Mental disorders, COVID-19-related life-saving measures and mortality in France: A nationwide cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Meta-analyses have shown that preexisting mental disorders may increase serious Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes, especially mortality. However, most studies were conducted during the first months of the pandemic, were inconclusive for several categories of mental disorders, and not fully controlled for potential confounders. Our study objectives were to assess independent associations between various categories of mental disorders and COVID-19-related mortality in a nationwide sample of COVID-19 inpatients discharged over 18 months and the potential role of salvage therapy triage to explain these associations. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We analysed a nationwide retrospective cohort of all adult inpatients discharged with symptomatic COVID-19 between February 24, 2020 and August 28, 2021 in mainland France. The primary exposure was preexisting mental disorders assessed from all discharge information recorded over the last 9 years (dementia, depression, anxiety disorders, schizophrenia, alcohol use disorders, opioid use disorders, Down syndrome, other learning disabilities, and other disorder requiring psychiatric ward admission). The main outcomes were all-cause mortality and access to salvage therapy (intensive-care unit admission or life-saving respiratory support) assessed at 120 days after recorded COVID-19 diagnosis at hospital. Independent associations were analysed in multivariate logistic models. Of 465,750 inpatients with symptomatic COVID-19, 153,870 (33.0%) were recorded with a history of mental disorders. Almost all categories of mental disorders were independently associated with higher mortality risks (except opioid use disorders) and lower salvage therapy rates (except opioid use disorders and Down syndrome). After taking into account the mortality risk predicted at baseline from patient vulnerability (including older age and severe somatic comorbidities), excess mortality risks due to caseload surges in hospitals were +5.0% (95% confidence interval (CI), 4.7 to 5.2) in patients without mental disorders (for a predicted risk of 13.3% [95% CI, 13.2 to 13.4] at baseline) and significantly higher in patients with mental disorders (+9.3% [95% CI, 8.9 to 9.8] for a predicted risk of 21.2% [95% CI, 21.0 to 21.4] at baseline). In contrast, salvage therapy rates during caseload surges in hospitals were significantly higher than expected in patients without mental disorders (+4.2% [95% CI, 3.8 to 4.5]) and lower in patients with mental disorders (-4.1% [95% CI, -4.4; -3.7]) for predicted rates similar at baseline (18.8% [95% CI, 18.7-18.9] and 18.0% [95% CI, 17.9-18.2], respectively). The main limitations of our study point to the assessment of COVID-19-related mortality at 120 days and potential coding bias of medical information recorded in hospital claims data, although the main study findings were consistently reproduced in multiple sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 patients with mental disorders had lower odds of accessing salvage therapy, suggesting that life-saving measures at French hospitals were disproportionately denied to patients with mental disorders in this exceptional context.

Determinants of COVID-19 Vaccination Intention among Health Care Workers in France: A Qualitative Study.

COVID-19 vaccines are one of the best tools to limit the spread of the virus. However, vaccine hesitancy is increasing worldwide, and France is one of the most hesitant countries. From the beginning of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign, health care workers (HCW) have been prioritized in the vaccination strategy but were also hesitant. This study was conducted to identify and understand the determinants of COVID-19 vaccination intention in the French context, with a view to promoting HCW vaccination. A qualitative study using individual semi-structured interviews of HCWs was carried out at the beginning of the vaccination campaign (January to April 2021) in a French university hospital. Interviews indicated that the vaccination intention of HCWs was influenced by confidence in the proposed vaccines, past experience with vaccines and disease, the opinions and vaccination status of others, and media handling of information related to COVID-19 vaccination. Improving HCW vaccination intention regarding COVID-19 vaccines could be achieved through the dissemination of clear, reassuring, scientific information. Information should be disseminated by HCWs and vaccination experts and adapted to local contexts. To improve the level of confidence and vaccination uptake through a compliance effect, it would be useful to promote positive COVID-19 vaccination experiences and increased rates of immunization.

Regional Differences in COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in December 2020: A Natural Experiment in the French Working-Age Population.

It can be assumed that higher SARS-CoV-2 infection risk is associated with higher COVID-19 vaccination intentions, although evidence is scarce. In this large and representative survey of 6007 adults aged 18-64 years and residing in France, 8.1% (95% CI, 7.5-8.8) reported a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection in December 2020, with regional variations according to an East-West gradient (p < 0.0001). In participants without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was substantial, including 41.3% (95% CI, 39.8-42.8) outright refusal of COVID-19 vaccination. Taking into account five characteristics of the first approved vaccines (efficacy, duration of immunity, safety, country of the vaccine manufacturer, and place of administration) as well as the initial setting of the mass vaccination campaign in France, COVID-19 vaccine acceptance would reach 43.6% (95% CI, 43.0-44.1) at best among working-age adults without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was primarily driven by vaccine characteristics, sociodemographic and attitudinal factors. Considering the region of residency as a proxy of the likelihood of getting infected, our study findings do not support the assumption that SARS-CoV-2 infection risk is associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptance.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in a representative working-age population in France: a survey experiment based on vaccine characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Opinion polls on vaccination intentions suggest that COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is increasing worldwide; however, the usefulness of opinion polls to prepare mass vaccination campaigns for specific new vaccines and to estimate acceptance in a country's population is limited. We therefore aimed to assess the effects of vaccine characteristics, information on herd immunity, and general practitioner (GP) recommendation on vaccine hesitancy in a representative working-age population in France. METHODS: In this survey experiment, adults aged 18-64 years residing in France, with no history of SARS-CoV-2 infection, were randomly selected from an online survey research panel in July, 2020, stratified by gender, age, education, household size, and region and area of residence to be representative of the French population. Participants completed an online questionnaire on their background and vaccination behaviour-related variables (including past vaccine compliance, risk factors for severe COVID-19, and COVID-19 perceptions and experience), and were then randomly assigned according to a full factorial design to one of three groups to receive differing information on herd immunity (>50% of adults aged 18-64 years must be immunised [either by vaccination or infection]; >50% of adults must be immunised [either by vaccination or infection]; or no information on herd immunity) and to one of two groups regarding GP recommendation of vaccination (GP recommends vaccination or expresses no opinion). Participants then completed a series of eight discrete choice tasks designed to assess vaccine acceptance or refusal based on hypothetical vaccine characteristics (efficacy [50%, 80%, 90%, or 100%], risk of serious side-effects [1 in 10 000 or 1 in 100 000], location of manufacture [EU, USA, or China], and place of administration [GP practice, local pharmacy, or mass vaccination centre]). Responses were analysed with a two-part model to disentangle outright vaccine refusal (irrespective of vaccine characteristics, defined as opting for no vaccination in all eight tasks) from vaccine hesitancy (acceptance depending on vaccine characteristics). FINDINGS: Survey responses were collected from 1942 working-age adults, of whom 560 (28·8%) opted for no vaccination in all eight tasks (outright vaccine refusal) and 1382 (71·2%) did not. In our model, outright vaccine refusal and vaccine hesitancy were both significantly associated with female gender, age (with an inverted U-shaped relationship), lower educational level, poor compliance with recommended vaccinations in the past, and no report of specified chronic conditions (ie, no hypertension [for vaccine hesitancy] or no chronic conditions other than hypertension [for outright vaccine refusal]). Outright vaccine refusal was also associated with a lower perceived severity of COVID-19, whereas vaccine hesitancy was lower when herd immunity benefits were communicated and in working versus non-working individuals, and those with experience of COVID-19 (had symptoms or knew someone with COVID-19). For a mass vaccination campaign involving mass vaccination centres and communication of herd immunity benefits, our model predicted outright vaccine refusal in 29·4% (95% CI 28·6-30·2) of the French working-age population. Predicted hesitancy was highest for vaccines manufactured in China with 50% efficacy and a 1 in 10 000 risk of serious side-effects (vaccine acceptance 27·4% [26·8-28·0]), and lowest for a vaccine manufactured in the EU with 90% efficacy and a 1 in 100 000 risk of serious side-effects (vaccine acceptance 61·3% [60·5-62·1]). INTERPRETATION: COVID-19 vaccine acceptance depends on the characteristics of new vaccines and the national vaccination strategy, among various other factors, in the working-age population in France. FUNDING: French Public Health Agency (Santé Publique France).

Tobacco and COVID-19: a crisis within a crisis?

During the pandemic, the world's media have publicized preliminary findings suggesting that tobacco use is protective against COVID-19. An ad hoc multidisciplinary group was created to address the major public health implications of this messaging. Key messages of this commentary are as follows: 1) The COVID-19 crisis may increase tobacco consumption and decrease access to healthcare. As a result, smoking-related morbidity and mortality could increase in the coming months and years; 2) Smoking and tobacco-related diseases are prognostic factors for severe COVID-19; and 3) In theory, smokers may be at lower risk of COVID-19 infection because of having fewer social contacts. In conclusion, tobacco control is a greater challenge than ever in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Public decision-makers must be vigilant in ensuring that public health practices are consistent and compliant with the principles of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. In addition, researchers and the media have a responsibility to be cautious in communicating preliminary results that may promote non-evidence-based research, self-destructive individual behaviours, and commercial agendas.

RéSUMé: Pendant la pandémie, des résultats préliminaires sur l'effet protecteur du tabac sur la COVID-19 ont été largement diffusés dans le monde entier. Dans ce contexte, et en raison des questions de santé publique liées à ce sujet, un groupe multidisciplinaire ad hoc a été créé en réponse aux demandes des institutions de santé publique. Les messages clés de ce commentaire sont les suivants : 1) La crise de la COVID-19 pourrait entraîner une augmentation de la consommation de tabac et une diminution de l'accès aux soins. En conséquence, la morbidité et la mortalité liées au tabagisme pourraient augmenter dans les mois et les années à venir; 2) Le tabagisme et les maladies liées au tabac sont des facteurs pronostiques de formes graves de la COVID-19; et 3) Hypothétiquement, les fumeurs, notamment en réduisant la fréquence et la durée des contacts sociaux, pourraient être moins susceptibles d'être contaminés. En conclusion, même pendant et malgré la crise sanitaire due à la pandémie de la COVID-19, la lutte contre le tabagisme reste plus que jamais un défi. Les décideurs publics doivent être particulièrement vigilants pour assurer la cohérence des pratiques publiques, y compris le respect des principes de la Convention-cadre de l'OMS pour la lutte antitabac. Il incombe également aux chercheurs et aux médias de communiquer avec prudence des résultats préliminaires susceptibles de générer des comportements individuels contre-productifs et d'être instrumentalisés à des fins commerciales.