External validation of the QCovid risk prediction algorithm for risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation and mortality in adults: national validation cohort study in Scotland.

BACKGROUND: The QCovid algorithm is a risk prediction tool that can be used to stratify individuals by risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation and mortality. Version 1 of the algorithm was trained using data covering 10.5 million patients in England in the period 24 January 2020 to 30 April 2020. We carried out an external validation of version 1 of the QCovid algorithm in Scotland. METHODS: We established a national COVID-19 data platform using individual level data for the population of Scotland (5.4 million residents). Primary care data were linked to reverse-transcription PCR (RT-PCR) virology testing, hospitalisation and mortality data. We assessed the performance of the QCovid algorithm in predicting COVID-19 hospitalisations and deaths in our dataset for two time periods matching the original study: 1 March 2020 to 30 April 2020, and 1 May 2020 to 30 June 2020. RESULTS: Our dataset comprised 5 384 819 individuals, representing 99% of the estimated population (5 463 300) resident in Scotland in 2020. The algorithm showed good calibration in the first period, but systematic overestimation of risk in the second period, prior to temporal recalibration. Harrell's C for deaths in females and males in the first period was 0.95 (95% CI 0.94 to 0.95) and 0.93 (95% CI 0.92 to 0.93), respectively. Harrell's C for hospitalisations in females and males in the first period was 0.81 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.82) and 0.82 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.82), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Version 1 of the QCovid algorithm showed high levels of discrimination in predicting the risk of COVID-19 hospitalisations and deaths in adults resident in Scotland for the original two time periods studied, but is likely to need ongoing recalibration prospectively.

The SARS-CoV-2 Alpha variant was associated with increased clinical severity of COVID-19 in Scotland: A genomics-based retrospective cohort analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The SARS-CoV-2 Alpha variant was associated with increased transmission relative to other variants present at the time of its emergence and several studies have shown an association between Alpha variant infection and increased hospitalisation and 28-day mortality. However, none have addressed the impact on maximum severity of illness in the general population classified by the level of respiratory support required, or death. We aimed to do this. METHODS: In this retrospective multi-centre clinical cohort sub-study of the COG-UK consortium, 1475 samples from Scottish hospitalised and community cases collected between 1st November 2020 and 30th January 2021 were sequenced. We matched sequence data to clinical outcomes as the Alpha variant became dominant in Scotland and modelled the association between Alpha variant infection and severe disease using a 4-point scale of maximum severity by 28 days: 1. no respiratory support, 2. supplemental oxygen, 3. ventilation and 4. death. RESULTS: Our cumulative generalised linear mixed model analyses found evidence (cumulative odds ratio: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.93) of a positive association between increased clinical severity and lineage (Alpha variant versus pre-Alpha variants). CONCLUSIONS: The Alpha variant was associated with more severe clinical disease in the Scottish population than co-circulating lineages.

Scotland's alcohol crisis: A clinician's perspective on a public health emergency.

Worldwide, alcohol causes a death every 10 seconds. The harmful effects are much wider in terms of impaired health and wellbeing of those affected and their families, particularly the most disadvantaged. The wider societal impact and financial costs are huge. Scotland, which has a particularly unhealthy relationship with alcohol and where the cost of alcohol harm is estimated at £3.6 billion, has introduced innovative public health measures such as minimum unit pricing (MUP). However, the COVID-19 pandemic has seen the death toll rising. This article examines the history of alcohol harm and policy interventions in Scotland in recent decades. The lessons learned provide a range of measures of proven efficacy that clinicians and government should employ to tackle Scotland's on-going alcohol crisis, and should be of interest to clinicians and policy makers everywhere.

Evaluating the impact of alcohol minimum unit pricing on deaths and hospitalisations in Scotland: a controlled interrupted time series study.

BACKGROUND: Since May 1, 2018, every alcoholic drink sold in Scotland has had minimum unit pricing (MUP) of £0·50 per unit. Previous studies have indicated that the introduction of this policy reduced alcohol sales by 3%. We aimed to assess whether this has led to reductions in alcohol-attributable deaths and hospitalisations. METHODS: Study outcomes, wholly attributable to alcohol consumption, were defined using routinely collected data on deaths and hospitalisations. Controlled interrupted time series regression was used to assess the legislation's impact in Scotland, and any effect modification across demographic and socioeconomic deprivation groups. The pre-intervention time series ran from Jan 1, 2012, to April 30, 2018, and for 32 months after the policy was implemented (until Dec 31, 2020). Data from England, a part of the UK where the intervention was not implemented, were used to form a control group. FINDINGS: MUP in Scotland was associated with a significant 13·4% reduction (95% CI -18·4 to -8·3; p=0·0004) in deaths wholly attributable to alcohol consumption. Hospitalisations wholly attributable to alcohol consumption decreased by 4·1% (-8·3 to 0·3; p=0·064). Effects were driven by significant improvements in chronic outcomes, particularly alcoholic liver disease. Furthermore, MUP legislation was associated with a reduction in deaths and hospitalisations wholly attributable to alcohol consumption in the four most socioeconomically deprived deciles in Scotland. INTERPRETATION: The implementation of MUP legislation was associated with significant reductions in deaths, and reductions in hospitalisations, wholly attributable to alcohol consumption. The greatest improvements were in the four most socioeconomically deprived deciles, indicating that the policy is positively tackling deprivation-based inequalities in alcohol-attributable health harm. FUNDING: Scottish Government.

Whole-population trends in pathology-confirmed cancer incidence in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: A retrospective observational study.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 epidemic interrupted normal cancer diagnosis procedures. Population-based cancer registries report incidence at least 18 months after it happens. Our goal was to make more timely estimates by using pathologically confirmed cancers (PDC) as a proxy for incidence. We compared the 2020 and 2021 PDC with the 2019 pre-pandemic baseline in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland (NI). METHODS: Numbers of female breast (ICD-10 C50), lung (C33-34), colorectal (C18-20), gynaecological (C51-58), prostate (C61), head and neck (C00-C14, C30-32), upper gastro-intestinal (C15-16), urological (C64-68), malignant melanoma (C43), and non-melanoma skin (NMSC) (C44) cancers were counted. Multiple pairwise comparisons generated incidence rate ratios (IRR). RESULTS: Data were accessible within 5 months of the pathological diagnosis date. Between 2019 and 2020, the number of pathologically confirmed malignancies (excluding NMSC) decreased by 7315 (14.1 %). Scotland experienced early monthly declines of up to 64 % (colorectal cancers, April 2020 versus April 2019). Wales experienced the greatest overall change in 2020, but Northern Ireland experienced the quickest recovery. The pandemic's effects varied by cancer type, with no significant change in lung cancer diagnoses in Wales in 2020 (IRR 0.97 (95 % CI 0.90-1.05)), followed by an increase in 2021 (IRR 1.11 (1.03-1.20). CONCLUSION: PDC are useful in reporting cancer incidence quicker than cancer registrations. Temporal and geographical differences between participating countries mirrored differences in responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, indicating face validity and the potential for quick cancer diagnosis assessment. To verify their sensitivity and specificity against the gold standard of cancer registrations, however, additional research is required.

Evaluating childsmile, Scotland's National Oral Health Improvement Programme for children.

In the early 2000s, a Scottish Government Oral Health Action Plan identified the need for a national programme to improve child oral health and reduce inequalities. 'Childsmile' aimed to improve child oral health in Scotland, reduce inequalities in outcomes and access to dental services, and to shift the balance of care from treatment to prevention through targeted and universal components in dental practice, community and educational settings. This paper describes how an embedded, theory-based research and evaluation arm with multi-disciplinary input helps determine priorities and provides important strategic direction. Programme theory is articulated in dedicated, dynamic logic models, and evaluation themes are as follows: population-level data linkage; trials and economic evaluations; investigations drawing from behavioural and implementation science; evidence reviews and updates; and applications of systems science. There is also a growing knowledge sharing network internationally. Collaborative working from all stakeholders is necessary to maintain gains and to address areas that may not be working as well, and never more so with the major disruptions to the programme from the COVID-19 pandemic and response. Conclusions are that evaluation and research are synergistic with a complex, dynamic programme like Childsmile. The evidence obtained allows for appraisal of the relative strengths of component interventions and the reach and impact of Childsmile to feed into national policy.

The research interest, capacity and culture of NHS staff in South East Scotland and changes in attitude to research following the pandemic: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: The UK National Health Service (NHS) is ideally placed to undertake research. The UK Government recently launched its vision of research within the NHS to improve research culture and activity amongst its staff. Currently, little is known about the research interest, capacity and culture of staff in one Health Board in South East Scotland and how their attitudes to research may have changed as a result of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. METHODS: We used the validated Research Capacity and Culture tool in an online survey of staff working in one Health Board in South East Scotland to explore attitudes to research at the organisation, team and individual level together with involvement in, barriers to and motivators to engage in research. Questions included changes in attitude to research as a result of the pandemic. Staff were identified by professional group: nurses/midwives, medical/dental, allied health professionals (AHP), other therapeutic and administrative roles. Median scores and interquartile ranges were reported and differences between groups assessed using the Chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests with P < 0.05 accepted as statistical significance. Free-text entries were analysed using content analysis. RESULTS: Replies were received from 503/9145 potential respondents (5.5% response), of these 278 (3.0% response) completed all sections of the questionnaire. Differences between groups were noted in the proportions of those with research as part of their role (P = 0.012) and in being research-active (P < 0.001). Respondents reported high scores for promoting evidence-based practice and for finding and critically reviewing literature. Low scores were returned for preparing reports and securing grants. Overall, medical and other therapeutic staff reported higher levels of practical skills compared with other groups. Principal barriers to research were pressure of clinical work and lack of time, backfill and funds. 171/503 (34%) had changed their attitude to research as a result of the pandemic with 92% of 205 respondents more likely to volunteer for a study themselves. CONCLUSION: We found a positive change in attitude to research arising from the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Research engagement may increase after addressing the barriers cited. The present results provide a baseline against which future initiatives introduced to increase research capability and capacity may be assessed.

COVID-19 infection and maternal morbidity in critical care units in Scotland: a national cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Previous research has shown that, in comparison with non-pregnant women of reproductive age, pregnant women with COVID-19 are more likely to be admitted to critical care, receive invasive ventilation, and die. At present there are limited data in relation to outcomes and healthcare utilisation following hospital discharge of pregnant and recently pregnant women admitted to critical care. METHODS: A national cohort study of pregnant and recently pregnant women who were admitted to critical care in Scotland with confirmed or suspected COVID-19. We examined hospital outcomes as well as hospital re-admission rates. RESULTS: Between March 2020 and March 2022, 75 pregnant or recently pregnant women with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 were admitted to 24 Intensive Care Units across Scotland. Almost two thirds (n=49, 65%) were from the most deprived socio-economic areas. Complete 90-day acute hospital re-admission data were available for 74 (99%) patients. Nine (12%) women required an emergency non-obstetric hospital re-admission within 90 days. Less than 5% of the cohort had received any form of vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: This national cohort study has demonstrated that pregnant or recently pregnant women admitted to critical care with COVID-19 were more likely to reside in areas of socio-economic deprivation, and fewer than 5% of the cohort had received any form of vaccination. More targeted public health campaigning across the socio-economic gradient is urgently required.

Students' and staffs' views and experiences of asymptomatic testing on a university campus during the COVID-19 pandemic in Scotland: a mixed methods study.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the acceptability of regular asymptomatic testing for SARS-CoV-2 on a university campus using saliva sampling for PCR analysis and the barriers and facilitators to participation. DESIGN: Cross-sectional surveys and qualitative semistructured interviews. SETTING: Edinburgh, Scotland. PARTICIPANTS: University staff and students who had registered for the testing programme (TestEd) and provided at least one sample. RESULTS: 522 participants completed a pilot survey in April 2021 and 1750 completed the main survey (November 2021). 48 staff and students who consented to be contacted for interview took part in the qualitative research. Participants were positive about their experience with TestEd with 94% describing it as 'excellent' or 'good'. Facilitators to participation included multiple testing sites on campus, ease of providing saliva samples compared with nasopharyngeal swabs, perceived accuracy compared with lateral flow devices (LFDs) and reassurance of test availability while working or studying on campus. Barriers included concerns about privacy while testing, time to and methods of receiving results compared with LFDs and concerns about insufficient uptake in the university community. There was little evidence that the availability of testing on campus changed the behaviour of participants during a period when COVID-19 restrictions were in place. CONCLUSIONS: The provision of free asymptomatic testing for COVID-19 on a university campus was welcomed by participants and the use of saliva-based PCR testing was regarded as more comfortable and accurate than LFDs. Convenience is a key facilitator of participation in regular asymptomatic testing programmes. Availability of testing did not appear to undermine engagement with public health guidelines.

Social, health and economic impact of COVID-19: Healthy Ageing In Scotland (HAGIS) - a protocol for a mixed-methods study.

INTRODUCTION: Public health responses to the COVID-19 pandemic have reaped adverse physical, psychological, social and economic effects, with older adults disproportionally affected. Psychological consequences of the pandemic include fear, worry and anxiety. COVID-19 fear may impact individuals' mitigation behaviours, influencing their willingness to (re)engage in health, social and economic behaviours. This study seeks (1) to develop a robust and evidence-based questionnaire to measure the prevalence of COVID-19 fear among older adults (aged ≥50) in Scotland and (2) to examine the impact of COVID-19 fear on the willingness of older adults to (re)engage across health, social and economic domains as society adjusts to the 'new normal' and inform policy and practice. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This mixed-method study includes a large-scale multimodal survey, focus groups and interviews with older adults (aged ≥50) living in Scotland, and an email-based 'e-Delphi' consultation with professionals working with older adults. The COVID-19 fear scale was developed and validated using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Survey data will be analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Thematic analysis will be used to analyse qualitative data. Survey and qualitative findings will be triangulated and used as the starting point for an 'e-Delphi' consensus consultation with expert stakeholders. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained from the University of Stirling for multimodal survey development, fieldwork methodology and data management. Anonymised survey data will be deposited with the UK Data Service, with a link provided via the Gateway to Global Ageing. Qualitative data will be deposited with the University of Stirling online digital repository-DataSTORRE. A dedicated work package will oversee dissemination via a coproduced project website, conference presentations, rapid reports and national and international peer-reviewed journal articles. There is planned engagement with Scottish and UK policy makers to contribute to the UK government's COVID-19 recovery strategy.

Evaluation of duration of antibiotic therapy across hospitals in Scotland including the impact of COVID-19 pandemic: a segmented interrupted time series analysis.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the duration of antibiotic use in hospital settings. We evaluated the duration of hospital antibiotic therapy for four commonly prescribed antibiotics (amoxicillin, co-amoxiclav, doxycycline, and flucloxacillin) including the assessment of COVID-19 impact. METHODS: A repeated, cross-sectional study using the Hospital Electronic Prescribing and Medicines Administration system (January/2019-March/2022). Monthly median duration of therapy/duration categories was calculated, stratified by routes of administration, age, and sex. The impact of COVID-19 was assessed using segmented time-series analysis. RESULTS: There were significant variations in the median duration of therapy across routes of administration (P < 0.05), with the highest value among those antibiotic courses composed of both oral and IV antibiotics ('Both' group). Significantly higher proportions of prescriptions within the 'Both' group had a duration of >7 days compared to oral or IV. The duration of therapy differed significantly by age. Some small statistically significant changes in the level/trends of duration of therapy were observed in the post-COVID-19 period. CONCLUSIONS: No evidence for prolonged duration of therapy were observed, even during COVID-19 pandemic. The duration of IV therapy was relatively short, suggesting timely clinical review and consideration of IV to oral switch. Longer duration of therapy was observed among older patients.

The Scottish COVID Cancer Immunity Prevalence Study: A Longitudinal Study of SARS-CoV-2 Immune Response in Patients Receiving Anti-Cancer Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Cancer and anti-cancer treatment (ACT) may be risk factors for severe SARS-CoV-2 infection and limited vaccine efficacy. Long-term longitudinal studies are needed to evaluate these risks. The Scottish COVID cancer immunity prevalence (SCCAMP) study characterizes the incidence and outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination in patients with solid tumors undergoing ACT. This preliminary analysis includes 766 patients recruited since May 2020. METHODS: Patients with solid-organ cancers attending secondary care for active ACT consented to the collection of routine electronic health record data and serial blood samples over 12 months. Blood samples were tested for total SARS-CoV-2 antibody. RESULTS: A total of 766 participants were recruited between May 28, 2020 and October 31, 2021. Most received cytotoxic chemotherapy (79%). Among the participants, 48 (6.3%) were tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by PCR. Infection rates were unaffected by ACT, largely aligning with the local population. Mortality proportion was not higher with a recent positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR (10.4% vs 10.6%). Multivariate analysis revealed lower infection rates in vaccinated patients regardless of chemotherapy (HR 0.307 [95% CI, 0.144-0.6548]) or immunotherapy (HR 0.314 [95% CI, 0.041-2.367]) treatment. A total of 96.3% of patients successfully raised SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after >2 vaccines. This was independent of the treatment type. CONCLUSION: This is the largest on-going longitudinal real-world dataset of patients undergoing ACT during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. This preliminary analysis demonstrates that patients with solid tumors undergoing ACT have high protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection following COVID-19 vaccination. The SCCAMP study will evaluate long-term COVID-19 antibody trends, focusing on specific ACTs and patient subgroups.

LIC in the time of COVID: experiences of LIC tutors during the COVID-19 pandemic in Scotland.

In March 2020, due to the escalating global coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, clinical placements for most medical students in the UK were suspended. A phased resumption of clinical placements started at the beginning of academic year 2020/2021. For the Scottish Graduate Entry Medicine programme (ScotGEM), 2020/21 was the first year that Dundee School of Medicine's comprehensive LIC was extended to all 54 students in the penultimate year of the ScotGEM programme. This cross-sectional qualitative study explored aspects of tutors' experiences of supporting LIC students in their practices. Thematic analysis of the data identified significant themes relating to the effects of the coronavirus pandemic on the organisation of the LIC placements and the experiences of the tutors, and the ways in which they adapted placements to the rapidly changing clinical and social landscapes. The changes necessitated by the pandemic posed significant challenges for practice-based tutors in ensuring that students had valuable educational experiences despite the constraints of social distancing requirements and the reduction in face-to-face consultations. However, tutors also identified several positive aspects of the changes which will be of interest to those involved in the organisation and delivery of both LIC and shorter General Practice based clinical attachments. Positive relationships between LIC students and practices enhanced the success of LIC placements. We will discuss how lessons learned from the experience of tutors in the pandemic could be used in the longer term to enrich the LIC experience and General Practice placements more generally.

Effectiveness of mRNA boosters after homologous primary series with BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 against symptomatic infection and severe COVID-19 in Brazil and Scotland: A test-negative design case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Brazil and Scotland have used mRNA boosters in their respective populations since September 2021, with Omicron's emergence accelerating their booster program. Despite this, both countries have reported substantial recent increases in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases. The duration of the protection conferred by the booster dose against symptomatic Omicron cases and severe outcomes is unclear. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Using a test-negative design, we analyzed national databases to estimate the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of a primary series (with ChAdOx1 or BNT162b2) plus an mRNA vaccine booster (with BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273) against symptomatic Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and severe COVID-19 outcomes (hospitalization or death) during the period of Omicron dominance in Brazil and Scotland compared to unvaccinated individuals. Additional analyses included stratification by age group (18 to 49, 50 to 64, ≥65). All individuals aged 18 years or older who reported acute respiratory illness symptoms and tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection between January 1, 2022, and April 23, 2022, in Brazil and Scotland were eligible for the study. At 14 to 29 days after the mRNA booster, the VE against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection of ChAdOx1 plus BNT162b2 booster was 51.6%, (95% confidence interval (CI): [51.0, 52.2], p < 0.001) in Brazil and 67.1% (95% CI [65.5, 68.5], p < 0.001) in Scotland. At ≥4 months, protection against symptomatic infection waned to 4.2% (95% CI [0.7, 7.6], p = 0.02) in Brazil and 37.4% (95% CI [33.8, 40.9], p < 0.001) in Scotland. VE against severe outcomes in Brazil was 93.5% (95% CI [93.0, 94.0], p < 0.001) at 14 to 29 days post-booster, decreasing to 82.3% (95% CI [79.7, 84.7], p < 0.001) and 98.3% (95% CI [87.3, 99.8], p < 0.001) to 77.8% (95% CI [51.4, 89.9], p < 0.001) in Scotland for the same periods. Similar results were obtained with the primary series of BNT162b2 plus homologous booster. Potential limitations of this study were that we assumed that all cases included in the analysis were due to the Omicron variant based on the period of dominance and the limited follow-up time since the booster dose. CONCLUSIONS: We observed that mRNA boosters after a primary vaccination course with either mRNA or viral-vector vaccines provided modest, short-lived protection against symptomatic infection with Omicron but substantial and more sustained protection against severe COVID-19 outcomes for at least 3 months.

Confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in Scottish neonates 2020-2022: a national, population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To examine neonates in Scotland aged 0-27 days with SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by viral testing; the risk of confirmed neonatal infection by maternal and infant characteristics; and hospital admissions associated with confirmed neonatal infections. DESIGN: Population-based cohort study. SETTING AND POPULATION: All live births in Scotland, 1 March 2020-31 January 2022. RESULTS: There were 141 neonates with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection over the study period, giving an overall infection rate of 153 per 100 000 live births (141/92 009, 0.15%). Among infants born to women with confirmed infection around the time of birth, the confirmed neonatal infection rate was 1812 per 100 000 live births (15/828, 1.8%). Two-thirds (92/141, 65.2%) of neonates with confirmed infection had an associated admission to neonatal or (more commonly) paediatric care. Six of these babies (6/92, 6.5%) were admitted to neonatal and/or paediatric intensive care; however, none of these six had COVID-19 recorded as their main diagnosis. There were no neonatal deaths among babies with confirmed infection. IMPLICATIONS AND RELEVANCE: Confirmed neonatal SARS-CoV-2 infection was uncommon over the first 23 months of the pandemic in Scotland. Secular trends in the neonatal confirmed infection rate broadly followed those seen in the general population, although at a lower level. Maternal confirmed infection at birth was associated with an increased risk of neonatal confirmed infection. Two-thirds of neonates with confirmed infection had an associated admission to hospital, with resulting implications for the baby, family and services, although their outcomes were generally good. Ascertainment of confirmed infection depends on the extent of testing, and this is likely to have varied over time and between groups: the extent of unconfirmed infection is inevitably unknown.

Wastewater monitoring of COVID-19: a perspective from Scotland.

Scotland introduced wastewater monitoring for COVID-19 early in the pandemic. From May 2020, samples have been taken and analysed using quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR). The programme was expanded to over 100 sites accounting for around 80% of the population. Data are presented publicly via a dashboard and regular reports are produced for both the public and health professionals. Wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE) offers opportunities and challenges. It offers an objective means of measuring COVID-19 prevalence and can be more practical or timely than other methods of mass testing. However, it also has substantial variability impacted by multiple environmental factors. Methods for data collection and analysis have developed significantly through the pandemic, reflecting the evolving situation and policy direction. We discuss the Scottish experience of wastewater monitoring for COVID-19, with a focus on the analysis of data. This includes our approach to flow normalisation, our experience of variability in measurements and anomalous values, and the visualisation and presentation of data to stakeholders. Summarising the Scottish methodology as of March 2022, we also discuss how wastewater data were used for informing policy and public health actions. We draw lessons from our experience and consider future directions for WBE in Scotland.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Radiotherapy Services in Scotland, UK: A Population-based Study.

AIMS: The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer radiotherapy services is largely unknown. The aim of the present study was to investigate the impact of the resultant contingency plans on radiotherapy cancer services in Scotland. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Detailed data of radiotherapy activity at our centre were collected from 1 April 2019 to 31 March 2021. Differences in mean weekly radiotherapy courses, dose and fractionation patterns and treatment intent were compared with corresponding pre-pandemic months for all treatment sites. Qualitative data were collected for a subgroup of radical radiotherapy patients. RESULTS: Total radiotherapy courses decreased from 6968 to 6240 (-10%) compared with the previous year, prior to the pandemic. Average weekly radiotherapy courses delivered were 134 (standard deviation ±13), decreasing by 10% to 120 (standard deviation 15) (Welch's t-test, P < 0.001). The greatest decrease in new start treatment courses was observed from May to August 2020 (-7.7%, -24.0%, -16.7% and -18.7%) compared with the corresponding months in 2019. A significant reduction was seen for female patients <70 years (-16%) compared with females >70 years (-8%) or their male counterparts (-7% and -6%, respectively). By diagnosis, the largest reductions between pre- and post-pandemic levels were for anal (-26%), breast (-18%) and prostate (-14%) cancer. Contrarily, a significant increase was found for bladder (28%) and oesophageal (11%) cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Over the first 12 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, radiotherapy activity significantly decreased compared with the 12 months prior. Due to issued guidance, the use of hypofractionated regimens increased, contributing to the reduction in treatments for some tumour sites. An increase in other tumour sites can probably be attributed to the reduction or cancellation of surgical interventions. These results will inform our understanding of the indirect consequences of the pandemic on radiotherapy services.

The Potential for Managed Alcohol Programmes in Scotland during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Exploration of Key Areas for Implementation Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

People experiencing homelessness and alcohol dependence are at increased risk of a range of harms, including from COVID-19. Managed Alcohol Programmes (MAPs) are an alcohol harm reduction intervention specifically for this group. In this paper we report on qualitative findings of a mixed methods study investigating the potential utility of MAPs during the COVID-19 pandemic in Scotland. Interviews, conducted with 40 participants, explored potential views of implementing MAPs during the pandemic. Theoretically, we drew on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to inform data collection and analysis. Six themes were identified which mapped onto three CFIR domains: perceptions of MAPs and the evidence base; necessary components of MAPs; changing culture of alcohol harm reduction; MAPs as a moral and ethical grey area; addressing a service gap; and securing buy-in and partnership working. Participants were generally positive about MAPs and viewed them as a key intervention to address a service gap. Several necessary components were identified for successful implementation of MAPs. Securing buy-in from a range of stakeholders and partnership working were deemed important. Finally, MAPs require careful, long-term planning before implementation. We conclude that MAPs are needed in Scotland and require long-term funding and appropriate resources to ensure they are successful.

Vaccine efficacy against severe COVID-19 in relation to delta variant (B.1.617.2) and time since second dose in patients in Scotland (REACT-SCOT): a case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Reports have suggested that the efficacy of vaccines against COVID-19 might have fallen since the delta (B.1.617.2) SARS-CoV-2 variant replaced the alpha (B.1.1.7) variant as the predominant variant. We aimed to investigate, for the two main classes of vaccine, whether efficacy against severe COVID-19 has decreased since delta became the predominant variant and whether the efficacy of two doses of vaccine against severe COVID-19 wanes with time since second dose. METHODS: In the REACT-SCOT case-control study, vaccine efficacy was estimated using a matched case-control design that includes all diagnosed cases of COVID-19 in Scotland up to Sept 8, 2021. For every incident case of COVID-19 in the Scottish population, ten controls matched for age rounded to the nearest year, sex, and primary care practice, and alive on the day of presentation of the case that they were matched to were selected using the Community Health Index database. To minimise ascertainment bias we prespecified the primary outcome measure to assess vaccine efficacy as severe COVID-19, defined as diagnosed patients with entry to critical care within 21 days of first positive test, death within 28 days of first positive test, or any death for which COVID-19 was coded as underlying cause. Although the data extracted for this study included cases presenting up to Sept 22, 2021, the analyses reported here are restricted to cases and controls presenting from Dec 1, 2020, to Sept 8, 2021, ensuring follow-up for at least 14 days after presentation date to allow classification of hospitalisation and (for most cases) severity based on entry to critical care or fatal outcome. FINDINGS: During the study period, a total of 5645 severe cases of COVID-19 were recorded; these were matched to 50 096 controls. Of the severe cases, 4495 (80%) were not vaccinated, and of the controls, 36 879 (74%) were not vaccinated. Of the severe cases of COVID-19 who had been vaccinated, 389 had received an mRNA vaccine and 759 had received the ChAdOx1 vaccine. The efficacy of vaccination against severe COVID-19 decreased in May, 2021, coinciding with the replacement of the alpha SARS-CoV-2 variant by the delta variant in Scotland, but this decrease was reversed over the following month. In the most recent time window centred on July 29, 2021, the efficacy of two doses was 91% (95% CI 87-94) for the ChAdOx1 vaccine and 92% (88-95) for mRNA (Pfizer or Moderna) vaccines. The efficacy of the ChAdOx1 vaccine against severe COVID-19 declined with time since second dose to 69% (95% CI 52-80) at 20 weeks from second dose. The efficacy of mRNA vaccines declined in the first ten weeks from second dose but more slowly thereafter to 93% (88-96) at 20 weeks from second dose. INTERPRETATION: Our results are reassuring with respect to concerns that vaccine efficacy against severe COVID-19 might have fallen since the delta variant became predominant, or that efficacy of mRNA vaccines wanes within the first 5-6 months after second dose. However, the efficacy of the ChAdOx1 vaccine against severe COVID-19 wanes substantially by 20 weeks from second dose. Efficacy of mRNA vaccines after 20 weeks and against newer variants remains to be established. Our findings support the case for additional protective measures for those at risk of severe disease, including, but not limited to, booster doses, at times when transmission rates are high or expected to rise. FUNDING: None.