking, attempts were made to provide potential avenues for investigation. There remain significant gaps in the understanding of the transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 and PPE recommendations may need to be modified in response to new evidence. These recommendations should serve as a minimum for PPE use in healthcare facilities and do not preclude decisions based on local risk assessments or requirements of local health jurisdictions or other regulatory bodies.

5.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(45): 1579-1583, 2021 Nov 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1513271

ABSTRACT

The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 (BNT162b2) vaccine is a lipid nanoparticle-formulated, nucleoside-modified mRNA vaccine encoding the prefusion spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. On August 23, 2021, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a Biologics License Application (BLA) for use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, marketed as Comirnaty (Pfizer, Inc.), in persons aged ≥16 years (1). The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine is also recommended for adolescents aged 12-15 years under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) (1). All persons aged ≥12 years are recommended to receive 2 doses (30 µg, 0.3 mL each), administered 3 weeks apart (2,3). As of November 2, 2021, approximately 248 million doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine had been administered to persons aged ≥12 years in the United States.* On October 29, 2021, FDA issued an EUA amendment for a new formulation of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for use in children aged 5-11 years, administered as 2 doses (10 µg, 0.2 mL each), 3 weeks apart (Table) (1). On November 2, 2021, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued an interim recommendation† for use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 5-11 years for the prevention of COVID-19. To guide its deliberations regarding recommendations for the vaccine, ACIP used the Evidence to Recommendation (EtR) Framework§ and incorporated a Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.¶ The ACIP recommendation for the use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 5-11 years under an EUA is interim and will be updated as additional information becomes available. The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine has high efficacy (>90%) against COVID-19 in children aged 5-11 years, and ACIP determined benefits outweigh risks for vaccination. Vaccination is important to protect children against COVID-19 and reduce community transmission of SARS-CoV-2.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Advisory Committees , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Child , Drug Approval , Humans , Immunization/standards , Immunization Schedule , United States/epidemiology , United States Food and Drug Administration
6.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(44): 1545-1552, 2021 Nov 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1502902

ABSTRACT

Three COVID-19 vaccines are currently approved under a Biologics License Application (BLA) or authorized under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and recommended for primary vaccination by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) in the United States: the 2-dose mRNA-based Pfizer-BioNTech/Comirnaty and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines and the single-dose adenovirus vector-based Janssen (Johnson & Johnson) COVID-19 vaccine (1,2) (Box 1). In August 2021, FDA amended the EUAs for the two mRNA COVID-19 vaccines to allow for an additional primary dose in certain immunocompromised recipients of an initial mRNA COVID-19 vaccination series (1). During September-October 2021, FDA amended the EUAs to allow for a COVID-19 vaccine booster dose following a primary mRNA COVID-19 vaccination series in certain recipients aged ≥18 years who are at increased risk for serious complications of COVID-19 or exposure to SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19), as well as in recipients aged ≥18 years of Janssen COVID-19 vaccine (1) (Table). For the purposes of these recommendations, an additional primary (hereafter additional) dose refers to a dose of vaccine administered to persons who likely did not mount a protective immune response after initial vaccination. A booster dose refers to a dose of vaccine administered to enhance or restore protection by the primary vaccination, which might have waned over time. Health care professionals play a critical role in COVID-19 vaccination efforts, including for primary, additional, and booster vaccination, particularly to protect patients who are at increased risk for severe illness and death.


Subject(s)
Advisory Committees , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Immunization/standards , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Adolescent , Adult , Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Drug Approval , Humans , Middle Aged , United States/epidemiology , United States Food and Drug Administration , Young Adult
7.
Front Psychiatry ; 12: 759343, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1497167

ABSTRACT

Background: Current global challenges are generating extensive social disruption and uncertainty that have the potential to undermine the mental health, wellbeing, and futures of young people. The scale and complexity of challenges call for engagement with systems science-based decision analytic tools that can capture the dynamics and interrelationships between physical, social, economic, and health systems, and support effective national and regional responses. At the outset of the pandemic mental health-related systems models were developed for the Australian context, however, the extent to which findings are generalisable across diverse regions remains unknown. This study aims to explore the context dependency of systems modelling insights. Methods: This study will employ a comparative case study design, applying participatory system dynamics modelling across eight diverse regions of Australia to answer three primary research questions: (i) Will current regional differences in key youth mental health outcomes be exacerbated in forward projections due to the social and economic impacts of COVID-19?; (ii) What combination of social policies and health system strengthening initiatives will deliver the greatest impacts within each region?; (iii) To what extent are optimal strategic responses consistent across the diverse regions? We provide a detailed technical blueprint as a potential springboard for more timely construction and deployment of systems models in international contexts to facilitate a broader examination of the question of generalisability and inform investments in the mental health and wellbeing of young people in the post COVID-19 recovery. Discussion: Computer simulation is known as the third pillar of science (after theory and experiment). Simulation allows researchers and decision makers to move beyond what can be manipulated within the scale, time, and ethical limits of the experimental approach. Such learning when achieved collectively, has the potential to enhance regional self-determination, help move beyond incremental adjustments to the status quo, and catalyze transformational change. This research seeks to advance efforts to establish regional decision support infrastructure and empower communities to effectively respond. In addition, this research seeks to move towards an understanding of the extent to which systems modelling insights may be relevant to the global mental health response by encouraging researchers to use, challenge, and advance the existing work for scientific and societal progress.

8.
Aust Health Rev ; 2021 Jun 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1475558

ABSTRACT

This paper presents a case study of an innovative direct-to-consumer preclinic triage system designed to reduce predicted peak demand for Australian mental health services as a result of COVID-19 and its associated socioeconomic consequences by guiding Australians to the right mental health care first time. Our innovative, digital health solution comprises two components: (1) a highly personalised and measurement-based model of care (Brain and Mind Centre model of care) that considers both the heterogeneity of mental disorders and other underlying comorbidities, as well as clinical staging; and (2) a health information technology (i.e. the InnoWell Platform). This digital health solution has been embedded as part of standard service delivery into a community-based intake service, thus resulting in a redesigned service model. The service model is currently being implemented as part of a pilot feasibility study, the marker of acceptability at the health professional and service level, and is now under active evaluation to determine its effect on outcomes for consumers, health professionals and the service. For the purposes of this paper, this model served as a prototype for the preclinic triage system that was conceptualised for national scalability at the primary health network level. When implemented at a national level, our direct-to-consumer preclinic triage system is expected to be an effective population health demand management strategy to address the rapidly emerging mental health demand crisis in Australia, and is aligned with the recent recommendation from the Productivity Commission to develop a sustainable national digital platform to facilitate the assessment and referral process to ensure access to mental health care matched to an individual's level of need.What is known about the topic?Although there is increased recognition of the mental health demand crisis in Australia as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, little has been done to 'flatten' the curve. The Australian Government committed additional funding to support the Better Access Pandemic Support measure; however, this approach to care fails to appreciate both the disparities in service availability across Australia and the gap fees that are prohibitive to some of those seeking help. Furthermore, the expansion of this program may only result in those in care remaining in care, thus further delaying access to those in need.What does this paper add?This paper describes a digital health solution, comprised of a highly personalised and measurement-based model of care coupled with a health information technology, that has been embedded as part of standard service delivery. Consumers seeking mental health care complete a multidimensional self-report assessment via the technology, the results of which are available in real-time and used to facilitate triage to pathways of care as indicated by the severity of the consumer's illness and level of need to more effectively and efficiently allocate consumers to care. The redesigned service model is now under active evaluation to determine its effects on outcomes at consumer, health professional and service levels.What are the implications for practitioners?The redesigned local service model served as a prototype for our innovative direct-to-consumer preclinic triage system specifically designed to allocate consumers to self-management, ambulatory care or acute care based on clinical stage and level of need. It is our hypothesis that the preclinic triage system will be an effective population health demand management strategy. Importantly, the proposed preclinic triage system aligns with the recent recommendation from the Productivity Commission for the Australian Government to fund the development and sustained implementation of a digital platform to facilitate assessment and referral to evidence-based interventions matched to a consumer's level of need.

9.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(38): 1344-1348, 2021 Sep 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1468851

ABSTRACT

The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine (BNT162b2) is a lipid nanoparticle-formulated, nucleoside mRNA vaccine encoding the prefusion spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine consists of 2 intramuscular doses (30 µg, 0.3 mL each) administered 3 weeks apart. In December 2020, the vaccine was granted Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as well as an interim recommendation for use among persons aged ≥16 years by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) (1). In May 2021, the EUA and interim ACIP recommendations for Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine were extended to adolescents aged 12-15 years (2). During December 14, 2020-September 1, 2021, approximately 211 million doses of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine were administered in the United States.* On August 23, 2021, FDA approved a Biologics License Application for use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, Comirnaty (Pfizer, Inc.), in persons aged ≥16 years (3). The ACIP COVID-19 Vaccines Work Group's conclusions regarding the evidence for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine were presented to ACIP at a public meeting on August 30, 2021. To guide its deliberations regarding the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, ACIP used the Evidence to Recommendation (EtR) Framework,† and incorporated a Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.§ In addition to initial clinical trial data, ACIP considered new information gathered in the 8 months since issuance of the interim recommendation for Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, including additional follow-up time in the clinical trial, real-world vaccine effectiveness studies, and postauthorization vaccine safety monitoring. The additional information increased certainty that benefits from prevention of asymptomatic infection, COVID-19, and associated hospitalization and death outweighs vaccine-associated risks. On August 30, 2021, ACIP issued a recommendation¶ for use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in persons aged ≥16 years for the prevention of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19/prevention & control , Immunization/standards , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Adolescent , Adult , Advisory Committees , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Drug Approval , Female , Humans , Male , United States/epidemiology , Vaccines, Synthetic/administration & dosage , Young Adult
10.
J Med Internet Res ; 23(9): e26317, 2021 09 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1443941

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Along with the proliferation of health information technologies (HITs), there is a growing need to understand the potential privacy risks associated with using such tools. Although privacy policies are designed to inform consumers, such policies have consistently been found to be confusing and lack transparency. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to present consumer preferences for accessing privacy information; develop and apply a privacy policy risk assessment tool to assess whether existing HITs meet the recommended privacy policy standards; and propose guidelines to assist health professionals and service providers with understanding the privacy risks associated with HITs, so that they can confidently promote their safe use as a part of care. METHODS: In phase 1, participatory design workshops were conducted with young people who were attending a participating headspace center, their supportive others, and health professionals and service providers from the centers. The findings were knowledge translated to determine participant preferences for the presentation and availability of privacy information and the functionality required to support its delivery. Phase 2 included the development of the 23-item privacy policy risk assessment tool, which incorporated material from international privacy literature and standards. This tool was then used to assess the privacy policies of 34 apps and e-tools. In phase 3, privacy guidelines, which were derived from learnings from a collaborative consultation process with key stakeholders, were developed to assist health professionals and service providers with understanding the privacy risks associated with incorporating HITs as a part of clinical care. RESULTS: When considering the use of HITs, the participatory design workshop participants indicated that they wanted privacy information to be easily accessible, transparent, and user-friendly to enable them to clearly understand what personal and health information will be collected and how these data will be shared and stored. The privacy policy review revealed consistently poor readability and transparency, which limited the utility of these documents as a source of information. Therefore, to enable informed consent, the privacy guidelines provided ensure that health professionals and consumers are fully aware of the potential for privacy risks in using HITs to support health and well-being. CONCLUSIONS: A lack of transparency in privacy policies has the potential to undermine consumers' ability to trust that the necessary measures are in place to secure and protect the privacy of their personal and health information, thus precluding their willingness to engage with HITs. The application of the privacy guidelines will improve the confidence of health professionals and service providers in the privacy of consumer data, thus enabling them to recommend HITs to provide or support care.


Subject(s)
Medical Informatics , Privacy , Adolescent , Humans , Informed Consent , Policy , Risk Assessment
11.
Mol Genet Metab Rep ; 29: 100802, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1428600

ABSTRACT

Fabry disease is an X linked disease caused by pathogenic variants in the GLA gene. The cardiovascular and renal systems are most affected in Fabry patients and may require heart or kidney transplants in the late stages of the disease depending on severity of manifestations. Enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) has proven to delay progression of Fabry disease considerably, especially when started early in life. Current research has shown that individuals who have received cardiac or renal transplants or are currently on dialysis have the greatest probability of developing severe manifestations of COVID-19. It has also been shown that people who contract COVID-19 experience a rapid increase in cytokine levels which can lead to a prothrombotic state and have a greater risk in the presence of comorbidities. A history of cardiac or renal transplants as well as the naturally elevated cytokine levels in Fabry disease make it likely that COVID-19 could have a greater impact on the health of these patients. We report the case of a 67-year-old male with diabetes mellitus, history of kidney transplant, and Fabry disease treated late in progression of the disease first with agalsidase beta ERT, then oral migalastat who developed severe manifestations of COVID-19. The autopsy findings showed acute and organizing hyaline membrane disease consistent with COVID-19 pneumonia and secondary invasive bronchopulmonary aspergillosis with cavitary lesion formation. The sections of the heart showed scattered subendocardial fibrosis, and the transplanted kidneys showed thyroidization and interstitial nephritis potentially secondary to COVID-19, in addition to his long-standing renal disease. This case report serves to chronicle complications in a complex patient with late stage Fabry disease and multiple COVID-19 related complications who succumbed from respiratory failure despite the advanced management for the COVID-19 infection.

12.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(9): e2125524, 2021 09 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1414844

ABSTRACT

Importance: As of May 2021, more than 32 million cases of COVID-19 have been confirmed in the United States, resulting in more than 615 000 deaths. Anaphylactic reactions associated with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-authorized mRNA COVID-19 vaccines have been reported. Objective: To characterize the immunologic mechanisms underlying allergic reactions to these vaccines. Design, Setting, and Participants: This case series included 22 patients with suspected allergic reactions to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines between December 18, 2020, and January 27, 2021, at a large regional health care network. Participants were individuals who received at least 1 of the following International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision anaphylaxis codes: T78.2XXA, T80.52XA, T78.2XXD, or E949.9, with documentation of COVID-19 vaccination. Suspected allergy cases were identified and invited for follow-up allergy testing. Exposures: FDA-authorized mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Main Outcomes and Measures: Allergic reactions were graded using standard definitions, including Brighton criteria. Skin prick testing was conducted to polyethylene glycol (PEG) and polysorbate 80 (P80). Histamine (1 mg/mL) and filtered saline (negative control) were used for internal validation. Basophil activation testing after stimulation for 30 minutes at 37 °C was also conducted. Concentrations of immunoglobulin (Ig) G and IgE antibodies to PEG were obtained to determine possible mechanisms. Results: Of 22 patients (20 [91%] women; mean [SD] age, 40.9 [10.3] years; 15 [68%] with clinical allergy history), 17 (77%) met Brighton anaphylaxis criteria. All reactions fully resolved. Of patients who underwent skin prick tests, 0 of 11 tested positive to PEG, 0 of 11 tested positive to P80, and 1 of 10 (10%) tested positive to the same brand of mRNA vaccine used to vaccinate that individual. Among these same participants, 10 of 11 (91%) had positive basophil activation test results to PEG and 11 of 11 (100%) had positive basophil activation test results to their administered mRNA vaccine. No PEG IgE was detected; instead, PEG IgG was found in tested individuals who had an allergy to the vaccine. Conclusions and Relevance: Based on this case series, women and those with a history of allergic reactions appear at have an elevated risk of mRNA vaccine allergy. Immunological testing suggests non-IgE-mediated immune responses to PEG may be responsible in most individuals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/diagnosis , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Hypersensitivity/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Risk Factors , United States/epidemiology , United States Food and Drug Administration/organization & administration , United States Food and Drug Administration/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/adverse effects
13.
J Allergy Clin Immunol ; 148(5): 1176-1191, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1401557

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) varies significantly among persons of similar age and is higher in males. Age-independent, sex-biased differences in susceptibility to severe COVID-19 may be ascribable to deficits in a sexually dimorphic protective attribute that we termed immunologic resilience (IR). OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine whether deficits in IR that antedate or are induced by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection independently predict COVID-19 mortality. METHODS: IR levels were quantified with 2 novel metrics: immune health grades (IHG-I [best] to IHG-IV) to gauge CD8+ and CD4+ T-cell count equilibrium, and blood gene expression signatures. IR metrics were examined in a prospective COVID-19 cohort (n = 522); primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Associations of IR metrics with outcomes in non-COVID-19 cohorts (n = 13,461) provided the framework for linking pre-COVID-19 IR status to IR during COVID-19, as well as to COVID-19 outcomes. RESULTS: IHG-I, tracking high-grade equilibrium between CD8+ and CD4+ T-cell counts, was the most common grade (73%) among healthy adults, particularly in females. SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with underrepresentation of IHG-I (21%) versus overrepresentation (77%) of IHG-II or IHG-IV, especially in males versus females (P < .01). Presentation with IHG-I was associated with 88% lower mortality, after controlling for age and sex; reduced risk of hospitalization and respiratory failure; lower plasma IL-6 levels; rapid clearance of nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 burden; and gene expression signatures correlating with survival that signify immunocompetence and controlled inflammation. In non-COVID-19 cohorts, IR-preserving metrics were associated with resistance to progressive influenza or HIV infection, as well as lower 9-year mortality in the Framingham Heart Study, especially in females. CONCLUSIONS: Preservation of immunocompetence with controlled inflammation during antigenic challenges is a hallmark of IR and associates with longevity and AIDS resistance. Independent of age, a male-biased proclivity to degrade IR before and/or during SARS-CoV-2 infection predisposes to severe COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/immunology , HIV Infections/epidemiology , HIV-1/physiology , Respiratory Insufficiency/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Sex Factors , T-Lymphocytes/immunology , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/mortality , Cohort Studies , Disease Resistance , Female , Humans , Immunocompetence , Interleukin-6/blood , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Severity of Illness Index , Survival Analysis , Transcriptome/immunology , United States/epidemiology , Viral Load
14.
N Engl J Med ; 385(12): 1138-1140, 2021 09 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1371628
15.
Inquiry ; 58: 469580211035742, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1360598

ABSTRACT

Medical misinformation (MM) is a problem for both medical practitioners and patients in the 21st century. Medical practitioners have anecdotally reported encounters with patient-held misinformation, but to date we lack evidence that quantifies this phenomenon. We surveyed licensed practitioners in the state of North Carolina to better understand how often patients mention MM in the clinical setting, and if medical practitioners are trained to engage with patients in these specific conversations. We administered an anonymous, online survey to physicians and physician assistants licensed to practice in the state of North Carolina. Questions focused on demographics, clinical encounters with MM, and training to discuss MM with patients. We received over 2800 responses and analyzed 2183 after removing ineligible responses. Our results showed that most respondents encountered MM from patients (94.2% (2047/2183)), with no significant differences between clinical specialty, time spent in practice, or community type. When asked about specific training, 18% (380/2081) reported formal experiences and 39% (807/289) reported informal experiences. MM has been salient due to the COVID-19 pandemic; however, it was present before and will remain after the pandemic. Given that MM is widespread but practitioners lack training on engaging patients in these conversations, a sustained effort to specifically train current and future practitioners on how to engage patients about MM would be an important step toward mitigating the spread of MM.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Communication , Humans , North Carolina , Perception , Pilot Projects , SARS-CoV-2
16.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(32): 1094-1099, 2021 Aug 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1355300

ABSTRACT

In December 2020, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs) for Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines, and in February 2021, FDA issued an EUA for the Janssen (Johnson & Johnson) COVID-19 vaccine. After each EUA, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued interim recommendations for vaccine use; currently Pfizer-BioNTech is authorized and recommended for persons aged ≥12 years and Moderna and Janssen for persons aged ≥18 years (1-3). Both Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, administered as 2-dose series, are mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines, whereas the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine, administered as a single dose, is a recombinant replication-incompetent adenovirus-vector vaccine. As of July 22, 2021, 187 million persons in the United States had received at least 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine (4); close monitoring of safety surveillance has demonstrated that serious adverse events after COVID-19 vaccination are rare (5,6). Three medical conditions have been reported in temporal association with receipt of COVID-19 vaccines. Two of these (thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome [TTS], a rare syndrome characterized by venous or arterial thrombosis and thrombocytopenia, and Guillain-Barré syndrome [GBS], a rare autoimmune neurologic disorder characterized by ascending weakness and paralysis) have been reported after Janssen COVID-19 vaccination. One (myocarditis, cardiac inflammation) has been reported after Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccination or Moderna COVID-19 vaccination, particularly after the second dose; these were reviewed together and will hereafter be referred to as mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. ACIP has met three times to review the data associated with these reports of serious adverse events and has comprehensively assessed the benefits and risks associated with receipt of these vaccines. During the most recent meeting in July 2021, ACIP determined that, overall, the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination in preventing COVID-19 morbidity and mortality outweigh the risks for these rare serious adverse events in adults aged ≥18 years; this balance of benefits and risks varied by age and sex. ACIP continues to recommend COVID-19 vaccination in all persons aged ≥12 years. CDC and FDA continue to closely monitor reports of serious adverse events and will present any additional data to ACIP for consideration. Information regarding risks and how they vary by age and sex and type of vaccine should be disseminated to providers, vaccine recipients, and the public.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , COVID-19/prevention & control , Immunization/standards , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Adult , Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems , Advisory Committees , COVID-19/epidemiology , Drug Approval , Humans , United States/epidemiology , Vaccines, Synthetic
17.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2021 Jul 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1303899

ABSTRACT

The clinical significance of SARS CoV-2 RNA in stool remains uncertain. We found that extrapulmonary dissemination of infection to the gastrointestinal (GI) tract, assessed by the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in stool, is associated with decreased COVID-19 survival. Measurement of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in stool may have utility for clinical risk assessment.

18.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(27): 977-982, 2021 Jul 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1302822

ABSTRACT

In December 2020, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs) for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 (BNT162b2) vaccine and the Moderna COVID-19 (mRNA-1273) vaccine,† and the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued interim recommendations for their use in persons aged ≥16 years and ≥18 years, respectively.§ In May 2021, FDA expanded the EUA for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine to include adolescents aged 12-15 years; ACIP recommends that all persons aged ≥12 years receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Both Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines are mRNA vaccines encoding the stabilized prefusion spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Both mRNA vaccines were authorized and recommended as a 2-dose schedule, with second doses administered 21 days (Pfizer-BioNTech) or 28 days (Moderna) after the first dose. After reports of myocarditis and pericarditis in mRNA vaccine recipients,¶ which predominantly occurred in young males after the second dose, an ACIP meeting was rapidly convened to review reported cases of myocarditis and pericarditis and discuss the benefits and risks of mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in the United States. Myocarditis is an inflammation of the heart muscle; if it is accompanied by pericarditis, an inflammation of the thin tissue surrounding the heart (the pericardium), it is referred to as myopericarditis. Hereafter, myocarditis is used to refer to myocarditis, pericarditis, or myopericarditis. On June 23, 2021, after reviewing available evidence including that for risks of myocarditis, ACIP determined that the benefits of using mRNA COVID-19 vaccines under the FDA's EUA clearly outweigh the risks in all populations, including adolescents and young adults. The EUA has been modified to include information on myocarditis after receipt of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. The EUA fact sheets should be provided before vaccination; in addition, CDC has developed patient and provider education materials about the possibility of myocarditis and symptoms of concern, to ensure prompt recognition and management of myocarditis.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Immunization/standards , Myocarditis/epidemiology , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Vaccines, Synthetic/administration & dosage , Vaccines, Synthetic/adverse effects , Adolescent , Adult , Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems , Advisory Committees , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Child , Female , Humans , Male , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
19.
JMIR Res Protoc ; 10(6): e24697, 2021 Jun 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1290333

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Australia's mental health care system has long been fragmented and under-resourced, with services falling well short of demand. In response, the World Economic Forum has recently called for the rapid deployment of smarter, digitally enhanced health services to facilitate effective care coordination and address issues of demand. The University of Sydney's Brain and Mind Centre (BMC) has developed an innovative digital health solution that incorporates 2 components: a highly personalized and measurement-based (data-driven) model of youth mental health care and a health information technology (HIT) registered on the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods. Importantly, research into implementation of such solutions considers education and training of clinicians to be essential to adoption and optimization of use in standard clinical practice. The BMC's Youth Mental Health and Technology Program has subsequently developed a comprehensive education and training program to accompany implementation of the digital health solution. OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the protocol for an evaluation study to assess the effectiveness of the education and training program on the adoption and optimization of use of the digital health solution in service delivery. It also describes the proposed tools to assess the impact of training on knowledge and skills of mental health clinicians. METHODS: The evaluation study will use the Kirkpatrick Evaluation Model as a framework with 4 levels of analysis: Reaction (to education and training), Learning (knowledge acquired), Behavior (practice change), and Results (client outcomes). Quantitative and qualitative data will be collected using a variety of tools, including evaluation forms, pre- and postknowledge questionnaires, skill development and behavior change scales, as well as a real-time clinical practice audit. RESULTS: This project is funded by philanthropic funding from Future Generation Global. Ethics approval has been granted via Sydney Local Health District's Human Research Ethics Committee. At the time of this publication, clinicians and their services were being recruited to this study. The first results are expected to be submitted for publication in 2021. CONCLUSIONS: The education and training program teaches clinicians the necessary knowledge and skills to assess, monitor, and manage complex needs; mood and psychotic syndromes; and trajectories of youth mental ill-health using a HIT that facilitates a highly personalized and measurement-based model of care. The digital health solution may therefore guide clinicians to help young people recover low functioning associated with subthreshold diagnostic presentations and prevent progression to more serious mental ill-health. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/24697.

20.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2021 Jun 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1276158

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Although mRNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccines report ≥90% efficacy, breakthrough infections occur. Little is known about the effectiveness of these vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 variants, including the highly-prevalent B.1.427/B.1.429 variant in California.. METHODS: In this quality improvement project, we collected demographic and clinical information from post-vaccine SARS-CoV-2 cases (PVSCs), defined as health care personnel (HCP) with positive SARS-CoV-2 NAAT after receiving ≥1 vaccine dose. Available specimens were tested for L452R, N501Y and E484K mutations by RT-PCR. Mutation prevalence was compared among unvaccinated, early post-vaccinated (<=14 days after dose 1), partially vaccinated (positive test >14 days after dose 1 and ≤14 days after dose 2) and fully vaccinated (>14 days after dose 2) PVSCs. RESULTS: From December 2020-April 2021, >=23,090 HCPS received at least1 dose of an mRNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, and 660 HCP cases of SARS-CoV-2 occurred of which 189 were PVSCs. Among the PVSCs, 114 (60.3%), 49 (25.9%) and 26 (13.8%) were early post-vaccination, partially vaccinated, and fully vaccinated, respectively. Of 261 available samples from vaccinated and unvaccinated HCP, 103 (39.5%), including 42 PVSCs (36.5%), had L452R mutation presumed to be B.1.427/B.1.429,. When adjusted for community prevalence of B.1.427/B.1.429, PVSCs did not have significantly elevated risk for infection with B.1.427/B.1.429 compared with unvaccinated HCP. CONCLUSIONS: Most PVSCs occurred prior to expected onset of full, vaccine-derived immunity. Presumptive B.1.427/B.1.429 was not more prevalent in post-vaccine cases than in unvaccinated SARS-CoV-2 HCP. Continued infection control measures, particularly ≤14 days post-vaccination, and continued variant surveillance in PVSCs is imperative to control future SARS-CoV-2 surges.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...