Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 17 de 17
Filter
1.
Lancet Respir Med ; 2022 Jun 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1882672

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Early intramuscular administration of SARS-CoV-2-neutralising monoclonal antibody combination, tixagevimab-cilgavimab, to non-hospitalised adults with mild to moderate COVID-19 has potential to prevent disease progression. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of tixagevimab-cilgavimab in preventing progression to severe COVID-19 or death. METHODS: TACKLE is an ongoing, phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study conducted at 95 sites in the USA, Latin America, Europe, and Japan. Eligible participants were non-hospitalised adults aged 18 years or older with a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (determined by RT-PCR or an antigen test) from any respiratory tract specimen collected 3 days or less before enrolment and who had not received a COVID-19 vaccination. A WHO Clinical Progression Scale score from more than 1 to less than 4 was required for inclusion and participants had to receive the study drug 7 days or less from self-reported onset of mild to moderate COVID-19 symptoms or measured fever. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either a single tixagevimab-cilgavimab 600 mg dose (two consecutive 3 mL intramuscular injections, one each of 300 mg tixagevimab and 300 mg cilgavimab) or placebo. Randomisation was stratified (using central blocked randomisation with randomly varying block sizes) by time from symptom onset, and high-risk versus low-risk of progression to severe COVID-19. Participants, investigators, and sponsor staff involved in the treatment or clinical evaluation and monitoring of the participants were masked to treatment-group assignments. The primary endpoints were severe COVID-19 or death from any cause through to day 29, and safety. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04723394. FINDINGS: Between Jan 28, 2021, and July 22, 2021, 1014 participants were enrolled, of whom 910 were randomly assigned to a treatment group (456 to receive tixagevimab-cilgavimab and 454 to receive placebo). The mean age of participants was 46·1 years (SD 15·2). Severe COVID-19 or death occurred in 18 (4%) of 407 participants in the tixagevimab-cilgavimab group versus 37 (9%) of 415 participants in the placebo group (relative risk reduction 50·5% [95% CI 14·6-71·3]; p=0·0096). The absolute risk reduction was 4·5% (95% CI 1·1-8·0; p<0·0001). Adverse events occurred in 132 (29%) of 452 participants in the tixagevimab-cilgavimab group and 163 (36%) of 451 participants in the placebo group, and were mostly of mild or moderate severity. There were three COVID-19-reported deaths in the tixagevimab-cilgavimab group and six in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: A single intramuscular tixagevimab-cilgavimab dose provided statistically and clinically significant protection against progression to severe COVID-19 or death versus placebo in unvaccinated individuals and safety was favourable. Treating mild to moderate COVID-19 earlier in the disease course with tixagevimab-cilgavimab might lead to more favourable outcomes. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

2.
EuropePMC; 2022.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-336834

ABSTRACT

Introduction Individuals with Long Covid represent a new and growing patient population. In England, fewer than 90 Long Covid clinics deliver assessment and treatment informed by NICE guidelines. However, a paucity of clinical trials or longitudinal cohort studies means that the epidemiology, clinical trajectory, healthcare utilisation and effectiveness of current Long Covid care are poorly documented, and that neither evidence-based treatments nor rehabilitation strategies exist. In addition, and in part due to pre-pandemic health inequalities, access to referral and care varies, and patient experience of the Long Covid care pathways can be poor. In a mixed methods study, we therefore aim to: (1) describe the usual healthcare, outcomes and resource utilisation of individuals with Long Covid;(2) assess the extent of inequalities in access to Long Covid care, and specifically to understand Long Covid patients’ experiences of stigma and discrimination. Methods and analysis A mixed methods study will address our aims. Qualitative data collection from patients and health professionals will be achieved through surveys, interviews and focus group discussions, to understand their experience and document the function of clinics. A patient cohort study will provide an understanding of outcomes and costs of care. Accessible data will be further analysed to understand the nature of Long Covid, and the care received. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval was obtained from South Central - Berkshire Research Ethics Committee (reference 303958). The dissemination plan will be decided by the patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) group members and study Co-Is, but will target 1) policy makers, and those responsible for commissioning and delivering Long Covid services, 2) patients and the public, and 3) academics.

3.
Exp Physiol ; 107(5): 422-423, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1832302
4.
EuropePMC; 2022.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-333110

ABSTRACT

Introduction As mortality rates from COVID-19 disease fall, the high prevalence of long-term sequelae (Long COVID) is becoming increasingly widespread, challenging healthcare systems globally. Traditional pathways of care for Long Term Conditions (LTCs) have tended to be managed by disease-specific specialties, an approach that has been ineffective in delivering care for patients with multi-morbidity. The multi-system nature of Long COVID and its impact on physical and psychological health demands a more effective model of holistic, integrated care. The evolution of integrated care systems (ICSs) in the UK presents an important opportunity to explore areas of mutual benefit to LTC, multi-morbidity and Long COVID care. There may be benefits in comparing and contrasting ICPs for Long COVID with ICPs for other LTCs. Methods and analysis This study aims to evaluate health services requirements for ICPs for Long COVID and their applicability to other LTCs including multi-morbidity and the overlap with medically not yet explained symptoms (MNYES). The study will follow a Delphi design and involve an expert panel of stakeholders including people with lived experience, as well as clinicians with expertise in Long COVID and other LTCs. Study processes will include expert panel and moderator panel meetings, surveys, and interviews. The Delphi process is part of the overall STIMULATE-ICP programme, aimed at improving integrated care for people with Long COVID. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval for this Delphi study has been obtained (Research Governance Board of the University of York) as have approvals for the other STIMULATE-ICP studies. Study outcomes are likely to inform policy for ICPs across LTCs. Results will be disseminated through scientific publication, conference presentation and communications with patients and stakeholders involved in care of other LTCs and Long COVID. Registration Researchregistry: https://www.researchregistry.com/browse-the-registry#home/registrationdetails/6246bfeeeaaed6001f08dadc/ . Strengths and limitations of this study Gap There is no general model for providing ICPs to many LTCs, especially in case of multi-morbidity or MNYES. Solution We will develop policy recommendations for such ICPs based upon a Delphi process exploring the value and interchangeability of elements of ICPs for Long COVID. This will help patients and clinicians navigate access to, or provide ICPs for, LTCs. Strengths A key tenet is that people with lived experience of Long COVID or an LTC will be involved from inception in the design and conduct of the study. Weaknesses Possible under-representation of digitally hard to reach groups, although efforts will be made to ensure that data collection is widely inclusive, following the NIHR INCLUDE framework.

6.
EuropePMC; 2020.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-305945

ABSTRACT

Background: Most biomedical research has focused on sampling COVID-19 patients presenting to hospital with advanced disease, with less focus on the asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic. We established a bioresource with serial sampling of health care workers (HCWs) designed to obtain samples before and during mainly mild disease, with follow-up sampling to evaluate the quality and duration of immune memory. Methods: : We conducted a prospective study on HCWs from three hospital sites in London, initially at a single centre (recruited just prior to first peak community transmission in London), but then extended to multiple sites 3 weeks later (recruitment still ongoing, target n=1,000). Asymptomatic participants attending work complete a health questionnaire, and provide a nasal swab (for SARS-CoV-2 RNA by RT-PCR tests) and blood samples (mononuclear cells, serum, plasma, RNA and DNA are biobanked) at 16 weekly study visits, and at 6 and 12 months. Results: : Preliminary baseline results for the first 731 HCWs (400 single-centre, 331 multicentre extension) are presented. Mean age was 38±11 years;67% are female, 31% nurses, 20% doctors, and 19% work in intensive care units. COVID-19-associated risk factors were: 37% black, Asian or minority ethnicities;18% smokers;13% obesity;11% asthma;7% hypertension and 2% diabetes mellitus. At baseline, 41% reported symptoms in the preceding 2 weeks. Preliminary test results from the initial cohort (n=400) are available: PCR at baseline for SARS-CoV-2 was positive in 28 of 396 (7.1%, 95% CI 4.9-10.0%) and 15 of 385 (3.9%, 2.4-6.3%) had circulating IgG antibodies. Conclusions: : This COVID-19 bioresource established just before the peak of infections in the UK will provide longitudinal assessments of incident infection and immune responses in HCWs through the natural time course of disease and convalescence. The samples and data from this bioresource are available to academic collaborators by application <ns3:ext-link xmlns:ns4="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" ns4:href="https://covid-consortium.com/application-for-samples/">https://covid-consortium.com/application-for-samples/</ns3:ext-link>.

7.
Lancet Respir Med ; 10(2): 199-213, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1510504

ABSTRACT

Non-invasive respiratory support (NIRS) has increasingly been used in the management of COVID-19-associated acute respiratory failure, but questions remain about the utility, safety, and outcome benefit of NIRS strategies. We identified two randomised controlled trials and 83 observational studies, compromising 13 931 patients, that examined the effects of NIRS modalities-high-flow nasal oxygen, continuous positive airway pressure, and bilevel positive airway pressure-on patients with COVID-19. Of 5120 patients who were candidates for full treatment escalation, 1880 (37%) progressed to invasive mechanical ventilation and 3658 of 4669 (78%) survived to study end. Survival was 30% among the 1050 patients for whom NIRS was the stated ceiling of treatment. The two randomised controlled trials indicate superiority of non-invasive ventilation over high-flow nasal oxygen in reducing the need for intubation. Reported complication rates were low. Overall, the studies indicate that NIRS in patients with COVID-19 is safe, improves resource utilisation, and might be associated with better outcomes. To guide clinical decision making, prospective, randomised studies are needed to address timing of intervention, optimal use of NIRS modalities-alone or in combination-and validation of tools such as oxygenation indices, response to a trial of NIRS, and inflammatory markers as predictors of treatment success.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Noninvasive Ventilation , Respiratory Insufficiency , Humans , Prospective Studies , Respiration, Artificial , SARS-CoV-2
8.
Med J Aust ; 215(9): 410-411, 2021 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1502729
9.
Exp Physiol ; 2021 Sep 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1416570
10.
J Clean Prod ; 313: 127880, 2021 Sep 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1263313

ABSTRACT

On January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization identified SARS-CoV-2 as a public health emergency of global concern. Accordingly, the demand for personal protective equipment (PPE), including medical face masks, has sharply risen compared with 2019. The new situation has led to a sharp increase in energy demand and the environmental impacts associated with these product systems. Hence, the pandemic's effects on the environmental consequences of various PPE types, such as medical face masks, should be assessed. In light of that, the current study aimed to identify the environmental hot-spots of medical face mask production and consumption by using life cycle assessment (LCA) and tried to provide solutions to mitigate the adverse impacts. Based on the results obtained, in 2020, medical face masks production using fossil-based plastics causes the loss of 2.03 × 103 disability-adjusted life years (DALYs); 1.63 × 108 PDF*m2*yr damage to ecosystem quality; the climate-damaging release of 2.13 × 109 kg CO2eq; and 5.65 × 1010 MJ damage to resources. Besides, annual medical face mask production results in 5.88 × 104 TJ demand for exergy. On the other hand, if used makes are not appropriately handled, they can lead to 4.99 × 105 Pt/yr additional damage to the environment in 2020 as determined by the EDIP 2003. Replacement of fossil-based plastics with bio-based plastics, at rates ranging from 10 to 100%, could mitigate the product's total yearly environmental damage by 4-43%, respectively. Our study calls attention to the environmental sustainability of PPE used to prevent virus transmission in the current and future pandemics.

11.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab ; 106(6): 1637-1648, 2021 05 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1099909

ABSTRACT

CONTEXT: Dysnatremia is an independent predictor of mortality in patients with bacterial pneumonia. There is paucity of data about the incidence and prognostic impact of abnormal sodium concentration in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). OBJECTIVE: This work aimed to examine the association of serum sodium during hospitalization with key clinical outcomes, including mortality, need for advanced respiratory support and acute kidney injury (AKI), and to explore the role of serum sodium as a marker of inflammatory response in COVID-19. METHODS: This retrospective longitudinal cohort study, including all adult patients who presented with COVID-19 to 2 hospitals in London over an 8-week period, evaluated the association of dysnatremia (serum sodium < 135 or > 145 mmol/L, hyponatremia, and hypernatremia, respectively) at several time points with inpatient mortality, need for advanced ventilatory support, and AKI. RESULTS: The study included 488 patients (median age, 68 years). At presentation, 24.6% of patients were hyponatremic, mainly due to hypovolemia, and 5.3% hypernatremic. Hypernatremia 2 days after admission and exposure to hypernatremia at any time point during hospitalization were associated with a 2.34-fold (95% CI, 1.08-5.05; P = .0014) and 3.05-fold (95% CI, 1.69-5.49; P < .0001) increased risk of death, respectively, compared to normonatremia. Hyponatremia at admission was linked with a 2.18-fold increase in the likelihood of needing ventilatory support (95% CI, 1.34-3.45, P = .0011). Hyponatremia was not a risk factor for in-hospital mortality, except for the subgroup of patients with hypovolemic hyponatremia. Sodium values were not associated with the risk for AKI and length of hospital stay. CONCLUSION: Abnormal sodium levels during hospitalization are risk factors for poor prognosis, with hypernatremia and hyponatremia being associated with a greater risk of death and respiratory failure, respectively. Serum sodium values could be used for risk stratification in patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/mortality , Sodium/blood , Acute Lung Injury/epidemiology , Acute Lung Injury/etiology , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/blood , Cohort Studies , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Hypernatremia/etiology , Hypernatremia/mortality , Hyponatremia/etiology , Hyponatremia/mortality , Incidence , Length of Stay , London/epidemiology , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , Predictive Value of Tests , Prognosis , Respiration, Artificial , Risk Factors , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome/blood , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome/etiology
12.
Journal of the Intensive Care Society ; : 1751143720988715, 2021.
Article in English | Sage | ID: covidwho-1093945

ABSTRACT

BackgroundPatients who have had prolonged stays in intensive care have ongoing rehabilitation needs. This is especially true of COVID-19 ICU patients, who can suffer diverse long-term ill effects. Currently there is no systematic data collection to guide the needs for therapy input for either of these groups nor to inform planning and development of rehabilitation services. These issues could be resolved in part by the systematic use of a clinical tool to support decision-making as patients progress from the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), through acute hospital care and onwards into rehabilitation. We describe (i) the development of such a tool (the Post-ICU Presentation Screen (PICUPS)) and (ii) the subsequent preparation of a person-centred Rehabilitation Prescription (RP) to travel with the patient as they continue down the care pathway.MethodsPICUPS development was led by a core group of experienced clinicians representing the various disciplines involved in post-ICU rehabilitation. Key constructs and item-level descriptors were identified by group consensus. Piloting was performed as part of wider clinical engagement in 26 acute hospitals across England. Development and validation of such a tool requires clinimetric analysis, and this was based on classical test theory. Teams also provided feedback about the feasibility and utility of the tool.ResultsInitial PICUPS design yielded a 24-item tool. In piloting, a total of 552 records were collated from 314 patients, of which 121 (38.5%) had COVID-19. No obvious floor or ceiling effects were apparent. Exploratory factor analysis provided evidence of uni-dimensionality with strong loading on the first principal component accounting for 51% of the variance and Cronbach?s alpha for the full-scale score 0.95 ? although a 3-factor solution accounted for a further 21%. The PICUPS was responsive to change both at full scale- and item-level. In general, positive responses were seen regarding the tool?s ability to describe the patients during their clinical course, engage and flag the relevant professionals needed, and to inform what should be included in an RP.ConclusionsThe PICUPS tool has robust scaling properties as a clinical measure and is potentially useful as a tool for identifying rehabilitation needs as patients step down from ICU and acute hospital care.

13.
Wellcome Open Res ; 5: 179, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1068028

ABSTRACT

Background: Most biomedical research has focused on sampling COVID-19 patients presenting to hospital with advanced disease, with less focus on the asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic. We established a bioresource with serial sampling of health care workers (HCWs) designed to obtain samples before and during mainly mild disease, with follow-up sampling to evaluate the quality and duration of immune memory. Methods: We conducted a prospective study on HCWs from three hospital sites in London, initially at a single centre (recruited just prior to first peak community transmission in London), but then extended to multiple sites 3 weeks later (recruitment still ongoing, target n=1,000). Asymptomatic participants attending work complete a health questionnaire, and provide a nasal swab (for SARS-CoV-2 RNA by RT-PCR tests) and blood samples (mononuclear cells, serum, plasma, RNA and DNA are biobanked) at 16 weekly study visits, and at 6 and 12 months. Results: Preliminary baseline results for the first 731 HCWs (400 single-centre, 331 multicentre extension) are presented. Mean age was 38±11 years; 67% are female, 31% nurses, 20% doctors, and 19% work in intensive care units. COVID-19-associated risk factors were: 37% black, Asian or minority ethnicities; 18% smokers; 13% obesity; 11% asthma; 7% hypertension and 2% diabetes mellitus. At baseline, 41% reported symptoms in the preceding 2 weeks. Preliminary test results from the initial cohort (n=400) are available: PCR at baseline for SARS-CoV-2 was positive in 28 of 396 (7.1%, 95% CI 4.9-10.0%) and 15 of 385 (3.9%, 2.4-6.3%) had circulating IgG antibodies. Conclusions: This COVID-19 bioresource established just before the peak of infections in the UK will provide longitudinal assessments of incident infection and immune responses in HCWs through the natural time course of disease and convalescence. The samples and data from this bioresource are available to academic collaborators by application  https://covid-consortium.com/application-for-samples/.

14.
Journal of the Intensive Care Society ; : 1751143720988708, 2021.
Article in English | Sage | ID: covidwho-1058219

ABSTRACT

BackgroundMany Intensive Care Unit (ICU) survivors suffer from a multi- system disability, termed the post-intensive care syndrome. There is no current national coordination of either rehabilitation pathways or related data collection for them. In the last year, the need for tools to systematically identify the multidisciplinary rehabilitation needs of severely affected COVID-19 survivors has become clear. Such tools offer the opportunity to improve rehabilitation for all critical illness survivors through provision of a personalised Rehabilitation Prescription (RP). The initial development and secondary refinement of such an assessment and data tools is described in the linked paper. We report here the clinical and workforce data that was generated as a result.MethodsProspective service evaluation of 26 acute hospitals in England using the Post-ICU Presentation Screen (PICUPS) tool and the RP. The PICUPS tool comprised items in domains of a) Medical and essential care, b) Breathing and nutrition;c) Physical movement and d) Communication, cognition and behaviour.ResultsNo difference was seen in total PICUPS scores between patients with or without COVID-19 (77 (IQR 60-92) vs. 84 (IQR 68-97);Mann-Whitney z?=??1.46, p?=?0.144. A network analysis demonstrated that requirements for physiotherapy, occupational therapy, speech and language therapy, dietetics and clinical psychology were closely related and unaffected by COVID-19 infection status. A greater proportion of COVID-19 patients were referred for inpatient rehabilitation (13% vs. 7%) and community-based rehabilitation (36% vs.15%). The RP informed by the PICUPS tool generally specified a greater need for multi-professional input when compared to rehabilitation plans instituted.ConclusionsThe PICUPS tool is feasible to implement as a screening mechanism for post-intensive care syndrome. No differences are seen in the rehabilitation needs of patients with and without COVID-19 infection. The RP could be the vehicle that drives the professional interventions across the transitions from acute to community care. No single discipline dominates the rehabilitation requirements of these patients, reinforcing the need for a personalised RP for critical illness survivors.

15.
Nature ; 591(7848): 92-98, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-971937

ABSTRACT

Host-mediated lung inflammation is present1, and drives mortality2, in the critical illness caused by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Host genetic variants associated with critical illness may identify mechanistic targets for therapeutic development3. Here we report the results of the GenOMICC (Genetics Of Mortality In Critical Care) genome-wide association study in 2,244 critically ill patients with COVID-19 from 208 UK intensive care units. We have identified and replicated the following new genome-wide significant associations: on chromosome 12q24.13 (rs10735079, P = 1.65 × 10-8) in a gene cluster that encodes antiviral restriction enzyme activators (OAS1, OAS2 and OAS3); on chromosome 19p13.2 (rs74956615, P = 2.3 × 10-8) near the gene that encodes tyrosine kinase 2 (TYK2); on chromosome 19p13.3 (rs2109069, P = 3.98 ×  10-12) within the gene that encodes dipeptidyl peptidase 9 (DPP9); and on chromosome 21q22.1 (rs2236757, P = 4.99 × 10-8) in the interferon receptor gene IFNAR2. We identified potential targets for repurposing of licensed medications: using Mendelian randomization, we found evidence that low expression of IFNAR2, or high expression of TYK2, are associated with life-threatening disease; and transcriptome-wide association in lung tissue revealed that high expression of the monocyte-macrophage chemotactic receptor CCR2 is associated with severe COVID-19. Our results identify robust genetic signals relating to key host antiviral defence mechanisms and mediators of inflammatory organ damage in COVID-19. Both mechanisms may be amenable to targeted treatment with existing drugs. However, large-scale randomized clinical trials will be essential before any change to clinical practice.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/genetics , COVID-19/physiopathology , Critical Illness , 2',5'-Oligoadenylate Synthetase/genetics , COVID-19/pathology , Chromosomes, Human, Pair 12/genetics , Chromosomes, Human, Pair 19/genetics , Chromosomes, Human, Pair 21/genetics , Critical Care , Dipeptidyl-Peptidases and Tripeptidyl-Peptidases/genetics , Drug Repositioning , Female , Genome-Wide Association Study , Humans , Inflammation/genetics , Inflammation/pathology , Inflammation/physiopathology , Lung/pathology , Lung/physiopathology , Lung/virology , Male , Multigene Family/genetics , Receptor, Interferon alpha-beta/genetics , Receptors, CCR2/genetics , TYK2 Kinase/genetics , United Kingdom
16.
ProQuest Central; 2020.
Preprint in English | ProQuest Central | ID: ppcovidwho-2091

ABSTRACT

Background: Most biomedical research has focused on sampling COVID-19 patients presenting to hospital with advanced disease, with less focus on the asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic. We established a bioresource with serial sampling of health care workers (HCWs) designed to obtain samples before and during mainly mild disease, with follow-usampling to evaluate the quality and duration of immune memory. Methods: We conducted a prospective observational study on HCWs from three hospital sites in London, initially at a single centre (recruited just prior to first peak community transmission in London), but then extended to multiple sites 3 weeks later (recruitment still ongoing, target n=1,000). Asymptomatic participants attending work complete a health questionnaire, and provide a nasal swa(for SARS-CoV-2 RNA by RT-PCR tests) and blood samples (mononuclear cells, serum, plasma, RNA and DNA are biobanked) at 16 weekly study visits, and at 6 and 12 months. Results: Preliminary baseline results for the first 731 HCWs (400 single-centre, 331 multicentre extension) are presented. Mean age was 38±11 years;67% are female, 31% nurses, 20% doctors, and 19% work in intensive care units. COVID-19-associated risk factors were: 37% black, Asian or minority ethnicities;18% smokers;13% obesity;11% asthma;7% hypertension and 2% diabetes mellitus. At baseline, 41% reported symptoms in the preceding 2 weeks. Preliminary test results from the initial cohort (n=400) are available: PCR at baseline for SARS-CoV-2 was positive in 28 of 396 (7.1%, 95% C4.9-10.0%) and 15 of 385 (3.9%, 2.4-6.3%) had circulating IgG antibodies. Conclusions: This COVID-19 bioresource established just before the peak of infections in the UK will provide longitudinal assessments of incident infection and immune responses in HCWs through the natural time course of disease and convalescence. The samples and data from this bioresource are available to academic collaborators by application https://covid-consortium.com/application-for-samples/.

17.
J Intensive Care Soc ; 22(3): 211-213, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-597727

ABSTRACT

The Intensive Care Society held a webinar on 3 April 2020 at which representatives from 11 of the most COVID-19 experienced hospital trusts in England and Wales shared learning around five specific topic areas in an open forum. This paper summarises the emerging learning and practice shared by those frontline clinicians.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL