Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 92
Filter
1.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(6)2022 03 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1760604

ABSTRACT

Staff working in homelessness services often find the work rewarding yet challenging, and the sector experiences high levels of staff burnout and staff turnover. During the COVID-19 pandemic, staff working in these services faced particularly stressful working conditions. This study explored the experiences of stress and wellbeing among those working in frontline homelessness service roles during the early stages of the pandemic in Scotland. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 participants, 11 of whom completed the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI). Qualitative data were analysed using Framework Analysis in NVivo, informed by the Revised Transactional Model of occupational stress and coping. MBI data were analysed using descriptive statistics. The COVID-19 pandemic positively and negatively impacted participants' lives and roles. Organisational culture acted as a magnifying glass for pre-pandemic practices: for some, the pandemic brought teams and staff closer together, creating a better working environment. For others, it led to fragmentation and frustration. Participants discussed coping strategies and recommendations for the future to protect staff wellbeing. Quantitative data suggested that participants were not experiencing burnout, although some were at heightened risk. Future research should explore the longer-term impact of the pandemic on homelessness service staff outcomes.


Subject(s)
Burnout, Professional , COVID-19 , Homeless Persons , Burnout, Professional/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , Scotland/epidemiology
2.
Drug Alcohol Depend ; 232: 109263, 2022 Mar 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1719618

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has likely affected the delivery of interventions to prevent blood-borne viruses (BBVs) among people who inject drugs (PWID). We examined the impact of the first wave of COVID-19 in Scotland on: 1) needle and syringe provision (NSP), 2) opioid agonist therapy (OAT) and 3) BBV testing. METHODS: An interrupted time series study design; 23rd March 2020 (date of the first 'lockdown') was chosen as the key date. RESULTS: The number of HIV tests and HCV tests in drug services/prisons, and the number of needles/syringes (N/S) distributed decreased by 94% (RR=0.062, 95% CI 0.041-0.094, p < 0.001), 95% (RR=0.049, 95% CI 0.034-0.069, p < 0.001) and 18% (RR = 0.816, 95% CI 0.750-0.887, p < 0.001), respectively, immediately after lockdown. Post-lockdown, an increasing trend was observed relating to the number of N/S distributed (0.6%; RR = 1.006, 95% CI 1.001-1.012, p = 0.015), HIV tests (12.1%; RR = 1.121, 95% CI 1.092-1.152, p < 0.001) and HCV tests (13.2%; RR = 1.132, 95 CI 1.106-1.158, p < 0.001). Trends relating to the total amount of methadone prescribed remained stable, but a decreasing trend in the number of prescriptions (2.4%; RR = 0.976, 95% CI 0.959-0.993, p = 0.006) and an increasing trend in the quantity prescribed per prescription (2.8%; RR = 1.028, 95% CI 1.013-1.042, p < 0.001) was observed post-lockdown. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 impacted the delivery of BBV prevention services for PWID in Scotland. While there is evidence of service recovery; further effort is likely required to return some intervention coverage to pre-pandemic levels in the context of subsequent waves of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Drug Users , HIV Infections , Pharmaceutical Preparations , Substance Abuse, Intravenous , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Communicable Disease Control , HIV Infections/epidemiology , HIV Infections/prevention & control , Humans , Interrupted Time Series Analysis , SARS-CoV-2 , Scotland/epidemiology , Substance Abuse, Intravenous/epidemiology , Substance Abuse, Intravenous/rehabilitation
4.
BMJ Open ; 12(2): e050062, 2022 02 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1691320

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, which emerged in December 2019, has caused millions of deaths and severe illness worldwide. Numerous vaccines are currently under development of which a few have now been authorised for population-level administration by several countries. As of 20 September 2021, over 48 million people have received their first vaccine dose and over 44 million people have received their second vaccine dose across the UK. We aim to assess the uptake rates, effectiveness, and safety of all currently approved COVID-19 vaccines in the UK. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will use prospective cohort study designs to assess vaccine uptake, effectiveness and safety against clinical outcomes and deaths. Test-negative case-control study design will be used to assess vaccine effectiveness (VE) against laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Self-controlled case series and retrospective cohort study designs will be carried out to assess vaccine safety against mild-to-moderate and severe adverse events, respectively. Individual-level pseudonymised data from primary care, secondary care, laboratory test and death records will be linked and analysed in secure research environments in each UK nation. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models will be carried out to estimate vaccine uptake levels in relation to various population characteristics. VE estimates against laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection will be generated using a generalised additive logistic model. Time-dependent Cox models will be used to estimate the VE against clinical outcomes and deaths. The safety of the vaccines will be assessed using logistic regression models with an offset for the length of the risk period. Where possible, data will be meta-analysed across the UK nations. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: We obtained approvals from the National Research Ethics Service Committee, Southeast Scotland 02 (12/SS/0201), the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage independent Information Governance Review Panel project number 0911. Concerning English data, University of Oxford is compliant with the General Data Protection Regulation and the National Health Service (NHS) Digital Data Security and Protection Policy. This is an approved study (Integrated Research Application ID 301740, Health Research Authority (HRA) Research Ethics Committee 21/HRA/2786). The Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioners Clinical Informatics Digital Hub meets NHS Digital's Data Security and Protection Toolkit requirements. In Northern Ireland, the project was approved by the Honest Broker Governance Board, project number 0064. Findings will be made available to national policy-makers, presented at conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Case-Control Studies , Humans , Observational Studies as Topic , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Scotland/epidemiology , State Medicine
5.
BMJ Open ; 12(2): e056628, 2022 02 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1673445

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To capture the extent and impact of changes in the delivery of child health services in the UK, resulting from the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic response, from the perspectives of a range of child healthcare providers. SETTING: National Health Service commissioned/delivered healthcare services in two regional settings in the UK: North of Scotland (NOS) and North East and North Cumbria (NENC) in England. PARTICIPANTS: Purposive sample of 39 child healthcare professionals including paediatricians, community/specialist nurses, allied health professionals and mental health professionals, from across the two regions (22 in NOS, 17 in NENC). METHODS: Semistructured qualitative interviews conducted via telephone between June and October 2020, fully transcribed and analysed in NVivo V.11 using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Extensive changes across a range of paediatric services were rapidly implemented to support the pandemic response and ongoing healthcare delivery. New ways of working emerged, principally to control the spread of the virus. Keeping users and their families out of hospital was an urgent driver for change. The changes had considerable impact on the health and well-being of staff with many experiencing radical changes to their working conditions and roles. However, there were some positive changes noted: some practitioners felt empowered and listened to by decision makers; some of the usual bureaucratic barriers to change were lifted; staff saw improved collaboration and joint working across the system; and some new ways of working were seen to be more efficient. Interviewees perceived the implications for children and their families to be profound, particularly with regard to self-care, relationships with practitioners and timely access to services. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the challenges experienced by staff, the pandemic provided an opportunity for positive, lasting change. It is vital to capitalise on this opportunity to benefit patient outcomes and to 'build back' services in a more sustainable way.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Child , England/epidemiology , Health Services , Humans , Pandemics , Scotland/epidemiology , State Medicine
6.
BMJ Open ; 12(2): e054376, 2022 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1673438

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Develop a novel algorithm to categorise alcohol consumption using primary care electronic health records (EHRs) and asses its reliability by comparing this classification with self-reported alcohol consumption data obtained from the UK Biobank (UKB) cohort. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: The UKB, a population-based cohort with participants aged between 40 and 69 years recruited across the UK between 2006 and 2010. PARTICIPANTS: UKB participants from Scotland with linked primary care data. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Create a rule-based multiclass algorithm to classify alcohol consumption reported by Scottish UKB participants and compare it with their classification using data present in primary care EHRs based on Read Codes. We evaluated agreement metrics (simple agreement and kappa statistic). RESULTS: Among the Scottish UKB participants, 18 838 (69%) had at least one Read Code related to alcohol consumption and were used in the classification. The agreement of alcohol consumption categories between UKB and primary care data, including assessments within 5 years was 59.6%, and kappa was 0.23 (95% CI 0.21 to 0.24). Differences in classification between the two sources were statistically significant (p<0.001); More individuals were classified as 'sensible drinkers' and in lower alcohol consumption levels in primary care records compared with the UKB. Agreement improved slightly when using only numerical values (k=0.29; 95% CI 0.27 to 0.31) and decreased when using qualitative descriptors only (k=0.18;95% CI 0.16 to 0.20). CONCLUSION: Our algorithm classifies alcohol consumption recorded in Primary Care EHRs into discrete meaningful categories. These results suggest that alcohol consumption may be underestimated in primary care EHRs. Using numerical values (alcohol units) may improve classification when compared with qualitative descriptors.


Subject(s)
Biological Specimen Banks , Electronic Health Records , Adult , Aged , Alcohol Drinking/epidemiology , Algorithms , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Information Storage and Retrieval , Middle Aged , Primary Health Care , Reproducibility of Results , Scotland/epidemiology
7.
Lancet Respir Med ; 10(2): 191-198, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1641759

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is an urgent need to inform policy deliberations about whether children with asthma should be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 and, if so, which subset of children with asthma should be prioritised. We were asked by the UK's Joint Commission on Vaccination and Immunisation to undertake an urgent analysis to identify which children with asthma were at increased risk of serious COVID-19 outcomes. METHODS: This national incident cohort study was done in all children in Scotland aged 5-17 years who were included in the linked dataset of Early Pandemic Evaluation and Enhanced Surveillance of COVID-19 (EAVE II). We used data from EAVE II to investigate the risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation among children with markers of uncontrolled asthma defined by either previous asthma hospital admission or oral corticosteroid prescription in the previous 2 years. A Cox proportional hazard model was used to derive hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for the association between asthma and COVID-19 hospital admission, stratified by markers of asthma control (previous asthma hospital admission and number of previous prescriptions for oral corticosteroids within 2 years of the study start date). Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, socioeconomic status, comorbidity, and previous hospital admission. FINDINGS: Between March 1, 2020, and July 27, 2021, 752 867 children were included in the EAVE II dataset, 63 463 (8·4%) of whom had clinician-diagnosed-and-recorded asthma. Of these, 4339 (6·8%) had RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. In those with confirmed infection, 67 (1·5%) were admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Among the 689 404 children without asthma, 40 231 (5·8%) had confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections, of whom 382 (0·9%) were admitted to hospital with COVID-19. The rate of COVID-19 hospital admission was higher in children with poorly controlled asthma than in those with well controlled asthma or without asthma. When using previous hospital admission for asthma as the marker of uncontrolled asthma, the adjusted HR was 6·40 (95% CI 3·27-12·53) for those with poorly controlled asthma and 1·36 (1·02-1·80) for those with well controlled asthma, compared with those with no asthma. When using oral corticosteroid prescriptions as the marker of uncontrolled asthma, the adjusted HR was 3·38 (1·84-6·21) for those with three or more prescribed courses of corticosteroids, 3·53 (1·87-6·67) for those with two prescribed courses of corticosteroids, 1·52 (0·90-2·57) for those with one prescribed course of corticosteroids, and 1·34 (0·98-1·82) for those with no prescribed course, compared with those with no asthma. INTERPRETATION: School-aged children with asthma with previous recent hospital admission or two or more courses of oral corticosteroids are at markedly increased risk of COVID-19 hospital admission and should be considered a priority for vaccinations. This would translate into 9124 children across Scotland and an estimated 109 448 children across the UK. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council), Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund, Health Data Research UK, and Scottish Government.


Subject(s)
Asthma , COVID-19 , Adolescent , Asthma/complications , Asthma/drug therapy , Asthma/epidemiology , Child , Child, Preschool , Cohort Studies , Hospitalization , Hospitals , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Scotland/epidemiology
8.
BMC Infect Dis ; 21(1): 1275, 2021 Dec 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1635338

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: To investigate the association of primary acute cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) with COVID-19 vaccination through complete ascertainment of all diagnosed CVT in the population of Scotland. METHODS: Case-crossover study comparing cases of CVT recently exposed to vaccination (1-14 days after vaccination) with cases less recently exposed. Cases in Scotland from 1 December 2020 were ascertained through neuroimaging studies up to 17 May 2021 and diagnostic coding of hospital discharges up to 28 April 2021, linked to national vaccination records. The main outcome measure was primary acute CVT. RESULTS: Of 50 primary acute CVT cases, 29 were ascertained only from neuroimaging studies, 2 were ascertained only from hospital discharges, and 19 were ascertained from both sources. Of these 50 cases, 14 had received the Astra-Zeneca ChAdOx1 vaccine and 3 the Pfizer BNT162b2 vaccine. The incidence of CVT per million doses in the first 14 days after vaccination was 2.2 (95% credible interval 0.9 to 4.1) for ChAdOx1 and 1 (95% credible interval 0.1 to 2.9) for BNT162b2. The rate ratio for CVT associated with exposure to ChAdOx1 in the first 14 days compared with exposure 15-84 days after vaccination was 3.2 (95% credible interval 1.1 to 9.5). CONCLUSIONS: These findings support a causal association between CVT and the AstraZeneca vaccine. The absolute risk of post-vaccination CVT in this population-wide study in Scotland was lower than has been reported for populations in Scandinavia and Germany; the explanation for this is not clear.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Venous Thrombosis , COVID-19 Vaccines , Cross-Over Studies , Humans , Neuroimaging , SARS-CoV-2 , Scotland/epidemiology , Vaccination , Venous Thrombosis/diagnostic imaging , Venous Thrombosis/epidemiology
10.
Lancet Respir Med ; 10(4): 347-354, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1621137

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is considerable uncertainty over whether adults with asthma should be offered booster vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 and, if so, who should be prioritised for booster vaccination. We were asked by the UK's Joint Commission on Vaccination and Immunisation to undertake an urgent analysis to identify which adults with asthma were at an increased risk of serious COVID-19 outcomes to inform deliberations on booster COVID-19 vaccines. METHODS: This national incident cohort study was done in all adults in Scotland aged 18 years and older who were included in the linked dataset of Early Pandemic Evaluation and Enhanced Surveillance of COVID-19 (EAVE II). We used data from EAVE II to investigate the risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation and the composite outcome of intensive care unit (ICU) admission or death from COVID-19 among adults with asthma. A Cox proportional hazard model was used to derive adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for the association between asthma and COVID-19 hospital admission and ICU admission or death, stratified by markers of history of an asthma attack defined by either oral corticosteroid prescription (prednisolone, prednisone, and dexamethasone) in the 2 years before March 1, 2020, or hospitalisation for asthma before March 1, 2020. Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, socioeconomic status, comorbidity, previous hospitalisation, and vaccine status. FINDINGS: Between March 1, 2020, and July 27, 2021, 561 279 (12·7%) of 4 421 663 adults in Scotland had clinician-diagnosed-and-recorded-asthma. Among adults with asthma, 39 253 (7·0%) had confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections, of whom 4828 (12·3%) were admitted to hospital for COVID-19 (among them, an estimated 600 [12·4%] might have been due to nosocomial infections). Adults with asthma were found to be at an increased risk of COVID-19 hospital admission (adjusted HR 1·27, 95% CI 1·23-1·32) compared with those without asthma. When using oral corticosteroid prescribing in the preceding 2 years as a marker for history of an asthma attack, the adjusted HR was 1·54 (95% CI 1·46-1·61) for those with three or more prescribed courses of oral corticosteroids, 1·37 (1·26-1·48) for those with two prescribed courses, 1·30 (1·23-1·37) for those with one prescribed course, and 1·15 (1·11-1·21) for those without any courses, compared with those aged 18 years or older without asthma. Adults with asthma were found to be at an increased risk of COVID-19 ICU admission or death compared with those without asthma (adjusted HR 1·13, 95 % CI 1·05-1·22). The adjusted HR was 1·44 (95% CI 1·31-1·58) for those with three or more prescribed courses of oral corticosteroids, 1·27 (1·09-1·48) for those with two prescribed courses, 1·04 (0·93-1·16) for those with one prescribed course, and 1·06 (0·97-1·17) for those without any course, compared with adults without asthma. INTERPRETATION: Adults with asthma who have required two or more courses of oral corticosteroids in the previous 2 years or a hospital admission for asthma before March 1, 2020, are at increased risk of both COVID-19 hospitalisation and ICU admission or death. Patients with a recent asthma attack should be considered a priority group for booster COVID-19 vaccines. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council), Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund, Health Data Research UK, and Scottish Government.


Subject(s)
Asthma , COVID-19 , Adolescent , Adult , Asthma/drug therapy , Asthma/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Vaccines , Cohort Studies , Hospitalization , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Scotland/epidemiology
11.
J Glob Health ; 11: 05026, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1614229

ABSTRACT

Background: The dynamics of acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission and severity of disease among children and young people (CYP) across different settings are of considerable clinical, public health and societal interest. Severe COVID-19 cases, requiring hospitalisations, and deaths have been reported in some CYP suggesting a need to extend vaccinations to these age groups. As part of the ongoing Early Pandemic Evaluation and Enhanced Surveillance of COVID-19 (EAVE II) study, we aim to investigate the uptake, effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in children and young people (CYP) aged 0 to 17 years in Scotland. Specifically, we will estimate: (i) uptake of vaccines against COVID-19, (ii) vaccine effectiveness (VE) against the outcomes of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalisation, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, and death; (iii) VE for first/second dose timing among different age groups and risk groups; and (iv) the safety of vaccines. Methods and analysis: We will conduct an open prospective cohort study classifying exposure as time-varying. We will compare outcomes amongst first dose vaccinated and second dose vaccinated CYP to those not yet vaccinated. A Test Negative Design (TND) case control study will be nested within this national cohort to investigate VE against symptomatic infection. The primary outcomes will be (i) uptake of vaccines against COVID-19, (ii) time to COVID-19 infection, hospitalisation, ICU admissions or death, and (iii) adverse events related to vaccines. Vaccination status (unvaccinated, one dose and two doses) will be defined as a time-varying exposure. Data from multiple sources will be linked using a unique identifier. We will conduct descriptive analyses to explore trends in vaccine uptake, and association between different exposure variables and vaccine uptake will be determined using multivariable logistic regression models. VE will be assessed from time-dependent Cox models or Poisson regression models, adjusted for relevant confounders, including age, sex, socioeconomic status, and comorbidities. We will employ self-controlled study designs to determine the risk of adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination. Ethics and dissemination: Ethics approval was obtained from the National Research Ethics Committee, South East Scotland 02. We will present findings of this study at international conferences, in peer-reviewed journals and to policy-makers.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Adolescent , Case-Control Studies , Child , Humans , Pandemics , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Scotland/epidemiology
12.
BMJ Open Gastroenterol ; 9(1)2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1612991

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: SARS-CoV-2 and consequent pandemic has presented unique challenges. Beyond the direct COVID-related mortality in those with liver disease, we sought to determine the effect of lockdown on people with liver disease in Scotland. The effect of lockdown on those with alcohol-related disease is of interest; and whether there were associated implications for a change in alcohol intake and consequent presentations with decompensated disease. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients admitted to seven Scottish hospitals with a history of liver disease between 1 April and 30 April 2020 and compared across the same time in 2017, 2018 and 2019. We also repeated an intermediate assessment based on a single centre to examine for delayed effects between 1 April and 31 July 2020. RESULTS: We found that results and outcomes for patients admitted in 2020 were similar to those in previous years in terms of morbidity, mortality, and length of stay. In the Scotland-wide cohort: admission MELD (Model for End-stage Liver Disease) (16 (12-22) vs 15 (12-19); p=0.141), inpatient mortality ((10.9% vs 8.6%); p=0.499) and length of stay (8 days (4-15) vs 7 days (4-13); p=0.140). In the Edinburgh cohort: admission MELD (17 (12-23) vs 17 (13-21); p=0.805), inpatient mortality ((13.7% vs 10.1%; p=0.373) and length of stay (7 days (4-14) vs 7 days (3.5-14); p=0.525)). CONCLUSION: This assessment of immediate and medium-term lockdown impacts on those with chronic liver disease suggested a minimal effect on the presentation of decompensated liver disease to secondary care.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , End Stage Liver Disease , Communicable Disease Control , Humans , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Scotland/epidemiology , Severity of Illness Index
13.
PLoS Med ; 18(11): e1003828, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1596033

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Clinical pathways are changing to incorporate support and appropriate follow-up for people to achieve remission of type 2 diabetes, but there is limited understanding of the prevalence of remission in current practice or patient characteristics associated with remission. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We carried out a cross-sectional study estimating the prevalence of remission of type 2 diabetes in all adults in Scotland aged ≥30 years diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and alive on December 31, 2019. Remission of type 2 diabetes was assessed between January 1, 2019 and December 31, 2019. We defined remission as all HbA1c values <48 mmol/mol in the absence of glucose-lowering therapy (GLT) for a continuous duration of ≥365 days before the date of the last recorded HbA1c in 2019. Multivariable logistic regression in complete and multiply imputed datasets was used to examine characteristics associated with remission. Our cohort consisted of 162,316 individuals, all of whom had at least 1 HbA1c ≥48 mmol/mol (6.5%) at or after diagnosis of diabetes and at least 1 HbA1c recorded in 2019 (78.5% of the eligible population). Over half (56%) of our cohort was aged 65 years or over in 2019, and 64% had had type 2 diabetes for at least 6 years. Our cohort was predominantly of white ethnicity (74%), and ethnicity data were missing for 19% of the cohort. Median body mass index (BMI) at diagnosis was 32.3 kg/m2. A total of 7,710 people (4.8% [95% confidence interval [CI] 4.7 to 4.9]) were in remission of type 2 diabetes. Factors associated with remission were older age (odds ratio [OR] 1.48 [95% CI 1.34 to 1.62] P < 0.001) for people aged ≥75 years compared to 45 to 54 year group), HbA1c <48 mmol/mol at diagnosis (OR 1.31 [95% CI 1.24 to 1.39] P < 0.001) compared to 48 to 52 mmol/mol), no previous history of GLT (OR 14.6 [95% CI 13.7 to 15.5] P < 0.001), weight loss from diagnosis to 2019 (OR 4.45 [95% CI 3.89 to 5.10] P < 0.001) for ≥15 kg of weight loss compared to 0 to 4.9 kg weight gain), and previous bariatric surgery (OR 11.9 [95% CI 9.41 to 15.1] P < 0.001). Limitations of the study include the use of a limited subset of possible definitions of remission of type 2 diabetes, missing data, and inability to identify self-funded bariatric surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that 4.8% of people with type 2 diabetes who had at least 1 HbA1c ≥48 mmol/mol (6.5%) after diagnosis of diabetes and had at least 1 HbA1c recorded in 2019 had evidence of type 2 diabetes remission. Guidelines are required for management and follow-up of this group and may differ depending on whether weight loss and remission of diabetes were intentional or unintentional. Our findings can be used to evaluate the impact of future initiatives on the prevalence of type 2 diabetes remission.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/therapy , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cross-Sectional Studies , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/blood , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/diagnosis , Female , Glycated Hemoglobin A/metabolism , Humans , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Odds Ratio , Prevalence , Remission Induction , Scotland/epidemiology
14.
Lancet ; 399(10319): 25-35, 2022 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1586218

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Reports suggest that COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness is decreasing, but whether this reflects waning or new SARS-CoV-2 variants-especially delta (B.1.617.2)-is unclear. We investigated the association between time since two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine and risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes in Scotland (where delta was dominant), with comparative analyses in Brazil (where delta was uncommon). METHODS: In this retrospective, population-based cohort study in Brazil and Scotland, we linked national databases from the EAVE II study in Scotland; and the COVID-19 Vaccination Campaign, Acute Respiratory Infection Suspected Cases, and Severe Acute Respiratory Infection/Illness datasets in Brazil) for vaccination, laboratory testing, clinical, and mortality data. We defined cohorts of adults (aged ≥18 years) who received two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and compared rates of severe COVID-19 outcomes (ie, COVID-19 hospital admission or death) across fortnightly periods, relative to 2-3 weeks after the second dose. Entry to the Scotland cohort started from May 19, 2021, and entry to the Brazil cohort started from Jan 18, 2021. Follow-up in both cohorts was until Oct 25, 2021. Poisson regression was used to estimate rate ratios (RRs) and vaccine effectiveness, with 95% CIs. FINDINGS: 1 972 454 adults received two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 in Scotland and 42 558 839 in Brazil, with longer follow-up in Scotland because two-dose vaccination began earlier in Scotland than in Brazil. In Scotland, RRs for severe COVID-19 increased to 2·01 (95% CI 1·54-2·62) at 10-11 weeks, 3·01 (2·26-3·99) at 14-15 weeks, and 5·43 (4·00-7·38) at 18-19 weeks after the second dose. The pattern of results was similar in Brazil, with RRs of 2·29 (2·01-2·61) at 10-11 weeks, 3·10 (2·63-3·64) at 14-15 weeks, and 4·71 (3·83-5·78) at 18-19 weeks after the second dose. In Scotland, vaccine effectiveness decreased from 83·7% (95% CI 79·7-87·0) at 2-3 weeks, to 75·9% (72·9-78·6) at 14-15 weeks, and 63·7% (59·6-67·4) at 18-19 weeks after the second dose. In Brazil, vaccine effectiveness decreased from 86·4% (85·4-87·3) at 2-3 weeks, to 59·7% (54·6-64·2) at 14-15 weeks, and 42·2% (32·4-50·6) at 18-19 weeks. INTERPRETATION: We found waning vaccine protection of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 against COVID-19 hospital admissions and deaths in both Scotland and Brazil, this becoming evident within three months of the second vaccine dose. Consideration needs to be given to providing booster vaccine doses for people who have received ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council), Scottish Government, Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund, Health Data Research UK, Fiocruz, Fazer o Bem Faz Bem Programme; Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico, Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. TRANSLATION: For the Portuguese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/prevention & control , /administration & dosage , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Brazil , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Immunization, Secondary , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Scotland/epidemiology , Time Factors , Vaccination
15.
Qual Health Res ; 32(4): 670-682, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1582650

ABSTRACT

Social prescribing schemes refer people toward personalized health/wellbeing interventions in local communities. Since schemes hold different representations of social prescribing, responses to the pandemic crisis will vary. Intersectionality states that social divisions build on one another, sustaining unequal health outcomes. We conducted and inductively analysed interviews with twenty-three professional and volunteer stakeholders across three social prescribing schemes in urban and rural Scotland at the start and end of year one of the pandemic. Concerns included identifying and digitally supporting disadvantaged and vulnerable individuals and reduced capacity statutory and third-sector services, obliging link workers to assume new practical and psychological responsibilities. Social prescribing services in Scotland, we argue, represent a collage of practices superimposed on a struggling healthcare system. Those in need of such services are unlikely to break through disadvantage whilst situated within a social texture wherein inequalities of education, health and environmental arrangements broadly intersect with one another.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vulnerable Populations , Humans , Pandemics , Qualitative Research , SARS-CoV-2 , Scotland/epidemiology
17.
J Hosp Infect ; 120: 23-30, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1540764

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Healthcare-acquired COVID-19 has been an additional burden on hospitals managing increasing numbers of patients with SARS-CoV-2. One acute hospital (W) among three in a Scottish healthboard experienced an unexpected surge of COVID-19 clusters. AIM: To investigate possible causes of COVID-19 clusters at Hospital W. METHODS: Daily surveillance provided total numbers of patients and staff involved in clusters in three acute hospitals (H, M and W) and care homes across the healthboard. All clusters were investigated and documented, along with patient boarding, community infection rates and outdoor temperatures from October 2020 to March 2021. Selected SARS-CoV-2 strains were genotyped. FINDINGS: There were 19 COVID-19 clusters on 14 wards at Hospital W during the six-month study period, lasting from two to 42 days (average, five days; median, 14 days) and involving an average of nine patients (range 1-24) and seven staff (range 0-17). COVID-19 clusters in Hospitals H and M reflected community infection rates. An outbreak management team implemented a control package including daily surveillance; ward closures; universal masking; screening; restricting staff and patient movement; enhanced cleaning; and improved ventilation. Forty clusters occurred across all three hospitals before a January window-opening policy, after which there were three during the remainder of the study. CONCLUSION: The winter surge of COVID-19 clusters was multi-factorial, but clearly exacerbated by moving trauma patients around the hospital. An extended infection prevention and control package including enhanced natural ventilation helped reduce COVID-19 clusters in acute hospitals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Delivery of Health Care , Hospitals , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Scotland/epidemiology
18.
Thorax ; 77(5): 497-504, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526530

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Algorithms , Calibration , Cohort Studies , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Scotland/epidemiology
20.
Arch Dis Child ; 106(12): 1212-1217, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526461

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Children are relatively protected from COVID-19, due to a range of potential mechanisms. We investigated if contact with children also affords adults a degree of protection from COVID-19. DESIGN: Cohort study based on linked administrative data. SETTING: Scotland. STUDY POPULATION: All National Health Service Scotland healthcare workers and their household contacts as of March 2020. MAIN EXPOSURE: Number of young children (0-11 years) living in the participant's household. MAIN OUTCOMES: COVID-19 requiring hospitalisation, and any COVID-19 (any positive test for SARS-CoV-2) in adults aged ≥18 years between 1 March and 12 October 2020. RESULTS: 241 266, 41 198, 23 783 and 3850 adults shared a household with 0, 1, 2 and 3 or more young children, respectively. Over the study period, the risk of COVID-19 requiring hospitalisation was reduced progressively with increasing numbers of household children-fully adjusted HR (aHR) 0.93 per child (95% CI 0.79 to 1.10). The risk of any COVID-19 was similarly reduced, with the association being statistically significant (aHR per child 0.93; 95% CI 0.88 to 0.98). After schools reopened to all children in August 2020, no association was seen between exposure to young children and risk of any COVID-19 (aHR per child 1.03; 95% CI 0.92 to 1.14). CONCLUSION: Between March and October 2020, living with young children was associated with an attenuated risk of any COVID-19 and COVID-19 requiring hospitalisation among adults living in healthcare worker households. There was no evidence that living with young children increased adults' risk of COVID-19, including during the period after schools reopened.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/transmission , Family Characteristics , Health Personnel , Adult , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19 Testing , Child , Child, Preschool , Cohort Studies , Cross Protection , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male , Pandemics , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Schools , Scotland/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL