A Complementary Medicine student-led telehealth clinic: evaluating learning & teaching perceptions (preprint)

Objectives This study evaluates a multi-centered complementary medicine (CM) student-led telehealth clinic during the COVID-19 pandemic. Likert and qualitative responses explore student and educator learning and teaching perceptions of the implementation of a successful telehealth clinic. Results 51 students and 17 educators completed the survey. Respondents agreed that support from educators (90%) and orientation (70%) assisted effective performance. Over ninety percent (93%) of all respondents supported telehealth in student-led clinics, whilst 87% encountered barriers such as technical and infrastructure issues. Respondents agreed that telehealth practice skills improved in case history taking (90%), treatment (90%) and building patient rapport (60%). Respondents (61%) disagreed that physical examination was effectively performed, and 100% of respondents agreed telehealth was a valuable learning experience. This study is the first to explore student and educator perceptions of telehealth in an Australian University multi-centered CM student-led clinic. To be successful in an educational environment, students and educators require digital literacy and adequate telehealth practice infrastructure. Whilst some in-person practice skills are transferable to telehealth, educators need to adapt curriculum to ensure counselling and physical examination skills are specifically taught for virtual consultations. Telehealth in clinical practice requires continued investigation and educational development.

Long-term effects of extreme smoke exposure on COVID-19: A cohort study (preprint)

In early 2014, the Hazelwood coalmine fire covered the regional Australian town of Morwell in smoke and ash for 45 days. One of the fires by-products, PM2.5, has been linked higher rates of COVID-19 infection to increased expression of the ACE2 receptor, which the COVID-19 virus uses to infect cells throughout the body. However, it is unclear whether the effect persists for years after exposure. In this study, we surveyed a cohort established prior to the pandemic to determine whether PM2.5 from the coalmine fire increased long-term vulnerability to COVID-19 infection and severe disease. In late 2022, 612 members of the Hazelwood Health Studys adult cohort, established in 2016/17, participated in a follow-up survey including standardised items to capture COVID-19 infections, hospitalisations, and vaccinations. Associations were evaluated in crude and adjusted logistic regression models, applying statistical weighting for survey response and multiple imputation to account for missing data, with sensitivity analyses to test the robustness of results. A total of 271 (44%) participants self-reported or met symptom criteria for at least one COVID-19 infection. All models found a positive association, with odds of infection increasing by between 4-21% for every standard deviation (12.3{micro}g/m3) increase in mine fire-related PM2.5 exposure. However, this was not statistically significant in any model. There were insufficient hospitalisations to examine severity (n=7; 1%). The findings were inconclusive in ruling out an effect of PM2.5 exposure from coalmine fire on long-term vulnerability to COVID-19 infection. Given the positive association that was robust to modelling variations as well as evidence for a causal mechanism, it would be prudent to treat PM2.5 from fire events as a risk factor for long-term COVID-19 vulnerability until more evidence accumulates.

Evaluation of home-based Naturopathic Telehealth clinic: an innovative model implemented in response to the COVID-19 pandemic (preprint)

ObjectivesThe COVID-19 pandemic in Australia disrupted usual clinical training placements for naturopathic students. An innovative, remote Telehealth model was developed and implemented. This pilot study evaluates student and educator learning and teaching experiences in Telehealth. A survey assessed Likert and qualitative written responses to student and staff interaction with the Telehealth clinic. ResultsNine student and 12 educator responses were included in the analysis. All students positively rated Telehealth training resources and the educator support provided. Students rated the Telehealth learning experience as ‘very good’ (78%) or ‘good’ (22%) with educator ratings of ‘very good’ (67%) or ‘good’ (33%). Thematic analysis of student written responses showed increased client diversity, collaboration, peer learning, increased feedback, and improved digital and technology skills. Virtual physical examination and infrastructure limitations were reported as Telehealth clinical practicum challenges.Naturopathic Telehealth clinic practicum is a valuable alternative to in-person clinical practicums for Australian students. It enhances student collaboration and peer learning. Challenges of technology, infrastructure and incorporating Telehealth in curriculum may be barriers to implementation of Telehealth. However, Telehealth is an important clinical training option to prepare student practitioners for contemporary professional practice if in-person consultation is prohibitive, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes associated with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases and immune modifying therapies: a nationwide cohort study in the OpenSAFELY platform (preprint)

BackgroundIt is unclear if people with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) (joint, bowel and skin) and on immune modifying therapy have increased risk of serious COVID-19 outcomes. MethodsWith the approval of NHS England we conducted a cohort study, using OpenSAFELY, analysing routinely-collected primary care data linked to hospital admission, death and previously unavailable hospital prescription data. We used Cox regression (adjusting for confounders) to estimate hazard ratios (HR) comparing risk of COVID-19-death, death/critical care admission, and hospitalisation (March to September 2020) in: 1) people with IMIDs compared to the general population; and 2) people with IMIDs on targeted immune modifying drugs (e.g., biologics) compared to standard systemic treatment (e.g., methotrexate). FindingsWe identified 17,672,065 adults; of 1,163,438 (7%) with IMIDs, 19,119 people received targeted immune modifying drugs, and 200,813 received standard systemics. We saw evidence of increased COVID-19-death (HR 1.23, 95%CI 1.20, 1.27), and COVID-19 hospitalisation (HR 1.32, 95%CI 1.29, 1.35) in individuals with IMIDs overall compared to individuals without IMIDs of the same age, sex, deprivation and smoking status. We saw no evidence of increased COVID-19 deaths with targeted compared to standard systemic treatments (HR 1.03, 95%CI 0.80, 1.33). There was no evidence of increased COVID-19-related death in those prescribed TNF inhibitors, IL-12/23, IL7, IL-6 or JAK inhibitors compared to standard systemics. Rituximab was associated with increased COVID-19 death (HR 1.68, 95%CI 1.11, 2.56); however, this finding may relate to confounding. InterpretationCOVID-19 death and hospitalisation was higher in people with IMIDs. We saw no increased risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes in those on most targeted immune modifying drugs for IMIDs compared to standard systemics. RESEARCH IN CONTEXTO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSWe searched PubMed on May 19th, 2021, using the terms "COVID-19", "SARS-CoV-2" and "rheumatoid arthritis", "psoriatic arthritis" "ankylosing spondylitis", "Crohns disease" "ulcerative colitis" "hidradenitis suppurativa" and "psoriasis", to identify primary research articles examining severe COVID-19 outcome risk in individuals with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) and those on immune modifying therapy. The studies identified (including matched cohort studies and studies in disease-specific registries) were limited by small sample sizes and number of outcomes. Most studies did not show a signal of increased adverse COVID-19 outcomes in those on targeted therapies, with the exception of rituximab. Additionally, disease- specific registries are subject to selection bias and lack denominator populations. Added value of the studyIn our large population-based study of 17 million individuals, including 1 million people with IMIDs and just under 200,000 receiving immune modifying medications, we saw evidence that people with IMIDs had an increased risk of COVID-19-related death compared to the general population after adjusting for potential confounders (age, sex, deprivation, smoking status) (HR 1.23, 95%CI 1.20, 1.27). We saw differences by IMID type, with COVID-19-related death being increased by the most in people with inflammatory joint disease (HR 1.47, 95%CI 1.40, 1.54). We also saw some evidence that those with IMIDs were more likely, compared to the general population, to have COVID-19-related critical care admission/death (HR 1.24, 95%CI 1.21, 1.28) and hospitalisation (HR 1.32, 95%CI 1.29, 1.35). Compared to people with IMIDs taking standard systemics, we saw no evidence of differences in severe COVID-19-related outcomes with TNF inhibitors, IL-17 inhibitors, IL-12/23 inhibitors, IL-6 inhibitors and JAK inhibitors. However, there was some evidence that rituximab was associated with an increased risk of COVID-19-related death (HR 1.68, 95%CI 1.11, 2.56) and death/critical care admission (HR 1.92, 95%CI 1.31, 2.81). We also saw evidence of an increase in COVID-19-related hospital admissions in people prescribed rituximab (HR 1.59, 95%CI 1.16, 2.18) or JAK inhibition (HR 1.81, 95%CI 1.09, 3.01) compared to those on standard systemics, although this could be related to worse underlying health rather than the drugs themselves, and numbers of events were small. This is the first study to our knowledge to use high-cost drug data on medicines supplied by hospitals at a national scale in England (to identify targeted therapies). The availability of these data fills an important gap in the medication record of those with more specialist conditions treated by hospitals creating an important opportunity to generate insights to these conditions and these medications Implications of all of the available evidenceOur study offers insights into future risk mitigation strategies and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination priorities for individuals with IMIDs, as it highlights that those with IMIDs and those taking rituximab may be at risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes. Critically, our study does not show a link between most targeted immune modifying medications compared to standard systemics and severe COVID-19 outcomes. However, the increased risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes that we saw in people with IMIDs and those treated with rituximab merits further study.

Impact of baseline cases of cough and fever on UK COVID-19 diagnostic testing rates: estimates from the Bug Watch community cohort study (preprint)

BackgroundDiagnostic testing forms a major part of the UKs response to the current COVID-19 pandemic with tests offered to people with a continuous cough, high temperature or anosmia. Testing capacity must be sufficient during the winter respiratory season when levels of cough and fever are high due to non-COVID-19 causes. This study aims to make predictions about the contribution of baseline cough or fever to future testing demand in the UK. MethodsIn this analysis of the Bug Watch prospective community cohort study, we estimated the incidence of cough or fever in England in 2018-2019. We then estimated the COVID-19 diagnostic testing rates required in the UK for baseline cough or fever cases for the period July 2020-June 2021. This was explored for different rates of the population requesting tests and four second wave scenarios and then compared to current national capacity. ResultsThe baseline incidence of cough or fever in the UK is expected to rise rapidly from 154,554 (95%CI 103,083 - 231,725) cases per day in August 2020 to 250,708 (95%CI 181,095 - 347,080) in September, peaking at 444,660 (95%CI 353,084 - 559,988) in December. If 80% of baseline cough or fever cases request tests, average daily UK testing demand would exceed current capacity for five consecutive months (October 2020 to February 2021), with a peak demand of 147,240 (95%CI 73,978 - 239,502) tests per day above capacity in December 2020. ConclusionsOur results show that current national COVID-19 testing capacity is likely to be exceeded by demand due to baseline cough and fever alone. This study highlights that the UKs response to the COVID-19 pandemic must ensure that a high proportion of people with symptoms request tests, and that testing capacity is immediately scaled up to meet this high predicted demand.