Search

Background: We examined fidelity and feasibility of implementation of COVID-19 preventive measures in schools, and explored associations between adherence to these measures and staff well-being, to inform policy on sustainable implementation and staff wellbeing. Methods: Surveys were conducted across 128 schools in England with 107 headteachers and 2698 staff-members with reference to autumn term 2020, examining school-level implementation of preventive measures, adherence, and teacher burnout (response rates for headteacher and staff surveys were 84% and 59%, respectively). Results: The median number of measures implemented in primary and secondary schools was 33 (range 23-41), and 32 (range 22-40), respectively; most measures presented challenges. No differences were found regarding number of measures implemented by school-level socio-economic disadvantage. High adherence was reported for staff wearing face-coverings, staff regularly washing their hands, (secondary only) desks facing forwards, and (primary only) increased cleaning of surfaces and student hand-washing. Adherence to most measures was reported as higher in primary than secondary schools. Over half of school leaders and 42% (517/1234) of other teaching staff suffered from high emotional exhaustion. Higher teacher-reported school-wide adherence with measures was consistently associated with lower burnout for leaders and other teaching staff. Conclusions: Findings indicate a tremendous effort in implementing preventive measures and an urgent need to support investments in improving teacher wellbeing.

Objective: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on pupils and staff in English schools. This study aimed to provide an in-depth understanding of the challenges schools faced and the processes they implemented to protect the mental wellbeing of students and staff in the later stages of the pandemic, focusing on January-June 2022. Design: Qualitative study. Setting: Primary and secondary schools in England from April to September 2022. Method: Ten semi-structured interviews were conducted using Zoom with six primary and four secondary school headteachers (or other members of the senior leadership team) in England. Results: Mental wellbeing programming for students and staff was scaled up in both primary and secondary schools amid concerns that the COVID-19 pandemic would impact on mental health. Headteachers perceived changes in the behaviour of students, including increased dysregulation, and staff struggling with fatigue and a sense of being devalued as professionals. Schools scaled up the supports they offered to students and staff, but challenges remain in maintaining such increased support due to the perceived additional needs of staff and students within the context of funding constraints. Despite initial concerns that there would be tension between promoting mental wellbeing and academic catch-up among students, headteachers identified work addressing these two priorities as synergistic. Conclusion: Mental wellbeing impacts of the pandemic on pupils and staff required increased provision of support programmes. Ongoing efforts to monitor the wellbeing needs of students and staff is required. Formal and informal methods to enhance the mental health for pupils and staff should continue into the recovery period.

BackgroundThis research prioritization aimed to identify major research gaps in maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health (MNCAH) to help mitigate the direct and indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe adapted the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative methodology. We defined scope, domains, themes and scoring criteria. We approached diverse global experts via email to submit their research ideas in MNCAH and MNCAH-related cross-cutting/health systems area. We curated the research ideas as research questions (RQs) and sent them to the consenting experts for scoring via the online link. For each RQ, the research priority score (RPS) was calculated as an average of individual criterion scores and ranked based on RPS in each area.ResultsWe identified top-ranked 10 RQs in each maternal, newborn, and child and adolescent health and 5 in the cross-cutting/health systems area. In maternal health, indirect effects on care, measures to improve care, health risks and outcomes, and preventing and managing SARS-CoV-2 infection/COVID-19 disease were priority RQs. In newborn health, clinical characterization and managing SARS-CoV-2 infection/COVID-19 disease, mode of transmission and interventions to prevent transmission were the focus. For child and adolescent health, top-ranked RQs were indirect effects on care, clinical status and outcomes, interventions to protect against SARS-CoV-2 infection/COVID-19 disease, and educational institute-related RQs. The cross-cutting RQs were the effects of the pandemic on availability, access, care-seeking and utilization of MNCAH services and potential solutions.ConclusionsWe call on partners, including governments, non-governmental organizations, research institutes, and donors, to address this urgent research agenda.

Background The role of children and staff in SARS-CoV-2 transmission outside and within households is still not fully understood when large numbers are in regular, frequent contact in schools. Methods We used the self-controlled case-series method during the alpha- and delta-dominant periods to explore the incidence of infection in periods around a household member infection, relative to periods without household infection, in a cohort of primary and secondary English schoolchildren and staff from November 2020 to July 2021. Results We found the relative incidence of infection in students and staff was highest in the 1–7 days following household infection, remaining high up to 14 days after, with risk also elevated in the 6–-12 days before household infection. Younger students had a higher relative incidence following household infection, suggesting household transmission may play a more prominent role compared with older students. The relative incidence was also higher among students in the alpha variant dominant period. Conclusions This analysis suggests SARS-CoV2 infection in children, young people and staff at English schools were more likely to be associated with within-household transmission than from outside the household, but that a small increased risk of seeding from outside is observed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) coronavirus (MERS-CoV) represents 1 of 3 major zoonotic coronaviruses to have emerged with global impact in the past 2 decades, alongside severe acute respiratory syndrome [...]

BACKGROUND: We examined fidelity and feasibility of implementation of COVID‐19 preventive measures in schools, and explored associations between adherence to these measures and staff well‐being, to inform policy on sustainable implementation and staff wellbeing. METHODS: Surveys were conducted across 128 schools in England with 107 headteachers and 2698 staff‐members with reference to autumn term 2020, examining school‐level implementation of preventive measures, adherence, and teacher burnout (response rates for headteacher and staff surveys were 84% and 59%, respectively). RESULTS: The median number of measures implemented in primary and secondary schools was 33 (range 23‐41), and 32 (range 22‐40), respectively; most measures presented challenges. No differences were found regarding number of measures implemented by school‐level socio‐economic disadvantage. High adherence was reported for staff wearing face‐coverings, staff regularly washing their hands, (secondary only) desks facing forwards, and (primary only) increased cleaning of surfaces and student hand‐washing. Adherence to most measures was reported as higher in primary than secondary schools. Over half of school leaders and 42% (517/1234) of other teaching staff suffered from high emotional exhaustion. Higher teacher‐reported school‐wide adherence with measures was consistently associated with lower burnout for leaders and other teaching staff. CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate a tremendous effort in implementing preventive measures and an urgent need to support investments in improving teacher wellbeing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: One of the most debated questions in the COVID-19 pandemic has been the role of schools in SARS-CoV-2 transmission. The COVID-19 Schools Infection Survey (SIS) aims to provide much-needed evidence addressing this issue. Objective: We present the study protocol and participation profile for the SIS study, aimed at assessing the role of schools in SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission within school settings, and investigating how transmission within and from schools could be mitigated through the implementation of school COVID-19 control measures. Methods: SIS was a multisite, prospective, observational cohort study conducted in a stratified random sample of primary and secondary schools in selected local authorities in England. A total of 6 biobehavioral surveys were planned among participating students and staff during the 2020-2021 academic year, between November 2020 and July 2021. Key measurements were SARS-CoV-2 virus prevalence, assessed by nasal swab polymerase chain reaction; anti-SARS-CoV-2 (nucleocapsid protein) antibody prevalence and conversion, assessed in finger-prick blood for staff and oral fluid for students; student and staff school attendance rates; feasibility and acceptability of school-level implementation of SARS-CoV-2 control measures; and investigation of selected school outbreaks. The study was approved by the United Kingdom Health Security Agency Research Support and Governance Office (NR0237) and London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Ethics Review Committee (reference 22657). Results: Data collection and laboratory analyses were completed by September 2021. A total of 22,585 individuals--1891 staff and 4654 students from 59 primary schools and 5852 staff and 10,188 students from 97 secondary schools--participated in at least one survey. Across all survey rounds, staff and student participation rates were 45.2% and 16.4%, respectively, in primary schools and 30% and 15.2%, respectively, in secondary schools. Although primary student participation increased over time, and secondary student participation remained reasonably consistent, staff participation declined across rounds, especially for secondary school staff (3165/7583, 41.7% in round 1 and 2290/10,374, 22.1% in round 6). Although staff participation overall was generally reflective of the eligible staff population, student participation was higher in schools with low absenteeism, a lower proportion of students eligible for free school meals, and from schools in the least deprived locations (in primary schools, 446/4654, 9.6% of participating students were from schools in the least deprived quintile compared with 1262/22,225, 5.7% of eligible students). Conclusions: We outline the study design, methods, and participation, and reflect on the strengths of the SIS study as well as the practical challenges encountered and the strategies implemented to address these challenges. The SIS study, by measuring current and incident infection over time, alongside the implementation of control measures in schools across a range of settings in England, aims to inform national guidance and public health policy for educational settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]