ABSTRACT
ObjectivesTo identify the risk of general practitioner mortality from COVID and the impact of measures to mitigate this risk on the level and socioeconomic distribution of primary care provision in the English NHS DesignCross sectional study SettingAll GP practices providing primary care under the NHS in England Participants45,858 GPs and 6,771 GP practices in the English NHS Main outcome measuresNumbers of high-risk GPs, high-risk single-handed GP practices, patients associated with these high-risk single-handed practices and the regional and socioeconomic distribution of each. Mortality rates from COVID by age, sex and ethnicity were used to attribute risk to GPs and the Index of Multiple Deprivation was used to determine socioeconomic distributions of the outcomes. ResultsOf 45,858 GPs in our sample 3,632 (7.9%) were classified as high risk or very high risk. Of 6,771 GP practices in our sample 639 (9.4%) were identified as single-handed practices and of these 209 (32.7%) were run by a GP at high or very high risk. These 209 single-handed practices care for 710,043 patients. GPs at the highest levels of risk from COVID, and single-handed practices run by high-risk GPs were concentrated in the most deprived neighbourhoods in the country. London had the highest proportion of both GPs and single-handed GP practices at very high risk of COVID mortality with 1,160 patients per 100,000 population registered to these practices. ConclusionsA significant proportion of GPs working in England, particularly those serving patients in the most deprived neighbourhoods, are at high risk of dying from COVID. Many of these GPs run single-handed practices. These GPs are particularly concentrated in London. There is an opportunity to provide additional support to mitigate COVID risk for GPs, GP practices and their patients. Failure to do so will likely exacerbate existing health inequalities. What is already knownO_LIKnown risk factors for morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 include age, sex, ethnicity and certain underlying health conditions. C_LIO_LINHS England have suggested that NHS staff who may be at higher risk from COVID are risk assessed and have their activities adjusted accordingly, including ceasing face to face patient contact. C_LI What this study addsO_LIThis study applies risk scoring to calculate the number of GPs practicing in England who are likely to be at high or very high risk of death from COVID. We examine the potential effect of removing GPs at high or very high risk from COVID from face to face patient contacts, estimating the number of GPs and patients likely to be affected, and relating this to deprivation and geography. C_LIO_LIWe estimate that of 45,858 GPs in our sample, 2,253 (4.9%) were classified as high risk, and 1,379 (3%) as very high risk from COVID. These are likely to be conservative estimates. C_LIO_LIGPs at high risk of COVID are more likely to work in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation. C_LIO_LIAlmost one in three single-handed GP practices (32.7%, or 209 out of 639) is run by a GP we estimate to be at high or very high risk from COVID. If these GPs did not see patients face to face, 710,043 patients would be left without face to face GP appointments. Single-handed GP practices in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation are more likely to be run by GPs at higher risk of COVID. C_LI
ABSTRACT
BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the respiratory disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was first identified in Wuhan, China and has since become pandemic. As part of initial response activities in the United States, enhanced contact investigations were conducted to enable early identification and isolation of additional cases and to learn more about risk factors for transmission. MethodsClose contacts of nine early travel-related cases in the United States were identified. Close contacts meeting criteria for active monitoring were followed, and selected individuals were targeted for collection of additional exposure details and respiratory samples. Respiratory samples were tested for SARS-CoV-2 by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. ResultsThere were 404 close contacts who underwent active monitoring in the response jurisdictions; 338 had at least basic exposure data, of whom 159 had [≥]1 set of respiratory samples collected and tested. Across all known close contacts under monitoring, two additional cases were identified; both secondary cases were in spouses of travel-associated case patients. The secondary attack rate among household members, all of whom had [≥]1 respiratory sample tested, was 13% (95% CI: 4 - 38%). ConclusionsThe enhanced contact tracing investigations undertaken around nine early travel-related cases of COVID-19 in the United States identified two cases of secondary transmission, both spouses. Rapid detection and isolation of the travel-associated case patients, enabled by public awareness of COVID-19 among travelers from China, may have mitigated transmission risk among close contacts of these cases.
ABSTRACT
IntroductionMore than 93,000 cases of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) have been reported worldwide. We describe the epidemiology, clinical course, and virologic characteristics of the first 12 U.S. patients with COVID-19. MethodsWe collected demographic, exposure, and clinical information from 12 patients confirmed by CDC during January 20-February 5, 2020 to have COVID-19. Respiratory, stool, serum, and urine specimens were submitted for SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR testing, virus culture, and whole genome sequencing. ResultsAmong the 12 patients, median age was 53 years (range: 21-68); 8 were male, 10 had traveled to China, and two were contacts of patients in this series. Commonly reported signs and symptoms at illness onset were fever (n=7) and cough (n=8). Seven patients were hospitalized with radiographic evidence of pneumonia and demonstrated clinical or laboratory signs of worsening during the second week of illness. Three were treated with the investigational antiviral remdesivir. All patients had SARS-CoV-2 RNA detected in respiratory specimens, typically for 2-3 weeks after illness onset, with lowest rRT-PCR Ct values often detected in the first week. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected after reported symptom resolution in seven patients. SARS-CoV-2 was cultured from respiratory specimens, and SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in stool from 7/10 patients. ConclusionsIn 12 patients with mild to moderately severe illness, SARS-CoV-2 RNA and viable virus were detected early, and prolonged RNA detection suggests the window for diagnosis is long. Hospitalized patients showed signs of worsening in the second week after illness onset.
