Search

During the second half of 2020, many European governments responded to the resurging transmission of SARS-CoV-2 with wide-ranging non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). These efforts were often highly targeted at the regional level and included fine-grained NPIs. This paper describes a new dataset designed for the accurate recording of NPIs in Europe's second wave to allow precise modelling of NPI effectiveness. The dataset includes interventions from 114 regions in 7 European countries during the period from the 1st August 2020 to the 9th January 2021. The paper includes NPI definitions tailored to the second wave following an exploratory data collection. Each entry has been extensively validated by semi-independent double entry, comparison with existing datasets, and, when necessary, discussion with local epidemiologists. The dataset has considerable potential for use in disentangling the effectiveness of NPIs and comparing the impact of interventions across different phases of the pandemic. Measurement(s) Government non-pharmaceutical interventions against Covid-19 Technology Type(s) Interpretation by researchers Sample Characteristic - Organism Homo sapiens [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

European governments use non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to control resurging waves of COVID-19. However, they only have outdated estimates for how effective individual NPIs were in the first wave. We estimate the effectiveness of 17 NPIs in Europe's second wave from subnational case and death data by introducing a flexible hierarchical Bayesian transmission model and collecting the largest dataset of NPI implementation dates across Europe. Business closures, educational institution closures, and gathering bans reduced transmission, but reduced it less than they did in the first wave. This difference is likely due to organisational safety measures and individual protective behaviours—such as distancing—which made various areas of public life safer and thereby reduced the effect of closing them. Specifically, we find smaller effects for closing educational institutions, suggesting that stringent safety measures made schools safer compared to the first wave. Second-wave estimates outperform previous estimates at predicting transmission in Europe's third wave. European governments control resurging waves of COVID-19 using nonpharmaceutical interventions. Here, the authors estimate the effectiveness of 17 interventions in Europe's second wave, and analyse differences to the first wave as well as implications for the future of the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: We describe the incidence, location and management of non-major bleeding, and assess the association between non-major bleeding and clinical outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) receiving anticoagulation therapy enrolled in Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE).Methods: We included patients who received ≥1 dose of study drug (n=18 140). Non-major bleeding was defined as the first bleeding event considered to be clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) or minor bleeding, and not preceded by a major bleeding event.Results: Non-major bleeding was three times more common than major bleeding (12.1% vs 3.8%). Like major bleeding, non-major bleeding was less frequent with apixaban (6.4 per 100 patient-years) than warfarin (9.4 per 100 patient-years) (adjusted HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.75). The most frequent sites of non-major bleeding were haematuria (16.4%), epistaxis (14.8%), gastrointestinal (13.3%), haematoma (11.5%) and bruising/ecchymosis (10.1%). Medical or surgical intervention was similar among patients with non-major bleeding on warfarin versus apixaban (24.7% vs 24.5%). A change in antithrombotic therapy (58.6% vs 50.0%) and permanent study drug discontinuation (5.1% (61) vs 3.6% (30), p=0.10) was numerically higher with warfarin than apixaban. CRNM bleeding was independently associated with an increased risk of overall death (adjusted HR 1.70, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.18) and subsequent major bleeding (adjusted HR 2.18, 95% CI 1.56 to 3.04).Conclusions: In ARISTOTLE, non-major bleeding was common and substantially less frequent with apixaban than with warfarin. CRNM bleeding was independently associated with a higher risk of death and subsequent major bleeding. Our results highlight the importance of any severity of bleeding in patients with AF treated with anticoagulation therapy and suggest that non-major bleeding, including minor bleeding, might not be minor.Trial Registration Number: NCT00412984; post-results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]