Observational cross-sectional study of the association of poor broadband provision with demographic and health outcomes: the Wolverhampton Digital ENablement (WODEN) programme.

OBJECTIVES: The association between impaired digital provision, access and health outcomes has not been systematically studied. The Wolverhampton Digital ENablement programme (WODEN) is a multiagency collaborative approach to determine and address digital factors that may impact on health and social care in a single deprived multiethnic health economy. The objective of this study is to determine the association between measurable broadband provision and demographic and health outcomes in a defined population. DESIGN: An observational cross-sectional whole local population-level study with cohorts defined according to broadband provision. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Data for all residents of the City of Wolverhampton, totalling 269 785 residents. PRIMARY OUTCOMES: Poor broadband provision is associated with variation in demographics and with increased comorbidity and urgent care needs. RESULTS: Broadband provision was measured using the Broadband Infrastructure Index (BII) in 158 City localities housing a total of 269 785 residents. Lower broadband provision as determined by BII was associated with younger age (p<0.001), white ethnic status (p<0.001), lesser deprivation as measured by Index of Multiple Deprivation (p<0.001), a higher number of health comorbidities (p<0.001) and more non-elective urgent events over 12 months (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Local municipal and health authorities are advised to consider the variations in broadband provision within their locality and determine equal distribution both on a geographical basis but also against demographic, health and social data to determine equitable distribution as a platform for equitable access to digital resources for their residents.

Why communities must be at the centre of the Coronavirus disease 2019 response: Lessons from Ebola and human immunodeficiency virus in Africa.

As the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has spread globally, with no effective treatment or vaccine yet available, governments in many countries have put in place social interventions to control the outbreak. The various lockdown measures may have devastating impacts on economies and livelihoods. This approach risks undermining public trust in government responses and therefore undermines efforts to promote behaviour change, which is key to the success of social interventions. Important lessons can be drawn from past Ebola outbreaks and the human immunodeficiency virus pandemic on how communities should be central to COVID-19 responses. Communities are complex and only their members can inform public health experts about their lived realities, the community's understanding of the outbreak and what will work locally to reduce transmission. The public should be encouraged to take positive actions to ensure their own health and well-being, rather than made to feel powerless. Communities should be supported to develop their own response plans, community leaders should be recognised as vital assets, community representatives should have equal inclusion in strategic meetings and greater empathy should be built into decision-making processes.

Assessing the psychological impact of COVID-19 on intensive care workers: A single-centre cross-sectional UK-based study.

Background: COVID-19 has presented a unique set of psychological stressors for healthcare professionals. There is currently a dearth of literature establishing the impact amongst intensive care workers, who may be at the greatest risk. This study aimed to establish the prevalence of anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder amongst a cohort of intensive care workers within the United Kingdom. Methods: A questionnaire was designed to incorporate validated screening tools for depression (Patient Health Questionnaire, PHQ-9) anxiety (Generalised Anxiety Disorder Scale, GAD-7), and post-traumatic stress disorder (Impact of Event Scale-Revised, IES-R). All intensive care workers at the Countess of Chester Hospital (UK) were eligible. Data was collected between 17th June and 8th July 2020. Results: The majority of the 131 respondents were nurses (52.7% [69/131]) or doctors (32.8% [43/141]). Almost one-third (29.8% [39/131]) reported a significant or extreme impact of COVID-19 on their mental health. In total, 16%(21/131) had symptoms of moderate depression, 11.5%(15/131) moderately severe depression and 6.1%(8/131) severe depression. Females had significantly higher mean PHQ-9 scores than males (8.8 and 5.7 respectively, p = 0.009). Furthermore, 18.3% (24/131) had moderate anxiety with 14.5% (19/131) having severe anxiety. Mean GAD-7 scores were higher amongst females than males (8.7 and 6.3 respectively, p = 0.028). Additionally, 28.2% (37/131) reported symptoms consistent with a diagnosis of PTSD (IES-R ≥ 33). Despite these findings, only 3.1% (4/131) of staff accessed trust mental health support. Conclusion: The impact of COVID-19 on intensive care workers is significant and warrants specific focus and attention in order to preserve this key sector of the workforce.