Search

Objectives: Knowledge of Acute Respiratory virus Infection (ARI) is limited in relation to their substantial global burden. We completed a feasibility study of a novel method to study the natural transmission of respiratory viruses from young children to adults in hospital., Methods: Between September 2012 and May 2015, we recruited healthy adults (contacts) and paediatric inpatients with ARIs (index) presenting to the University Hospitals Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK. We took nose and throat swabs from all participants prior to controlled, 30 minute interactions between the children with ARIs and adult contacts. Contacts recorded symptoms and provided four nose and throat swabs over ten days post-interaction, which were tested for a panel of respiratory viruses to assess transmission., Results: 111 interactions occurred between children with ARIs and adult contacts. Respiratory viruses were detected in 103 of 111 children (93%), most commonly rhinoviruses (RVs) (67 of 103, 65%). Transmission to an adult contact occurred in 15 (14·6%) of 103 interactions and was inversely associated with the contact being male (adjusted OR 0·12; 95% CI 0·02-0·72)., Conclusion: Using a novel methodology, we found that natural transmission of ARIs occurred in 15% of an infected child's contacts following a 30 minute interaction, primarily by RVs and when the contact was female. Our model has key advantages in comparison with human challenge studies making it well-suited for further studies of respiratory virus transmission, disease pathogenesis, and clinical and public health interventions to interrupt transmission., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Rapid diagnostic and prognostic tests for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) are urgently required. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic and prognostic ability of breath analysis using gas chromatography-ion mobility spectrometry (GC-IMS) in hospitalized patients with COVID-19., Methods: Between February and May 2021, we took 1 breath sample for analysis using GC-IMS from participants who were admitted to the hospital for COVID-19, participants who were admitted to the hospital for other respiratory infections, and symptom-free controls, at the University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, United Kingdom. Demographic, clinical, and radiological data, including requirement for continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) ventilation as a marker for severe disease in the COVID-19 group, were collected., Results: A total of 113 participants were recruited into the study. Seventy-two (64%) were diagnosed with COVID-19, 20 (18%) were diagnosed with another respiratory infection, and 21 (19%) were healthy controls. Differentiation between participants with COVID-19 and those with other respiratory tract infections with GC-IMS was highly accurate (sensitivity/specificity, 0.80/0.88; area under the receiver operating characteristics curve [AUROC], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.74-0.96). GC-IMS was also moderately accurate at identifying those who subsequently required CPAP (sensitivity/specificity, 0.62/0.80; AUROC, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.53-0.87)., Conclusions: GC-IMS shows promise as both a diagnostic tool and a predictor of prognosis in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and should be assessed further in larger studies., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. A.S. and E.B. report provision of materials, consumables, and training only, with no payment from IMSPEX Diagnostics Ltd, Abercynon, UK. All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

Background: Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Effective use of personal protective equipment (PPE) reduces this risk. We sought to determine the prevalence and predictors of self-reported access to appropriate PPE (aPPE) for HCWs in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: We conducted cross sectional analyses using data from a nationwide questionnaire-based cohort study administered between December 2020-February 2021. The outcome was a binary measure of self-reported aPPE (access all of the time vs access most of the time or less frequently) at two timepoints: the first national lockdown in the UK in March 2020 (primary analysis) and at the time of questionnaire response (secondary analysis)., Results: Ten thousand five hundred eight HCWs were included in the primary analysis, and 12,252 in the secondary analysis. 35.2% of HCWs reported aPPE at all times in the primary analysis; 83.9% reported aPPE at all times in the secondary analysis. In the primary analysis, after adjustment (for age, sex, ethnicity, migration status, occupation, aerosol generating procedure exposure, work sector and region, working hours, night shift frequency and trust in employing organisation), older HCWs and those working in Intensive Care Units were more likely to report aPPE at all times. Asian HCWs (aOR:0.77, 95%CI 0.67-0.89 [vs White]), those in allied health professional and dental roles (vs those in medical roles), and those who saw a higher number of COVID-19 patients compared to those who saw none (≥ 21 patients/week 0.74, 0.61-0.90) were less likely to report aPPE at all times. Those who trusted their employing organisation to deal with concerns about unsafe clinical practice, compared to those who did not, were twice as likely to report aPPE at all times. Significant predictors were largely unchanged in the secondary analysis., Conclusions: Only a third of HCWs in the UK reported aPPE at all times during the first lockdown and that aPPE had improved later in the pandemic. We also identified key determinants of aPPE during the first UK lockdown, which have mostly persisted since lockdown was eased. These findings have important implications for the safe delivery of healthcare during the pandemic., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Healthcare workers (HCWs), particularly those from ethnic minority groups, have been shown to be at disproportionately higher risk of infection with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) compared to the general population. However, there is insufficient evidence on how demographic and occupational factors influence infection risk among ethnic minority HCWs., Methods and Findings: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis using data from the baseline questionnaire of the United Kingdom Research study into Ethnicity and Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Outcomes in Healthcare workers (UK-REACH) cohort study, administered between December 2020 and March 2021. We used logistic regression to examine associations of demographic, household, and occupational risk factors with SARS-CoV-2 infection (defined by polymerase chain reaction (PCR), serology, or suspected COVID-19) in a diverse group of HCWs. The primary exposure of interest was self-reported ethnicity. Among 10,772 HCWs who worked during the first UK national lockdown in March 2020, the median age was 45 (interquartile range [IQR] 35 to 54), 75.1% were female and 29.6% were from ethnic minority groups. A total of 2,496 (23.2%) reported previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. The fully adjusted model contained the following dependent variables: demographic factors (age, sex, ethnicity, migration status, deprivation, religiosity), household factors (living with key workers, shared spaces in accommodation, number of people in household), health factors (presence/absence of diabetes or immunosuppression, smoking history, shielding status, SARS-CoV-2 vaccination status), the extent of social mixing outside of the household, and occupational factors (job role, the area in which a participant worked, use of public transport to work, exposure to confirmed suspected COVID-19 patients, personal protective equipment [PPE] access, aerosol generating procedure exposure, night shift pattern, and the UK region of workplace). After adjustment, demographic and household factors associated with increased odds of infection included younger age, living with other key workers, and higher religiosity. Important occupational risk factors associated with increased odds of infection included attending to a higher number of COVID-19 positive patients (aOR 2.59, 95% CI 2.11 to 3.18 for ≥21 patients per week versus none), working in a nursing or midwifery role (1.30, 1.11 to 1.53, compared to doctors), reporting a lack of access to PPE (1.29, 1.17 to 1.43), and working in an ambulance (2.00, 1.56 to 2.58) or hospital inpatient setting (1.55, 1.38 to 1.75). Those who worked in intensive care units were less likely to have been infected (0.76, 0.64 to 0.92) than those who did not. Black HCWs were more likely to have been infected than their White colleagues, an effect which attenuated after adjustment for other known risk factors. This study is limited by self-selection bias and the cross sectional nature of the study means we cannot infer the direction of causality., Conclusions: We identified key sociodemographic and occupational risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection among UK HCWs, and have determined factors that might contribute to a disproportionate odds of infection in HCWs from Black ethnic groups. These findings demonstrate the importance of social and occupational factors in driving ethnic disparities in COVID-19 outcomes, and should inform policies, including targeted vaccination strategies and risk assessments aimed at protecting HCWs in future waves of the COVID-19 pandemic., Trial Registration: The study was prospectively registered at ISRCTN (reference number: ISRCTN11811602)., Competing Interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: MDT has had research collaborations with GlaxoSmithKline and Orion Pharma unrelated to the current work. KK is Director of the University of Leicester Centre for Black Minority Ethnic Health, Trustee of the South Asian Health Foundation and Chair of the Ethnicity Subgroup of the UK Government Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE). SC is Deputy Medical Director of the General Medical Council, UK Honorary Professor, University of Leicester. MP reports grants from Sanofi, grants and personal fees from Gilead Sciences and personal fees from QIAGEN, outside the submitted work. ALG Co-investigator on UK-REACH, which is supported by a grant from the MRC-UK Research and Innovation (MR/V027549/1) and the Department of Health and Social Care through the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) rapid response panel to tackle COVID-19. Past funding by internal fellowships at the University of Leicester from the Wellcome Trust Institutional Strategic Support Fund (204801/Z/16/Z) and the BHF Accelerator Award (AA/18/3/ 34220). Member of Wellcome Trust Longitudinal Populations studies COVID-19 questionnaire steering group, to design national questionnaire to capture impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the population. KRA is a member of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Diagnostics Advisory Committee, the NICE Decision and Technical Support Units, and is a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Senior Investigator Emeritus [NF-SI-0512-10159]. He has served as a paid consultant, providing unrelated methodological and strategic advice, to the pharmaceutical and life sciences industry generally, as well as to DHSC/NICE, and has received unrelated research funding from Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI), European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries & Associations (EFPIA), Pfizer, Sanofi and Swiss Precision Diagnostics/Clearblue. He has also received course fees from ABPI and is a Partner and Director of Visible Analytics Limited, a health technology assessment consultancy company.

Competing Interests: KK is Director of the University of Leicester Centre for Black Minority Ethnic Health, Trustee of the South Asian Health Foundation, Chair of the Ethnicity Subgroup of the UK Government Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE). SC is Deputy Medical Director of the General Medical Council, UK Honorary Professor, University of Leicester. MP reports grants from Sanofi, grants and personal fees from Gilead Sciences and personal fees from QIAGEN, outside the submitted work. KW, ICM, CAM, LBN, ALG, CM, LB, AG, CJ, MDT, JN, DP and LJG have no competing interests to declare.

Competing Interests: Competing interests: none declared

Community-Based Health Insurance (CBHI) is a form of micro health insurance targeted at low-income groups that permits for grouping of assets to tackle the expenses of future, uncertain, health-related circumstances. According to the International Labour Organisation, more than 80% of India's employed nonagricultural population is in the informal sector, implying that they are possibly excluded from receiving health insurance benefits. This is where CBHI comes into play, wherein groups of people belonging to a community define the demand and benefits and pool their resources to provide financial protection to all their members. This study aims to scrutinize the package prices sanctioned by these schemes and compare them with the cost incurred by the hospital. The expense pattern of three surgeries in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology was analysed under three insurance schemes: Arogya Bhagya Yojana, Arogya Karnataka, and Employees' State Insurance Scheme. Methodology . A retrospective study was conducted in a 2,032-bedded tertiary care hospital in South India. Patients of abdominal hysterectomy, vaginal hysterectomy, and caesarean section surgeries covered by any of the insurance schemes mentioned above were a part of the inclusion criteria. The patient records were examined from the hospital's Medical Records Department (MRD). The patients' bills were assembled from the inpatient billing department to scrutinize all the expenses associated with each surgery. The variable costs include consumables, medicine, electricity and AC, diagnostics, blood bank materials, doctor's fee, package differences, and others. In contrast, fixed costs include bed cost, equipment cost (purchase + annual maintenance cost), manpower cost-OT, manpower cost-nursing, and allocated indirect costs associated with the medical treatment. These were computed and compared with the package price of respective insurance schemes to determine if the schemes are profit-yielding schemes or loss-yielding schemes, using the data from the finance department. Results and Conclusion . It has been observed that the operating loss of the hospital for abdominal hysterectomy, vaginal hysterectomy, and caesarean section under CBHI schemes ranges between 7% and 36%. The highest loss was observed in Arogya Karnataka Scheme for caesarean section surgery (BPL patients). The amount received through these schemes is insufficient to cover the costs acquired by the hospital, let alone make a profit. However, under Arogya Bhagya and ESI Schemes, the hospital has made a profit in covering the variable costs for these surgeries. The study concludes that the hospital is running under loss due to the three Community-Based Health Insurance (CBHI) schemes., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Jatoveda Haldar et al.)

Competing Interests: KRA has served as a paid consultant, providing unrelated methodological advice, to; Abbvie, Amaris, Allergan, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Meyers Squibb, Creativ-Ceutical, GSK, ICON/Oxford Outcomes, Ipsen, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Merck, NICE, Novartis, NovoNordisk, Pfizer, PRMA, Roche and Takeda, and has received research funding from Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI), European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries & Associations (EFPIA), Pfizer, Sanofi and Swiss Precision Diagnostics. He is a Partner and Director of Visible Analytics Limited, a healthcare consultancy company. KK has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Takeda, Servier and Pfizer, and research support from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi and Pfizer. KK is Director for the University of Leicester Centre for BME Health, Trustee of the South Asian Health Foundation, national NIHR ARC lead for Ethnicity and Diversity, Chair of the SAGE subgroup on Ethnicity and COVD and a member of Independent SAGE. MP reports grants and personal fees from Gilead Sciences and personal fees from QIAGEN, outside the submitted work. All other authors report no conflict of interest.

Background: Patients from ethnic minority groups are disproportionately affected by Coronavirus disease (COVID-19). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the relationship between ethnicity and clinical outcomes in COVID-19., Methods: Databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PROSPERO, Cochrane library and MedRxiv ) were searched up to 31st August 2020, for studies reporting COVID-19 data disaggregated by ethnicity. Outcomes were: risk of infection; intensive therapy unit (ITU) admission and death. PROSPERO ID: 180654., Findings: 18,728,893 patients from 50 studies were included; 26 were peer-reviewed; 42 were from the United States of America and 8 from the United Kingdom. Individuals from Black and Asian ethnicities had a higher risk of COVID-19 infection compared to White individuals. This was consistent in both the main analysis (pooled adjusted RR for Black: 2.02, 95% CI 1.67-2.44; pooled adjusted RR for Asian: 1.50, 95% CI 1.24-1.83) and sensitivity analyses examining peer-reviewed studies only (pooled adjusted RR for Black: 1.85, 95%CI: 1.46-2.35; pooled adjusted RR for Asian: 1.51, 95% CI 1.22-1.88). Individuals of Asian ethnicity may also be at higher risk of ITU admission (pooled adjusted RR 1.97 95% CI 1.34-2.89) (but no studies had yet been peer-reviewed) and death (pooled adjusted RR/HR 1.22 [0.99-1.50])., Interpretation: Individuals of Black and Asian ethnicity are at increased risk of COVID-19 infection compared to White individuals; Asians may be at higher risk of ITU admission and death. These findings are of critical public health importance in informing interventions to reduce morbidity and mortality amongst ethnic minority groups., Competing Interests: KRA has served as a paid consultant, providing unrelated methodological advice, to; Abbvie, Amaris, Allergan, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Meyers Squibb, Creativ-Ceutical, GSK, ICON/Oxford Outcomes, Ipsen, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Merck, NICE, Novartis, NovoNordisk, Pfizer, PRMA, Roche and Takeda, and has received research funding from Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI), European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries & Associations (EFPIA), Pfizer, Sanofi and Swiss Precision Diagnostics. He is a Partner and Director of Visible Analytics Limited, a healthcare consultancy company. KK has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Takeda, Servier and Pfizer, and research support from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi and Pfizer. KK is Director for the University of Leicester Centre for BME Health, Trustee of the South Asian Health Foundation, national NIHR ARC lead for Ethnicity and Diversity, Chair of the SAGE subgroup on Ethnicity and COVD and a member of Independent SAGE. MP reports grants and personal fees from Gilead Sciences and personal fees from QIAGEN, outside the submitted work. All other authors report no conflict of interest., (© 2020 The Author(s).)

Introduction: Coronary artery aneurysms are seen in 1.5-5% of patients presenting for coronary angiography, but giant aneurysms, defined as being greater than 2 cm in diameter, are rare. Given the paucity of cases and limited experience in diagnosis and management of the disease, each case is a learning tool in itself., Case Presentation: We report the rare case of a 78-year-old Caucasian man who presented to a peripheral emergency department with chest pain and was subsequently found to have a giant right coronary artery aneurysm. Following initial investigation and treatment he was referred to our hospital for definitive management., Conclusion: The case described illustrates one of the varied presentations and subsequent management of an ill-defined and heterogeneous disease process. Given the limited experience with giant aneurysms in the coronary circulation, this case provides valuable insight into the clinical presentation of the disease and gives an example of the management of the most recent such case at our hospital.