Access to COVID-19 vaccination by socio-economic status in older Singaporean adults: a population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Socio-economic status (SES) disparities exist in the uptake of COVID-19 vaccination; however, most studies were conducted during the initial pandemic wave when vaccination was less discretionary, limiting generalizability. We aimed to determine whether differences in vaccination uptake across SES strata widened after the removal of vaccination-differentiated measures prior to the rollout of the second boosters, in a nationwide cohort of older Singaporeans at higher risk of severe-COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective population-based cohort study. METHODS: Retrospective population-based cohort study of all Singaporeans aged ≥60 years from 22nd February 2021-14th February 2023. Cox regression models controlling for demographics and comorbidities were used to estimate hazard-ratios (HRs) for the uptake of primary vaccination as well as first/second boosters, as recorded in the national vaccination registry, according to SES (housing type). RESULTS: 836,170 individuals were included for completion of a primary vaccine series; 784,938 individuals for completion of the first booster and 734,206 individuals for the completion of the second booster. Differences in vaccination uptake by SES strata were observed (e.g. vaccination uptake in lowest-SES [1-2 room public-housing] versus highest-SES [private housing]: second booster, 47.6% vs. 58.1%; first booster, 93.9% vs. 98.0%). However, relative differences did not markedly widen during second booster rollout when vaccination was more discretionary (e.g. amongst those aged 60-69 years: 0.75 [95% CI = 0.73-0.76] for the first booster; 0.81 [95% CI = 0.79-0.84] for the second booster). CONCLUSION: While differences in vaccination uptake across SES strata by housing type persisted during the rollout of primary vaccination and subsequent boosters in a nationwide cohort of older Singaporeans, differences did not widen substantially when vaccination was made more discretionary.

Accelerating TB diagnosis during the COVID-19 pandemic.

SETTING: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused significant disruption worldwide to economies and healthcare systems, even those with well-developed infrastructure.OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of COVID-19 on TB diagnosis in Singapore, and to identify any factors that could facilitate early detection of TB among persons screened.DESIGN: To assess the impact of testing and diagnosis of the pandemic on TB, the number of TB-related tests from January 2018 to December 2020 were collected. We also conducted a retrospective case-control study of all adult patients admitted for COVID-19, TB or coinfection from 23 January to 31 May 2020.RESULTS: Nationwide testing for TB from 2018 to 2020 increased by 24.2%. We analysed 253 adult inpatients, of whom 107 (42.3%) were diagnosed with COVID-19, 134 (53.0%) had TB, while 12 (4.7%) had co-infection. Patients with TB were more likely to have chest X-ray abnormalities than those with COVID-19 (89.9% vs. 76.0%; P < 0.01). Patients with TB were more likely to have prolonged cough vs. those with COVID-19 infection (28 vs. 5 days; P < 0.01).CONCLUSION: Early screening for TB, even among patients with COVID-19, could lead to earlier diagnosis and treatment, thereby breaking the chain of transmission.

Screening for cardiovascular disease risk factors at baseline and post intervention among adults with intellectual disabilities in an urbanised Asian society.

BACKGROUND: Adults with intellectual disabilities (ID) face significant barriers to screening participation. We determined predictors for regular cardiovascular health screening at baseline among adults with ID in Singapore, and evaluated the effectiveness of a 3-month screening intervention. METHODS: The study population involved all adults with ID aged ≥40 years receiving services from the Movement for the Intellectually Disabled of Singapore (MINDS), the largest such provider in Singapore. Over 3 months in 2011, adult clients not screened regularly at baseline for hypertension, diabetes and dyslipidaemia were offered free and convenient blood pressure, fasting blood glucose and lipid testing; data on other cardiovascular disease risk factors were also collected. Chi-square and logistic regression identified predictors of regular screening at baseline. RESULTS: Participation was 95.0% (227/239). At baseline, among adults with ID, 61.8% (118/191), 24.8% (52/210) and 18.2% (34/187) had gone for regular hypertension, diabetes and dyslipidaemia screening respectively; post intervention, rates rose to 96.9%, 89.5% and 88.8% respectively. Prevalence of cardiovascular disease risk factors (22.5% with hypertension, 10.6% with diabetes, 34.8% with dyslipidaemia, 10.7% obese and 90.6% lacking regular exercise) was high compared against the general population. While receiving residential services was associated with regular hypertension screening, receiving non-residential services and being independently mobile were associated with regular participation in fasting blood tests (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Cardiovascular disease risk factors are common among adults with ID and clinicians should proactively screen such populations. Provision of free and convenient screening for cardiovascular disease risk improved screening participation.