Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 26
Filter
1.
Health Science Reports ; 5(3), 2022.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1857064

ABSTRACT

BackgroundThe waves of COVID‐19 infections in Ontario, Canada, were marked by differences in patient characteristics and treatment. Our objectives were to (i) describe patient characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of hospitalized older adults with COVID‐19 between waves 1, 2, and 3, (ii) determine if there was an improvement in in‐hospital mortality in waves 2 and 3 after adjusting for covariates.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study was done in five acute care hospitals in Toronto, Ontario. Consecutive hospitalized older adults aged ≥65 years with confirmed COVID‐19 infection were included. Wave 1 extended from March 11 to July 31, 2020, wave 2 from August 1, 2020 to February 20, 2021, and wave 3 from February 21 to June 30, 2021. Patient characteristics and outcomes were ed from charts. A logistic regression model was used to determine the association between COVID‐19 and in‐hospital mortality in waves 2 and 3 compared with wave 1.ResultsOf the 1671 patients admitted to acute care, 297 (17.8%) were admitted in wave 1, 751 (44.9%) in wave 2, and 623 (37.3%) in wave 3. The median age of our cohort was 77.0 years (interquartile range: 71.0–85.0) and 775 (46.4%) were female. The prevalence of frailty declined in progressive waves. The use of dexamethasone, remdesivir, and tocilizumab was significantly higher in waves 2 and 3 compared with wave 1. In the unadjusted analysis, in‐hospital mortality was unchanged between waves 1 and 2, but it was lower in wave 3 (18.3% vs. 27.4% in wave 1). After adjustment, in‐hospital mortality was unchanged in waves 2 and 3 compared with wave 1.ConclusionIn‐hospital mortality in hospitalized older adults with COVID‐19 was similar between waves 1 and 3. Further research should be done to determine if COVID‐19 therapies have similar benefits for older adults compared with younger adults.

2.
Can J Public Health ; 113(2): 185-195, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1841735

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 in education workers and the factors associated with infection between March 2020 and July 2021. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of education workers working ≥8 h per week in Ontario, Canada. Participants self-reported results of tests for SARS-CoV-2 and completed online surveys about demographic information, exposures, and vaccinations against SARS-CoV-2. Participants submitted self-collected dried blood spots. Antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 spike, the receptor binding domain of spike, and nucleocapsid were assessed. Multivariable regression was used to assess risk factors for infection. RESULTS: Of 2834 participants, 85% were female, 81% were teaching staff, and 86% had received at least one dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Of the 1983 who had been tested via a respiratory specimen, 4.9% reported a positive test. Five additional participants had serologic testing suggestive of a previous infection (3.6% overall incidence). In multivariable regression analysis, risk factors for infection included exposure to a SARS-CoV-2 infected adult (adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR) 13.6; 95% confidence interval 8.6, 21.3) or child (aIRR 2.3; 1.3, 4.2) in the household, or school student (aIRR 1.9; 1.2, 3.2), or travel outside the province within 14 days of testing (aIRR 6.0; 1.5, 23.6). CONCLUSION: In the first 18 months of the pandemic, education workers had a similar risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2 as other Ontario residents. Practicing protective measures whenever any household member has been exposed to a possible case and at all times when exposed to anyone from outside the home would help reduce the risk of infection.


RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Estimer l'incidence du SRAS-CoV-2 chez les travailleuses et les travailleurs en éducation et les facteurs associés à l'infection entre mars 2020 et juillet 2021. MéTHODE: Étude prospective de cohortes auprès de travailleuses et de travailleurs en éducation travaillant ≥8 heures par semaine en Ontario, au Canada. Les participants ont autodéclaré les résultats de tests de dépistage du SRAS-CoV-2 et répondu à des questionnaires en ligne portant sur leurs données démographiques, leurs expositions au SRAS-CoV-2 et leurs vaccins contre le virus. Les participants ont soumis des gouttes de sang séché autoprélevées. Les anticorps à la protéine S du SRAS-CoV-2, le domaine de liaison aux récepteurs de la protéine S et la nucléocapside ont été évalués. Une régression multivariée a servi à évaluer les facteurs de risque d'infection. RéSULTATS: Sur les 2 834 participants, 85 % étaient des femmes, 81 % étaient des enseignants et 86 % avaient reçu au moins une dose de vaccin contre le SRAS-CoV-2. Sur les 1 983 personnes ayant été testées au moyen d'un prélèvement respiratoire, 4,9 % ont déclaré un test positif. Chez cinq autres participants, un test sérologique a indiqué une infection antérieure (incidence globale de 3,6 %). Selon l'analyse de régression multivariée, les facteurs de risque d'infection étaient l'exposition à un adulte infecté par le SRAS-CoV-2 (rapport de taux d'incidence ajusté [RTIa] 13,6; intervalle de confiance de 95 % 8,6, 21,3) ou à un enfant infecté (RTIa 2,3; 1,3, 4,2) au sein du ménage, l'exposition à un élève infecté (RTIa 1,9; 1,2, 3,2) ou un déplacement hors province dans les 14 jours ayant précédé le test (RTIa 6,0; 1,5, 23,6). CONCLUSION: Au cours des 18 premiers mois de la pandémie, le risque d'infection par le SRAS-CoV-2 chez les travailleuses et les travailleurs en éducation était semblable au risque des autres résidents de l'Ontario. L'application de mesures de protection chaque fois qu'un membre du ménage a été exposé à un cas possible, et en tout temps lorsqu'on est exposé à une personne de l'extérieur du ménage, contribuerait à réduire le risque d'infection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Vaccines , Child , Female , Humans , Ontario/epidemiology , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Schools
3.
Mucosal Immunol ; 2022 Apr 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1805590

ABSTRACT

Although SARS-CoV-2 infects the upper respiratory tract, we know little about the amount, type, and kinetics of antibodies (Ab) generated in the oral cavity in response to COVID-19 vaccination. We collected serum and saliva samples from participants receiving two doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and measured the level of anti-SARS-CoV-2 Ab. We detected anti-Spike and anti-Receptor Binding Domain (RBD) IgG and IgA, as well as anti-Spike/RBD associated secretory component in the saliva of most participants after dose 1. Administration of a second dose of mRNA boosted the IgG but not the IgA response, with only 30% of participants remaining positive for IgA at this timepoint. At 6 months post-dose 2, these participants exhibited diminished anti-Spike/RBD IgG levels, although secretory component-associated anti-Spike Ab were more stable. Examining two prospective cohorts we found that participants who experienced breakthrough infections with SARS-CoV-2 variants had lower levels of vaccine-induced serum anti-Spike/RBD IgA at 2-4 weeks post-dose 2 compared to participants who did not experience an infection, whereas IgG levels were comparable between groups. These data suggest that COVID-19 vaccines that elicit a durable IgA response may have utility in preventing infection.

4.
Med (N Y) ; 3(6): 422-432.e3, 2022 06 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1796323

ABSTRACT

Background: SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant of concern (VOC) has evolved multiple mutations within the spike protein, raising concerns of increased antibody evasion. In this study, we assessed the neutralization potential of COVID-19 convalescent sera and sera from vaccinated individuals against ancestral SARS-CoV-2 and VOCs. Methods: The neutralizing activity of sera from 65 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccine recipients and convalescent individuals against clinical isolates of ancestral SARS-CoV-2 and Beta, Delta, and Omicron VOCs was assessed using a micro-neutralization assay. Findings: Convalescent sera from unvaccinated individuals infected by the ancestral virus demonstrated reduced neutralization against Beta and Omicron VOCs. Sera from individuals that received three doses of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines demonstrated reduced neutralization of the Omicron variant relative to ancestral SARS-CoV-2. Sera from individuals that were naturally infected with ancestral SARS-CoV-2 and subsequently received two doses of the Pfizer vaccine induced significantly higher neutralizing antibody levels against ancestral virus and all VOCs. Infection alone, either with ancestral SARS-CoV-2 or the Delta variant, was not sufficient to induce high neutralizing antibody titers against Omicron. Conclusions: In summary, we demonstrate that convalescent and vaccinated sera display varying levels of SARS-CoV-2 VOC neutralization. Data from this study will inform booster vaccination strategies against SARS-CoV-2 VOCs. Funding: This research was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR). VIDO receives operational funding from the Government of Saskatchewan through Innovation Saskatchewan and the Ministry of Agriculture and from the Canada Foundation for Innovation through the Major Science Initiatives for its CL3 facility.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus , Antibodies, Neutralizing , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Membrane Glycoproteins/genetics , Neutralization Tests , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Saskatchewan , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/genetics , Viral Envelope Proteins/genetics
5.
Health Sci Rep ; 5(3): e603, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1782604

ABSTRACT

Background: The waves of COVID-19 infections in Ontario, Canada, were marked by differences in patient characteristics and treatment. Our objectives were to (i) describe patient characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of hospitalized older adults with COVID-19 between waves 1, 2, and 3, (ii) determine if there was an improvement in in-hospital mortality in waves 2 and 3 after adjusting for covariates. Methods: This retrospective cohort study was done in five acute care hospitals in Toronto, Ontario. Consecutive hospitalized older adults aged ≥65 years with confirmed COVID-19 infection were included. Wave 1 extended from March 11 to July 31, 2020, wave 2 from August 1, 2020 to February 20, 2021, and wave 3 from February 21 to June 30, 2021. Patient characteristics and outcomes were abstracted from charts. A logistic regression model was used to determine the association between COVID-19 and in-hospital mortality in waves 2 and 3 compared with wave 1. Results: Of the 1671 patients admitted to acute care, 297 (17.8%) were admitted in wave 1, 751 (44.9%) in wave 2, and 623 (37.3%) in wave 3. The median age of our cohort was 77.0 years (interquartile range: 71.0-85.0) and 775 (46.4%) were female. The prevalence of frailty declined in progressive waves. The use of dexamethasone, remdesivir, and tocilizumab was significantly higher in waves 2 and 3 compared with wave 1. In the unadjusted analysis, in-hospital mortality was unchanged between waves 1 and 2, but it was lower in wave 3 (18.3% vs. 27.4% in wave 1). After adjustment, in-hospital mortality was unchanged in waves 2 and 3 compared with wave 1. Conclusion: In-hospital mortality in hospitalized older adults with COVID-19 was similar between waves 1 and 3. Further research should be done to determine if COVID-19 therapies have similar benefits for older adults compared with younger adults.

6.
ProQuest Central;
Preprint in English | ProQuest Central | ID: ppcovidwho-328246

ABSTRACT

Background: Multiple long-term care (LTC) reports have issued similar recommendations for improvement across Canadian LTC homes. Our primary objective was to identify the most common recommendations made over the past 10 years. Our secondary objective was to estimate the total cost of studying LTC issues repeatedly from 1998 to 2020.Methods: The qualitative and cost analyses were conducted in Canada from July to October 2020. Using a list of reports, inquiries and commissions from The Royal Society of Canada Working Group on Long-Term Care, we coded recurrent recommendations in LTC reports. We contacted the sponsoring organizations for a cost estimate, including direct and indirect costs. All costs were adjusted to 2020 Canadian dollar values.Results: Of the 80 Canadian LTC reports spanning the years of 1998 to 2020, 24 (30%) were based on a national level and 56 (70%) were focused on provinces or municipalities. Report length ranged from 4 to 1491 pages and the median number of contributors was 14 (interquartile range, IQR, 5–26) per report. The most common recommendation was to increase funding to LTC to improve staffing, direct care and capacity (67% of reports). A median of 8 (IQR 3.25–18) recommendations were made per report. The total cost for all 80 reports was estimated to be $23,626,442.78.Conclusions: Problems in Canadian LTC homes and their solutions have been known for decades. Despite this, governments and non-governmental agencies continue to produce more reports at a monetary and societal cost to Canadians.

7.
Ann Epidemiol ; 65: 84-92, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1525672

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Inequities in the burden of COVID-19 were observed early in Canada and around the world, suggesting economically marginalized communities faced disproportionate risks. However, there has been limited systematic assessment of how heterogeneity in risks has evolved in large urban centers over time. PURPOSE: To address this gap, we quantified the magnitude of risk heterogeneity in Toronto, Ontario from January to November 2020 using a retrospective, population-based observational study using surveillance data. METHODS: We generated epidemic curves by social determinants of health (SDOH) and crude Lorenz curves by neighbourhoods to visualize inequities in the distribution of COVID-19 and estimated Gini coefficients. We examined the correlation between SDOH using Pearson-correlation coefficients. RESULTS: Gini coefficient of cumulative cases by population size was 0.41 (95% confidence interval [CI]:0.36-0.47) and estimated for: household income (0.20, 95%CI: 0.14-0.28); visible minority (0.21, 95%CI:0.16-0.28); recent immigration (0.12, 95%CI:0.09-0.16); suitable housing (0.21, 95%CI:0.14-0.30); multigenerational households (0.19, 95%CI:0.15-0.23); and essential workers (0.28, 95%CI:0.23-0.34). CONCLUSIONS: There was rapid epidemiologic transition from higher- to lower-income neighborhoods with Lorenz curve transitioning from below to above the line of equality across SDOH. Moving forward necessitates integrating programs and policies addressing socioeconomic inequities and structural racism into COVID-19 prevention and vaccination programs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Geography , Humans , Ontario/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Socioeconomic Factors
8.
Age Ageing ; 51(1)2022 01 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1522110

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19-related physical distancing measures necessitated widespread adoption of virtual care (i.e. telephone or videoconference), but patients, caregivers and healthcare providers raised concerns about its implementation and sustainability given barriers faced by older adults. OBJECTIVE: To describe barriers and facilitators experienced by people accessing and providing virtual care in a geriatric medicine clinic. DESIGN: Qualitative semi-structured interview study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We recruited and interviewed 20 English-speaking patients, caregivers and healthcare providers who participated in virtual care at St. Michael's Hospital's geriatric medicine clinic, Toronto, Canada, between 22 October 2020 and 23 January 2021. METHODS: We analyzed data in two stages: framework analysis and deductive coding to the Theoretical Domains Framework. RESULTS: We included six healthcare providers, seven patients and seven caregivers. We identified eight themes: impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on virtual care uptake, complexity of virtually caring for older adults, uncertain accuracy of virtual assessments, inequity in access to virtual care, importance of caring for the patient-caregiver dyad, assimilating technology into the lives of older adults, impact of technology-related factors on virtual care uptake and impact of clinic processes on integration of virtual care into outpatient care. Further, we identified knowledge, skills, belief in capabilities, and environmental context and resources as key barriers and facilitators to uptake. CONCLUSIONS: Patients, caregivers and healthcare providers believe that there is a role for virtual care after COVID-19-related physical distancing measures relax, but we must tailor implementation of virtual care programs for older adults based on identified barriers and facilitators.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Caregivers , Aged , Health Personnel , Humans , Pandemics , Qualitative Research , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Crit Care ; 25(1): 347, 2021 09 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1438304

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Restricted visitation policies in acute care settings because of the COVID-19 pandemic have negative consequences. The objective of this scoping review is to identify impacts of restricted visitation policies in acute care settings, and describe perspectives and mitigation approaches among patients, families, and healthcare professionals. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Healthstar, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials on January 01/2021, unrestricted, for published primary research records reporting any study design. We included secondary (e.g., reviews) and non-research records (e.g., commentaries), and performed manual searches in web-based resources. We excluded records that did not report primary data. Two reviewers independently abstracted data in duplicate. RESULTS: Of 7810 citations, we included 155 records. Sixty-six records (43%) were primary research; 29 (44%) case reports or case series, and 26 (39%) cohort studies; 21 (14%) were literature reviews and 8 (5%) were expert recommendations; 54 (35%) were commentary, editorial, or opinion pieces. Restricted visitation policies impacted coping and daily function (n = 31, 20%) and mental health outcomes (n = 29, 19%) of patients, families, and healthcare professionals. Participants described a need for coping and support (n = 107, 69%), connection and communication (n = 107, 69%), and awareness of state of well-being (n = 101, 65%). Eighty-seven approaches to mitigate impact of restricted visitation were identified, targeting families (n = 61, 70%), patients (n = 51, 59%), and healthcare professionals (n = 40, 46%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients, families, and healthcare professionals were impacted by restricted visitation polices in acute care settings during COVID-19. The consequences of this approach on patients and families are understudied and warrant evaluation of approaches to mitigate their impact. Future pandemic policy development should include the perspectives of patients, families, and healthcare professionals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020221662) and a protocol peer-reviewed prior to data extraction.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Critical Care , Family , Health Policy , Inpatients , Physical Distancing , Visitors to Patients , COVID-19/psychology , COVID-19/transmission , Communication , Family/psychology , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Inpatients/psychology , Mental Health Services , Pandemics , Psychological Distress , SARS-CoV-2 , Telephone , Visitors to Patients/psychology
10.
BMJ Open ; 11(9): e048227, 2021 09 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1438083

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Flexible visitation policies in hospitals are an important component of care that contributes to reduced stress and increased satisfaction among patients and their family members. Early evidence suggests restricted visitation policies enacted in hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic are having unintended consequences on patients, family members and healthcare providers. There is a need for a comprehensive summary of the impacts of restricted visitation policies on key stakeholders and approaches to mitigate that impact. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a scoping review as per the Arksey-O'Malley 5-stage scoping review method and the Scoping Review Methods Manual by the Joanna Briggs Institute. We will search relevant electronic databases (eg, CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO), grey literature and preprint repositories. We will include all study designs including qualitative and quantitative methodologies (excluding protocols) as well as reports, opinions and editorials, to identify the broad impact of restricted hospital visitation policies due to the COVID-19 pandemic on patients, family members or healthcare providers of hospitalised patients, and approaches taken or proposed to mitigate this impact. Two reviewers will calibrate the screening criteria and data abstraction form and will independently screen studies and abstract the data. Narrative synthesis with thematic analysis will be performed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not applicable as this review will be conducted on published literature only. This scoping review will identify, describe and categorise impacts of restricted hospital visitation policies due to the COVID-19 pandemic on patients, family members and healthcare providers of hospitalised patients, and approaches that have been taken to mitigate impact. We will provide a comprehensive synthesis by developing a framework of restricted visitation policies and associated impacts. Our results will inform the development of consensus statements on restricted visitation policies to be implemented in future pandemics. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020221662.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Family , Health Personnel , Hospitals , Humans , Policy , Research Design , Review Literature as Topic , SARS-CoV-2
11.
BMJ Open ; 11(9): e050596, 2021 09 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1416674

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The objective of this rapid scoping review was to identify studies of dose-sparing strategies for administration of intramuscular seasonal influenza vaccines in healthy individuals of all ages. METHODS: Comprehensive literature searches were executed in MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane library. The grey literature was searched via international clinical trial registries for relevant studies published in English in the last 20 years. We included studies in healthy humans of any age that used any dose-sparing strategy to administer intramuscular seasonal influenza vaccines. Title/abstract and full-text screening were carried out by pairs of reviewers independently. Data extraction was conducted by a single reviewer and verified by a second reviewer. Our outcomes were influenza infections, intensive care unit admission, pneumonia, hospitalisations, adverse events and mortality. Results were summarised descriptively. RESULTS: A total of 13 studies with 10 351 participants were included in the review and all studies were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted between 2006 and 2019. The most common interventions were the trivalent influenza vaccine (n=10), followed by the quadrivalent influenza vaccine (n=4). Nine studies included infants/toddlers 6-36 months old and one of these studies also included children and adolescents. In these nine studies, no clinical effectiveness outcomes were reported. Of the four adult studies (≥18 years), two studies reported on effectiveness outcomes, however, only one RCT reported on laboratory-confirmed influenza. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the low number of studies in healthy adults and the lack of studies assessing confirmed influenza and influenza-like illness, there remains a need for further evaluation.


Subject(s)
Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Pneumonia , Virus Diseases , Adolescent , Adult , Child, Preschool , Humans , Infant , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Seasons
12.
Can J Anaesth ; 68(10): 1474-1484, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1392019

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: In response to the rapid spread of SARS-CoV-2, hospitals in Canada enacted temporary visitor restrictions to limit the spread of COVID-19 and preserve personal protective equipment supplies. This study describes the extent, variation, and fluctuation of Canadian adult intensive care unit (ICU) visitation policies before and during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted an environmental scan of Canadian hospital visitation policies throughout the first wave of the pandemic. We conducted a two-phased study analyzing both quantitative and qualitative data. RESULTS: We collected 257 documents with reference to visitation policies (preCOVID, 101 [39%]; midCOVID, 71 [28%]; and lateCOVID, 85 [33%]). Of these 257 documents, 38 (15%) were ICU-specific and 70 (27%) referenced the ICU. Most policies during the midCOVID/lateCOVID pandemic period allowed no visitors with specific exceptions (e.g., end-of-life). Framework analysis revealed five overarching themes: 1) reasons for restricted visitation policies; 2) visitation policies and expectations; 3) exceptions to visitation policy; 4) patient and family-centred care; and 5) communication and transparency. CONCLUSIONS: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, most Canadian hospitals had public-facing visitor restriction policies with specific exception categories, most commonly for patients at end-of-life, patients requiring assistance, or COVID-19 positive patients (varying from not allowed to case-by-case). Further studies are needed to understand the consistency with which visitation policies were operationalized and how they may have impacted patient- and family-centred care.


RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: En réponse à la propagation rapide du SRAS-CoV-2, les hôpitaux du Canada ont adopté des restrictions temporaires pour les visites afin de limiter la propagation de la COVID-19 et de préserver les stocks d'équipements de protection individuelle. Cette étude décrit l'ampleur, les variations et fluctuations des politiques canadiennes concernant les visites aux unités de soins intensifs (USI) pour adultes avant et pendant la première vague de la pandémie de COVID-19. MéTHODE: Nous avons réalisé une étude de milieu des politiques hospitalières canadiennes concernant les visites tout au long de la première vague de la pandémie. Nous avons mené une étude en deux phases analysant des données quantitatives et qualitatives. RéSULTATS: Nous avons recueilli 257 documents faisant référence aux politiques de visites (pré-COVID, 101 [39 %]; mid-COVID, 71 [28 %]; et COVID-tardif, 85 [33 %]). Sur ces 257 documents, 38 (15 %) étaient spécifiques aux USI et 70 (27 %) faisaient référence aux USI. La plupart des politiques au cours de la période pandémique mid-COVID/COVID-tardif ne permettaient aucune visite sauf exception spécifique (p. ex., fin de vie). L'analyse du cadre a révélé cinq thèmes généraux : 1) les raisons des restrictions des politiques de visites; 2) les politiques et attentes en matière de visites; 3) les exceptions aux politiques de visites; 4) les soins aux patients et centrés sur la famille; et 5) la communication et la transparence. CONCLUSION: Au cours de la première vague de la pandémie de COVID-19, la plupart des hôpitaux canadiens avaient des politiques de restriction des visites s'appliquant au public avec des catégories d'exception spécifiques, le plus souvent pour les patients en fin de vie, les patients nécessitant de l'aide ou les patients COVID-positifs (variant d'une interdiction au cas par cas). D'autres études sont nécessaires pour comprendre l'uniformité avec laquelle les politiques de visites ont été mises en œuvre et comment elles ont pu avoir une incidence sur les soins centrés sur le patient et la famille.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Adult , Canada , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Organizational Policy , Policy , SARS-CoV-2 , Visitors to Patients
13.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(9): e2123622, 2021 09 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1391523

ABSTRACT

Importance: Patients undergoing hemodialysis have a high mortality rate associated with COVID-19, and this patient population often has a poor response to vaccinations. Randomized clinical trials for COVID-19 vaccines included few patients with kidney disease; therefore, vaccine immunogenicity is uncertain in this population. Objective: To evaluate the SARS-CoV-2 antibody response in patients undergoing chronic hemodialysis following 1 vs 2 doses of BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccination compared with health care workers serving as controls and convalescent serum. Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective, single-center cohort study was conducted between February 2 and April 17, 2021, in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Participants included 142 patients receiving in-center hemodialysis and 35 health care worker controls. Exposures: BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) COVID-19 vaccine. Main Outcomes and Measures: SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies to the spike protein (anti-spike), receptor binding domain (anti-RBD), and nucleocapsid protein (anti-NP). Results: Among the 142 participants undergoing maintenance hemodialysis, 94 (66%) were men; median age was 72 (interquartile range, 62-79) years. SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies were measured in 66 patients receiving 1 vaccine dose following a public health policy change, 76 patients receiving 2 vaccine doses, and 35 health care workers receiving 2 vaccine doses. Detectable anti-NP suggestive of natural SARS-CoV-2 infection was detected in 15 of 142 (11%) patients at baseline, and only 3 patients had prior COVID-19 confirmed by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction testing. Two additional patients contracted COVID-19 after receiving 2 doses of vaccine. In 66 patients receiving a single BNT162b2 dose, seroconversion occurred in 53 (80%) for anti-spike and 36 (55%) for anti-RBD by 28 days postdose, but a robust response, defined by reaching the median levels of antibodies in convalescent serum from COVID-19 survivors, was noted in only 15 patients (23%) for anti-spike and 4 (6%) for anti-RBD in convalescent serum from COVID-19 survivors. In patients receiving 2 doses of BNT162b2 vaccine, seroconversion occurred in 69 of 72 (96%) for anti-spike and 63 of 72 (88%) for anti-RBD by 2 weeks following the second dose and median convalescent serum levels were reached in 52 of 72 patients (72%) for anti-spike and 43 of 72 (60%) for anti-RBD. In contrast, all 35 health care workers exceeded the median level of anti-spike and anti-RBD found in convalescent serum 2 to 4 weeks after the second dose. Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests poor immunogenicity 28 days following a single dose of BNT162b2 vaccine in the hemodialysis population, supporting adherence to recommended vaccination schedules and avoiding delay of the second dose in these at-risk individuals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , Immunoglobulin G/blood , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , Case-Control Studies , Dose-Response Relationship, Immunologic , Female , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/biosynthesis , Male , Pandemics , Prospective Studies , Renal Dialysis , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology
14.
PLoS One ; 16(7): e0254527, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1315887

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: One of the current challenges in long-term care homes (LTCH) is to identify the optimal model of care, which may include specialty physicians, nursing staff, person support workers, among others. There is currently no consensus on the complement or scope of care delivered by these providers, nor is there a repository of studies that evaluate the various models of care. We conducted a rapid scoping review to identify and map what care provider models and interventions in LTCH have been evaluated to improve quality of life, quality of care, and health outcomes of residents. METHODS: We conducted this review over 10-weeks of English language, peer-reviewed studies published from 2010 onward. Search strategies for databases (e.g., MEDLINE) were run on July 9, 2020. Studies that evaluated models of provider care (e.g., direct patient care), or interventions delivered to facility, staff, and residents of LTCH were included. Study selection was performed independently, in duplicate. Mapping was performed by two reviewers, and data were extracted by one reviewer, with partial verification by a second reviewer. RESULTS: A total of 7,574 citations were screened based on the title/abstract, 836 were reviewed at full text, and 366 studies were included. Studies were classified according to two main categories: healthcare service delivery (n = 92) and implementation strategies (n = 274). The condition/ focus of the intervention was used to further classify the interventions into subcategories. The complex nature of the interventions may have led to a study being classified in more than one category/subcategory. CONCLUSION: Many healthcare service interventions have been evaluated in the literature in the last decade. Well represented interventions (e.g., dementia care, exercise/mobility, optimal/appropriate medication) may present opportunities for future systematic reviews. Areas with less research (e.g., hearing care, vision care, foot care) have the potential to have an impact on balance, falls, subsequent acute care hospitalization.


Subject(s)
Long-Term Care , Humans , Quality of Life
15.
Can J Anaesth ; 68(10): 1474-1484, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1290444

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: In response to the rapid spread of SARS-CoV-2, hospitals in Canada enacted temporary visitor restrictions to limit the spread of COVID-19 and preserve personal protective equipment supplies. This study describes the extent, variation, and fluctuation of Canadian adult intensive care unit (ICU) visitation policies before and during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted an environmental scan of Canadian hospital visitation policies throughout the first wave of the pandemic. We conducted a two-phased study analyzing both quantitative and qualitative data. RESULTS: We collected 257 documents with reference to visitation policies (preCOVID, 101 [39%]; midCOVID, 71 [28%]; and lateCOVID, 85 [33%]). Of these 257 documents, 38 (15%) were ICU-specific and 70 (27%) referenced the ICU. Most policies during the midCOVID/lateCOVID pandemic period allowed no visitors with specific exceptions (e.g., end-of-life). Framework analysis revealed five overarching themes: 1) reasons for restricted visitation policies; 2) visitation policies and expectations; 3) exceptions to visitation policy; 4) patient and family-centred care; and 5) communication and transparency. CONCLUSIONS: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, most Canadian hospitals had public-facing visitor restriction policies with specific exception categories, most commonly for patients at end-of-life, patients requiring assistance, or COVID-19 positive patients (varying from not allowed to case-by-case). Further studies are needed to understand the consistency with which visitation policies were operationalized and how they may have impacted patient- and family-centred care.


RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: En réponse à la propagation rapide du SRAS-CoV-2, les hôpitaux du Canada ont adopté des restrictions temporaires pour les visites afin de limiter la propagation de la COVID-19 et de préserver les stocks d'équipements de protection individuelle. Cette étude décrit l'ampleur, les variations et fluctuations des politiques canadiennes concernant les visites aux unités de soins intensifs (USI) pour adultes avant et pendant la première vague de la pandémie de COVID-19. MéTHODE: Nous avons réalisé une étude de milieu des politiques hospitalières canadiennes concernant les visites tout au long de la première vague de la pandémie. Nous avons mené une étude en deux phases analysant des données quantitatives et qualitatives. RéSULTATS: Nous avons recueilli 257 documents faisant référence aux politiques de visites (pré-COVID, 101 [39 %]; mid-COVID, 71 [28 %]; et COVID-tardif, 85 [33 %]). Sur ces 257 documents, 38 (15 %) étaient spécifiques aux USI et 70 (27 %) faisaient référence aux USI. La plupart des politiques au cours de la période pandémique mid-COVID/COVID-tardif ne permettaient aucune visite sauf exception spécifique (p. ex., fin de vie). L'analyse du cadre a révélé cinq thèmes généraux : 1) les raisons des restrictions des politiques de visites; 2) les politiques et attentes en matière de visites; 3) les exceptions aux politiques de visites; 4) les soins aux patients et centrés sur la famille; et 5) la communication et la transparence. CONCLUSION: Au cours de la première vague de la pandémie de COVID-19, la plupart des hôpitaux canadiens avaient des politiques de restriction des visites s'appliquant au public avec des catégories d'exception spécifiques, le plus souvent pour les patients en fin de vie, les patients nécessitant de l'aide ou les patients COVID-positifs (variant d'une interdiction au cas par cas). D'autres études sont nécessaires pour comprendre l'uniformité avec laquelle les politiques de visites ont été mises en œuvre et comment elles ont pu avoir une incidence sur les soins centrés sur le patient et la famille.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Adult , Canada , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Organizational Policy , Policy , SARS-CoV-2 , Visitors to Patients
16.
J Am Geriatr Soc ; 69(6): 1429-1440, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1216749

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Virtual (i.e., telephone or videoconference) care was broadly implemented because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our objectives were to compare the diagnostic accuracy of virtual to in-person cognitive assessments and tests and barriers to virtual cognitive assessment implementation. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. SETTING: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CDSR, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, and gray literature (inception to April 1, 2020). PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Studies describing the accuracy or reliability of virtual compared with in-person cognitive assessments (i.e., reference standard) for diagnosing dementia or mild cognitive impairment (MCI), identifying virtual cognitive test cutoffs suggestive of dementia or MCI, or describing correlations between virtual and in-person cognitive test scores in adults. MEASUREMENTS: Reviewer pairs independently conducted study screening, data abstraction, and risk of bias appraisal. RESULTS: Our systematic review included 121 studies (15,832 patients). Two studies demonstrated that virtual cognitive assessments could diagnose dementia with good reliability compared with in-person cognitive assessments: weighted kappa 0.51 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.41-0.62) and 0.63 (95% CI 0.4-0.9), respectively. Videoconference-based cognitive assessments were 100% sensitive and specific for diagnosing dementia compared with in-person cognitive assessments in a third study. No studies compared telephone with in-person cognitive assessment accuracy. The Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status (TICS; maximum score 41) and modified TICS (maximum score 50) were the only virtual cognitive tests compared with in-person cognitive assessments in >2 studies with extractable data for meta-analysis. The optimal TICS cutoff suggestive of dementia ranged from 22 to 33, but it was 28 or 30 when testing was conducted in English (10 studies; 1673 patients). Optimal modified TICS cutoffs suggestive of MCI ranged from 28 to 31 (3 studies; 525 patients). Sensory impairment was the most often voiced condition affecting assessment. CONCLUSION: Although there is substantial evidence supporting virtual cognitive assessment and testing, we identified critical gaps in diagnostic certainty.


Subject(s)
Cognition Disorders/diagnosis , Neuropsychological Tests/standards , Humans , Mental Status and Dementia Tests/standards , Telecommunications , Telemedicine
17.
J Clin Epidemiol ; 134: 160-166, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1118537

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 has disproportionately placed women in academic science on the frontlines of domestic and clinical care compared to men. As a result, women in science are publishing less and potentially acquiring less funding during COVID-19 than compared to before. This widens the pre-existing gap between men and women in prevailing, publication-based measures of productivity used to determine academic career progression. Early career women and those with intersectional identities associated with greater inequities, are facing unique challenges during this time. We argue that women will fall further behind unless academic reward systems adjust how and what they evaluate. We propose several strategies that academic institutions, funders, journals, and men in academic science can take.


Subject(s)
Biomedical Research/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/epidemiology , Career Mobility , Efficiency , Publishing/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Female , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Sex Factors
18.
Age Ageing ; 50(4): 1412-1415, 2021 06 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1099574

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: virtual care has been critical during the COVID-19 pandemic, but there may be inequities in accessing different virtual modalities (i.e. telephone or videoconference). OBJECTIVE: to describe patient-specific factors associated with receiving different virtual care modalities. DESIGN: cross-sectional study. SETTING AND SUBJECTS: we reviewed medical records of all patients assessed virtually in the geriatric medicine clinic at St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada, between 17 March and 13 July 2020. METHODS: we derived adjusted odds ratios (OR), risk differences (RDs) and marginal and predicted probabilities, with 95% confidence intervals, from a multivariable logistic regression model, which tested the association between having a videoconference assessment (vs. telephone) and patient age, sex, computer ability, education, frailty (Clinical Frailty Scale score), history of cognitive impairment and immigration history; language of assessment and caregiver involvement in assessment. RESULTS: our study included 330 patients (227 telephone and 103 videoconference assessments). The median population age was 83 (Q1-Q3, 76-88) and 45.2% were male. Frailty (adjusted OR 0.62, 0.45-0.85; adjusted RD -0.08, -0.09 to -0.06) and absence of a caregiver (adjusted OR 0.12, 0.06-0.24; adjusted RD -0.35, -0.43 to -0.26) were associated with lower odds of videoconference assessment. Only 32 of 98 (32.7%) patients who independently use a computer participated in videoconference assessments. CONCLUSIONS: older adults who are frail or lack a caregiver to attend assessments with them may not have equitable access to videoconference-based virtual care. Future research should evaluate interventions that support older adults in accessing videoconference assessments.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Aged , Canada , Cross-Sectional Studies , Frail Elderly , Geriatric Assessment , Humans , Male , SARS-CoV-2
19.
BMJ Open ; 11(2): e048350, 2021 02 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1088264

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: In response to the burden of chronic disease among older adults, different chronic disease self-management tools have been created to optimise disease management. However, these seldom consider all aspects of disease management are not usually developed specifically for seniors or created for sustained use and are primarily focused on a single disease. We created an eHealth self-management application called 'KeepWell' that supports seniors with complex care needs in their homes. It incorporates the care for two or more chronic conditions from among the most prevalent high-burden chronic diseases. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will evaluate the effectiveness, cost and uptake of KeepWell in a 6-month, pragmatic, hybrid effectiveness-implementation randomised controlled trial. Older adults age ≥65 years with one or more chronic conditions who are English speaking are able to consent and have access to a computer or tablet device, internet and an email address will be eligible. All consenting participants will be randomly assigned to KeepWell or control. The allocation sequence will be determined using a random number generator.Primary outcome is perceived self-efficacy at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include quality of life, health background/status, lifestyle (nutrition, physical activity, caffeine, alcohol, smoking and bladder health), social engagement and connections, eHealth literacy; all collected via a Health Risk Questionnaire embedded within KeepWell (intervention) or a survey platform (control). Implementation outcomes will include reach, effectiveness, adoption, fidelity, implementation cost and sustainability. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been received from the North York General Hospital Research and Ethics Board. The study is funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Ontario Ministry of Health. We will work with our team to develop a dissemination strategy which will include publications, presentations, plain language summaries and an end-of-grant meeting. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04437238.


Subject(s)
Self-Management , Telemedicine , Aged , Humans , Multimorbidity , Ontario , Quality of Life , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
20.
CJC Open ; 3(5): 627-630, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1039311

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has exposed a work-life (im)balance that has been present but not openly discussed in medicine, surgery, and science for decades. The pandemic has exposed inequities in existing institutional structure and policies concerning clinical workload, research productivity, and/or teaching excellence inadvertently privileging those who do not have significant caregiving responsibilities or those who have the resources to pay for their management. METHODS: We sought to identify the challenges facing multidisciplinary faculty and trainees with dependents, and highlight a number of possible strategies to address challenges in work-life (im)balance. RESULTS: To date, there are no Canadian-based data to quantify the physical and mental effect of COVID-19 on health care workers, multidisciplinary faculty, and trainees. As the pandemic evolves, formal strategies should be discussed with an intersectional lens to promote equity in the workforce, including (but not limited to): (1) the inclusion of broad representation (including equal representation of women and other marginalized persons) in institutional-based pandemic response and recovery planning and decision-making; (2) an evaluation (eg, institutional-led survey) of the effect of the pandemic on work-life balance; (3) the establishment of formal dialogue (eg, workshops, training, and media campaigns) to normalize coexistence of work and caregiving responsibilities and to remove stigma of gender roles; (4) a reevaluation of workload and promotion reviews; and (5) the development of formal mentorship programs to support faculty and trainees. CONCLUSIONS: We believe that a multistrategy approach needs to be considered by stakeholders (including policy-makers, institutions, and individuals) to create sustainable working conditions during and beyond this pandemic.


CONTEXTE: La pandémie de COVID-19 a mis en lumière le déséquilibre entre travail et vie personnelle qui règne depuis des décennies dans les milieux de la médecine, de la chirurgie et des sciences, mais dont on ne parlait pas ouvertement. La pandémie a en effet mis au jour des iniquités dans la structure et les politiques des établissements en matière de charge de travail clinique, de productivité de la recherche et d'excellence en enseignement, qui favorisent par inadvertance les personnes qui n'ont pas de responsabilités familiales importantes ou qui ont les ressources nécessaires pour leur prise en charge. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Nous avons tenté de cerner les difficultés auxquelles font face les enseignants multidisciplinaires et les stagiaires ayant des personnes à charge, et nous proposons un certain nombre de stratégies possibles pour faciliter la conciliation travail-vie personnelle. RÉSULTATS: À ce jour, il n'existe pas de données canadiennes permettant de quantifier les répercussions physiques et mentales de la pandémie de COVID-19 sur les travailleurs de la santé, les enseignants multidisciplinaires et les stagiaires. Au fil de l'évolution de la pandémie, il conviendrait de formuler des stratégies officielles à la lumière des commentaires d'intervenants des différents secteurs concernés, afin de promouvoir l'équilibre au sein des effectifs; ces stratégies pourraient notamment inclure ce qui suit (sans toutefois s'y limiter) : 1) l'inclusion d'une vaste représentation (y compris une représentation égale des femmes et des autres personnes marginalisées) pour la réponse à la pandémie dans les établissements, la planification du rétablissement et la prise de décisions; 2) une évaluation (p. ex. au moyen d'un sondage mené sous la direction des établissements) des répercussions de la pandémie sur la conciliation travail-vie personnelle; 3) l'établissement d'un dialogue formel (p. ex. ateliers, activités de formation et campagnes dans les médias) afin de normaliser la coexistence des responsabilités professionnelles et familiales et d'éliminer la stigmatisation associée aux rôles des sexes; 4) une réévaluation de la charge de travail et des promotions; et 5) la mise sur pied de programmes formels de mentorat pour soutenir les enseignants et les stagiaires. CONCLUSIONS: Nous croyons que les intervenants (décideurs, établissements et personnes) devraient envisager une approche multistratégie afin d'instaurer des conditions de travail viables pendant la pandémie et par la suite.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL