Ethnic disparities and COVID-19 pneumonia in Ireland: a single-centre descriptive study of hospitalised patients in a tertiary university teaching hospital.

In this study, we aim to describe the demographic, clinical and imaging characteristics, treatment course and subsequent outcomes of the first 116 cases presenting to a tertiary Dublin hospital with COVID-19 infection and to compare whether ethnic minority background was a risk factor for poorer disease outcomes in this cohort. Of 116 cases analysed, 100 (86%) patients presented from the community, 6 (5%) from care homes and 10 (9%) were existing inpatients. Fifty-four (46%) patients identified as being from an ethnic minority group. One hundred fourteen (98%) patients reported two or more symptoms at time of diagnosis with 81 (70%) patients having confirmed radiological findings of COVID-19 infection. Median duration of symptoms prior to hospital presentation was 6 days (IQR 3-10 days). The median age at presentation was 52 years (IQR 43-65). Co-morbidities recorded included hypertension, hyperlipidaemia, type 2 diabetes mellitus, underlying respiratory disease, previous or current malignancy and current smoker. Twenty-six patients (22%) required ICU admission, 20 (76.9%) of these were from all other ethnic groups combined and 6 (10%) from White Irish group. Adjusting for variables of age, ethnicity and gender, all other ethnic groups combined were five times more likely to require ICU admission than White Irish group (Table 5). Patients from all other ethnic groups combined admitted to ICU were significantly younger than patients from White Irish group (OR 50.85 vs 62.83, P = 0.012). Our hospital's catchment area serves a wide-ranging and diverse population with many ethnic minority groups represented. Our data demonstrated that there was a significant overrepresentation of a younger cohort of patients from ethnic minority groups admitted to ICU with COVID-19 infection with less co-morbidities than that of the White Irish group.

SARS-CoV-2 transmission risk for common group activities and settings: a living scoping review.

BACKGROUND: While the modes of transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) are well studied, the risk of transmission in various group settings or activities is less clear. This living scoping review aims to summarize the risk factors of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) spread in common group activities (e.g. social gatherings) or settings (e.g. schools, hospitals, shared workplaces) to understand the drivers of transmission and to inform a risk assessment profile tool for use of rapid antigen detection tests. METHODS: We systematically searched electronic databases, MEDLINE and Embase, from January 2019 until February 2022. We included studies that evaluated the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in activities and settings, deemed strategically important to government departments in Ireland, provided by the Department of Health (Ireland) Expert Advisory Group on Rapid Testing. RESULTS: After screening 14 052 records, data from 139 studies were narratively synthesized. The risk was consistently reported as 'high' for large social events (e.g. weddings) and indoor sports, working in healthcare settings and shared workplaces, working/living in residential settings and travelling via public transportation. Most studies were from healthcare settings, with common risk factors including close contact with COVID-19 cases, working in high-risk departments and inappropriate use of personal protective equipment. For other settings and activities, lack of infection prevention and control practices reportedly contributed to infection transmission. CONCLUSION: The heterogeneity across studies and lack of direct information on dominant variants, preventive measures, vaccination coverage necessitates further research on transmission risk within group activities to inform infection prevention and control measures.

Performance of different rapid antigen testing strategies for SARS-CoV-2: A living rapid review.

BACKGROUND: Rapid antigen detection tests (RADTs) for SARS-CoV-2 testing offer several advantages over molecular tests, but there is little evidence supporting an ideal testing algorithm. We aimed to examine the diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) and the effectiveness of different RADT SARS-CoV-2 testing strategies. METHODS: Following PRISMA DTA guidance, we carried out a living rapid review and meta-analysis. Searches were conducted in Ovid MEDLINE® ALL, Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL electronic databases until February 2022. Results were visualized using forest plots and included in random-effects univariate meta-analyses, where eligible. RESULTS: After screening 8010 records, 18 studies were included. Only one study provided data on incidence outcomes. Seventeen studies were DTA reports with direct comparisons of RADT strategies, using RT-PCR as the reference standard. Testing settings varied, corresponding to original SARS-CoV-2 or early variants. Strategies included differences in serial testing, the individual collecting swabs and swab sample locations. Overall, specificity remained high (>98%) across strategies. Although results were heterogeneous, the sensitivity for healthcare worker-collected samples was greater than for self-collected samples. Nasal samples had comparable sensitivity when compared to paired RADTs with nasopharyngeal samples, but sensitivity was much lower for saliva samples. The limited evidence for serial testing suggested higher sensitivity if RADTs were administered every 3 days compared to less frequent testing. CONCLUSIONS: Additional high-quality research is needed to confirm our findings; all studies were judged to be at risk of bias, with significant heterogeneity in sensitivity estimates. Evaluations of testing algorithms in real-world settings are recommended, especially for transmission and incidence outcomes.

Development of a risk assessment profile tool to determine appropriate use of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen detection tests for different activities and events in Ireland, since October 2021.

We describe the development of a risk assessment profile tool that incorporates data from multiple domains to help determine activities and events where rapid antigen detection tests (Ag-RDT) could be used to screen asymptomatic individuals to identify infectious cases as an additional mitigation measure to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2. The tool aims to stratify, in real time, the overall risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission associated with common activities and events, and this can be matched to an appropriate Ag-RDT testing protocol.

Effects of non-invasive respiratory support on gas exchange and outcomes in COVID-19 outside the ICU.

Non-invasive respiratory support (NRS) outside of the ICU has played an important role in the management of COVID-19 pneumonia. There is little data to guide selection of NRS modality. We present outcomes of NRS outside the ICU and discuss the effects of NRS on gas exchange with implications for management.

Sociodemographic variables as predictors of adverse outcome in SARS-CoV-2 infection: an Irish hospital experience.

INTRODUCTION: Our hospital found itself at the epicentre of the Irish COVID-19 pandemic. We describe the organisational challenges faced in managing the surge and identified risk factors for mortality and ICU admission among hospitalised SARS-CoV-2-infected patients. METHODS: All hospitalised SARS-CoV-2 patients diagnosed between March 13 and May 1, 2020, were included. Demographic, referral, deprivation, ethnicity and clinical data were recorded. Multivariable regression, including age-adjusted hazard ratios (HR (95% CI), was used to explore risk factors associated with adverse outcomes. RESULTS: Of 257 inpatients, 174 were discharged (68%) and 39 died (15%) in hospital. Two hundred three (79%) patients presented from the community, 34 (13%) from care homes and 20 (8%) were existing inpatients. Forty-five percent of community patients were of a non-Irish White or Black, Asian or minority ethnic (BAME) population, including 34 Roma (13%) compared to 3% of care home and 5% of existing inpatients, (p < 0.001). Twenty-two patients were healthcare workers (9%). Of 31 patients (12%) requiring ICU admission, 18 were discharged (58%) and 7 died (23%). Being overweight/obese HR (95% CI) 3.09 (1.32, 7.23), p = 0.009; a care home resident 2.68 (1.24, 5.6), p = 0.012; socioeconomically deprived 1.05 (1.01, 1.09), p = 0.012; and older 1.04 (1.01, 1.06), p = 0.002 were significantly associated with death. Non-Irish White or BAME were not significantly associated with death 1.31 (0.28, 6.22), p = 0.63 but were significantly associated with ICU admission 4.38 (1.38, 14.2), p = 0.014 as was being overweight/obese 2.37 (1.37, 6.83), p = 0.01. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic posed unprecedented organisational issues for our hospital resulting in the greatest surge in ICU capacity above baseline of any Irish hospital. Being overweight/obese, a care home resident, socioeconomically deprived and older were significantly associated with death, while ethnicity and being overweight/obese were significantly associated with ICU admission.

'CPR for Feet' care bundle to improve foot assessment in inpatient diabetes.

AIMS: The Scottish Inpatient Diabetes Foot Audit conducted in 2013 revealed that 57% of inpatients had not had their feet checked on admission, 60% of those at risk did not have pressure relief in place and 2.4% developed a new foot lesion. In response, the Scottish Diabetes Foot Action Group launched the 'CPR for Feet' campaign. The aim of this project was to raise awareness of the 'Check, Protect and Refer' (CPR) campaign as well as improve the assessment and management of inpatients with diabetes. METHODS: A quality improvement project underpinned by Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) methodology was undertaken. The first and second cycles focused on staff education and the implementation of a 'CPR for Feet' assessment checklist using campaign guidelines, training manuals and modules. The third and fourth cycles focused on staff feedback and the implementation of a 'CPR for Feet' care bundle. RESULTS: Baseline measurements revealed 28% of patients had evidence of foot assessment. Medical and nursing staff reported to be largely unaware of the 'CPR for Feet' campaign (13%). Fifty-two per cent of inpatients with diabetes had their feet assessed and managed correctly following the second PDSA cycle. After completion of the third and fourth PDSA this number improved further to 72% and all staff reported to be aware of the campaign. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of a 'CPR for Feet' care bundle improved the assessment of inpatients with diabetes.