Search

Hepatitis C is a global public health threat, affecting 56 million people worldwide. The World Health Organization has committed to eliminating hepatitis C by 2030. Although new treatments have revolutionised the treatment and care of people with hepatitis C, treatment uptake has slowed in recent years, drawing attention to the need for innovative approaches to reach elimination targets. One approach involves using existing notifiable disease data to contact people previously diagnosed with hepatitis C. Within these disease surveillance systems, however, competing tensions exist, including protecting individual rights to privacy and autonomy, and broader public health goals. We explore these issues using hepatitis C and Australia's legislative and regulatory frameworks as a case study. We examine emerging uses of notification data to contact people not yet treated, and describe some of the ethical dilemmas associated with the use and non-use of this data and the protections that exist to preserve individual rights and public health. We reveal weaknesses in rights protections and processes under Australian public health and human rights legislation and argue for consultation with and involvement of affected communities in policy and intervention design before notification data is used to increase hepatitis C treatment coverage., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Background: Media narratives can shape public opinion and actions, influencing the uptake of pediatric COVID-19 vaccines. The COVID-19 pandemic has occurred at a time where infodemics, misinformation, and disinformation are present, impacting the COVID-19 response., Objective: This study aims to investigate how narratives about pediatric COVID-19 vaccines in the media of 4 English-speaking countries: the United States, Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom., Methods: The Narrative Policy Framework was used to guide the comparative analyses of the major print and web-based news agencies' media regarding COVID-19 vaccines for children aged 5 to 11 years. Data were sought using systematic searching on Factiva (Dow Jones) of 4 key phases of pediatric vaccine approval and rollout., Results: A total of 400 articles (n=287, 71.8% in the United States, n=40, 10% in Australia, n=60, 15% in Canada, and n=13, 3% in the United Kingdom) met the search criteria and were included. Using the Narrative Policy Framework, the following were identified in each article: hero, villain, survivor, and plot. The United States was the earliest country to vaccinate children, and other countries' media often lauded the United States for this. Australian and Canadian media narratives about vaccines for children aged 5 to 11 years were commonly about protecting susceptible people in society, whereas the US and the UK narratives focused more on the vaccine helping children return to school. All 4 countries focused on the vaccines for children aged 5 to 11 years as being key to "ending" the pandemic. Australian and Canadian narratives frequently compared vaccine rollouts across states or provinces and bemoaned local progress in vaccine delivery compared with other countries globally. Canadian and US narratives highlighted the "infodemic" about the COVID-19 pandemic and disinformation regarding child vaccines as impeding uptake. All 4 countries-the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom, and Canada-used war imagery in reporting about COVID-19 vaccines for children. The advent of the Omicron variant demonstrated that populations were fatigued by the COVID-19 pandemic, and the media reporting increasingly blamed the unvaccinated. The UK media narrative was unique in describing vaccinating children as a distraction from adult COVID-19 vaccination efforts. The United States and Canada had narratives expressing anger about potential vaccine passports for children. In Australia, general practitioners were labelled as heroes. Finally, the Canadian narrative suggested altruistic forgoing of COVID-19 vaccine "boosters" as well as pediatric COVID-19 vaccines to benefit those in poorer nations., Conclusions: Public health emergencies require clear; compelling and accurate communication. The stories told during this pandemic are compelling because they contain the classic elements of a narrative; however, they can be reductive and inaccurate., (©Verity L Chadwick, Freya Saich, Joseph Freeman, Alexandra Martiniuk. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (https://formative.jmir.org), 29.04.2024.)

Introduction: Longitudinal studies can provide timely and accurate information to evaluate and inform COVID-19 control and mitigation strategies and future pandemic preparedness. The Optimise Study is a multidisciplinary research platform established in the Australian state of Victoria in September 2020 to collect epidemiological, social, psychological and behavioural data from priority populations. It aims to understand changing public attitudes, behaviours and experiences of COVID-19 and inform epidemic modelling and support responsive government policy., Methods and Analysis: This protocol paper describes the data collection procedures for the Optimise Study, an ongoing longitudinal cohort of ~1000 Victorian adults and their social networks. Participants are recruited using snowball sampling with a set of seeds and two waves of snowball recruitment. Seeds are purposively selected from priority groups, including recent COVID-19 cases and close contacts and people at heightened risk of infection and/or adverse outcomes of COVID-19 infection and/or public health measures. Participants complete a schedule of monthly quantitative surveys and daily diaries for up to 24 months, plus additional surveys annually for up to 48 months. Cohort participants are recruited for qualitative interviews at key time points to enable in-depth exploration of people's lived experiences. Separately, community representatives are invited to participate in community engagement groups, which review and interpret research findings to inform policy and practice recommendations., Ethics and Dissemination: The Optimise longitudinal cohort and qualitative interviews are approved by the Alfred Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (# 333/20). The Optimise Study CEG is approved by the La Trobe University Human Ethics Committee (# HEC20532). All participants provide informed verbal consent to enter the cohort, with additional consent provided prior to any of the sub studies. Study findings will be disseminated through public website (https://optimisecovid.com.au/study-findings/) and through peer-reviewed publications., Trial Registration Number: NCT05323799., Competing Interests: Competing interests: Burnet Institute has received investigator initiated clinical research funding form Gilead Sciences, AbbVie and Merck unrelated to this grant., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Community engagement is key to developing local and context-specific strategies for the prevention and control of COVID-19. However, expedited research design and approval in the early days of the pandemic may have limited the opportunities for community members to influence pandemic-related research. In this study, we sought to understand how a Community Engagement Group (CEG) could impact a large longitudinal COVID-19 research project (Optimise), when involved solely in the interpretation and knowledge translation phases of the research., Methods: Seven community members were recruited for the CEG, representing a diverse range of groups. Each month, Optimise data of topical importance were compiled into a draft report. The CEG discussed the draft report at their monthly meeting and members' contributions were incorporated into the final report for distribution to policy-makers. In this study, a document analysis was undertaken of ten consecutive reports produced between February and November 2021. Each report was compared pre- and post- the inclusion of CEG contributions, which were then analysed using thematic analysis., Results: Community engagement in the interpretation and knowledge translation phases of Optimise had positive impacts on reports for policy-makers, including grounding the empirical findings in broader community perspectives, identifying policy issues affecting different groups and contributing unique insights beyond the empirical findings. Overall, the CEG contributions demonstrated the complexity of lived experience lying beneath the empirical data., Conclusion: Community engagement in the translation of the Optimise findings resulted in research reports to policy-makers that were reflective of a broader range of community perspectives, and that provided potential solutions to emerging policy issues related to COVID-19. This study adds to the evidence base about the impact of community engagement in the later interpretation and knowledge translation phases of research, particularly in the context of reporting to policy-makers during a public health emergency., (© 2024 The Author(s); Published by Kerman University of Medical Sciences This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.)

Background: This review is an update of a rapid review undertaken in 2020 to identify relevant, feasible and effective communication approaches to promote acceptance, uptake and adherence to physical distancing measures for COVID-19 prevention and control. The rapid review was published when little was known about transmission, treatment or future vaccination, and when physical distancing measures (isolation, quarantine, contact tracing, crowd avoidance, work and school measures) were the cornerstone of public health responses globally. This updated review includes more recent evidence to extend what we know about effective pandemic public health communication. This includes considerations of changes needed over time to maintain responsiveness to pandemic transmission waves, the (in)equities and variable needs of groups within communities due to the pandemic, and highlights again the critical role of effective communication as integral to the public health response., Objectives: To update the evidence on the question 'What are relevant, feasible and effective communication approaches to promote acceptance, uptake and adherence to physical distancing measures for COVID-19 prevention and control?', our primary focus was communication approaches to promote and support acceptance, uptake and adherence to physical distancing., Secondary Objective: to explore and identify key elements of effective communication for physical distancing measures for different (diverse) populations and groups., Search Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library databases from inception, with searches for this update including the period 1 January 2020 to 18 August 2021. Systematic review and study repositories and grey literature sources were searched in August 2021 and guidelines identified for the eCOVID19 Recommendations Map were screened (November 2021)., Selection Criteria: Guidelines or reviews focusing on communication (information, education, reminders, facilitating decision-making, skills acquisition, supporting behaviour change, support, involvement in decision-making) related to physical distancing measures for prevention and/or control of COVID-19 or selected other diseases (sudden acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), influenza, Ebola virus disease (EVD) or tuberculosis (TB)) were included. New evidence was added to guidelines, reviews and primary studies included in the 2020 review., Data Collection and Analysis: Methods were based on the original rapid review, using methods developed by McMaster University and informed by Cochrane rapid review guidance. Screening, data extraction, quality assessment and synthesis were conducted by one author and checked by a second author. Synthesis of results was conducted using modified framework analysis, with themes from the original review used as an initial framework., Main Results: This review update includes 68 studies, with 17 guidelines and 20 reviews added to the original 31 studies. Synthesis identified six major themes, which can be used to inform policy and decision-making related to planning and implementing communication about a public health emergency and measures to protect the community. Theme 1: Strengthening public trust and countering misinformation: essential foundations for effective public health communication Recognising the key role of public trust is essential. Working to build and maintain trust over time underpins the success of public health communications and, therefore, the effectiveness of public health prevention measures. Theme 2: Two-way communication: involving communities to improve the dissemination, accessibility and acceptability of information Two-way communication (engagement) with the public is needed over the course of a public health emergency: at first, recognition of a health threat (despite uncertainties), and regularly as public health measures are introduced or adjusted. Engagement needs to be embedded at all stages of the response and inform tailoring of communications and implementation of public health measures over time. Theme 3: Development of and preparation for public communication: target audience, equity and tailoring Communication and information must be tailored to reach all groups within populations, and explicitly consider existing inequities and the needs of disadvantaged groups, including those who are underserved, vulnerable, from diverse cultural or language groups, or who have lower educational attainment. Awareness that implementing public health measures may magnify existing or emerging inequities is also needed in response planning, enactment and adjustment over time. Theme 4: Public communication features: content, timing and duration, delivery Public communication needs to be based on clear, consistent, actionable and timely (up-to-date) information about preventive measures, including the benefits (whether for individual, social groupings or wider society), harms (likewise) and rationale for use, and include information about supports available to help follow recommended measures. Communication needs to occur through multiple channels and/or formats to build public trust and reach more of the community. Theme 5: Supporting behaviour change at individual and population levels Supporting implementation of public health measures with practical supports and services (e.g. essential supplies, financial support) is critical. Information about available supports must be widely disseminated and well understood. Supports and communication related to them require flexibility and tailoring to explicitly consider community needs, including those of vulnerable groups. Proactively monitoring and countering stigma related to preventive measures (e.g. quarantine) is also necessary to support adherence. Theme 6: Fostering and sustaining receptiveness and responsiveness to public health communication Efforts to foster and sustain public receptiveness and responsiveness to public health communication are needed throughout a public health emergency. Trust, acceptance and behaviours change over time, and communication needs to be adaptive and responsive to these changing needs. Ongoing community engagement efforts should inform communication and public health response measures., Authors' Conclusions: Implications for practice Evidence highlights the critical role of communication throughout a public health emergency. Like any intervention, communication can be done well or poorly, but the consequences of poor communication during a pandemic may mean the difference between life and death. The approaches to effective communication identified in this review can be used by policymakers and decision-makers, working closely with communication teams, to plan, implement and adjust public communications over the course of a public health emergency like the COVID-19 pandemic. Implications for research Despite massive growth in research during the COVID-19 period, gaps in the evidence persist and require high-quality, meaningful research. This includes investigating the experiences of people at heightened COVID-19 risk, and identifying barriers to implementing public communication and protective health measures particular to lower- and middle-income countries, and how to overcome these., (Copyright © 2023 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Objective: We describe COVID-19 risk reduction strategies adopted by Victorian adults during December 2021-January 2022, a period of high COVID-19 infection and limited government mandated public health measures., Methods: In February 2022, participants of a Victorian-based cohort study (Optimise) completed a cross-sectional survey on risk reduction behaviours during December 2021-January 2022. Regression modelling estimated the association between risk reduction and demographics., Results: A total of 556 participants were included (median age 47 years; 75% women; 82% in metropolitan Melbourne). Two-thirds (61%) adopted at least one risk reduction behaviour, with uptake highest among younger participants (18-34 years; adjusted relative risk (aRR): 1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01, 1.41) and those with a chronic health condition (aRR: 1.17, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.35)., Conclusions: Participants adopted their own COVID-19 risk reduction strategies in a setting of limited government restrictions, with young people more likely to adopt a risk reduction strategy that did not limit social mobility., Implication for Public Health: A public health response to COVID-19 that focusses on promoting personal risk reduction behaviours, as opposed to mandated restrictions, could be enhanced by disseminating information on and increasing availability of effective risk reduction strategies tailored to segments of the population., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Since the emergence of the Omicron variant in Australia in late 2021 there have been over 5.47 million cases and 4993 deaths, disproportionately impacting on people with social and structural disadvantage. However there has been increasing reluctance by governments to intervene to reduce the impact of COVID-19 transmission and its consequences. This commentary article provides a perspective on the support and guidance required to mitigate individuals and communities risk by using a harm reduction approach to highlight strategies that can reduce COVID-19 transmission and infection., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest The authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To estimate the proportion of Victorians infected with COVID-19 in January 2022., Methods: Between 11-19 February 2022 we conducted a nested cross-sectional survey on experiences of COVID-19 testing, symptoms, test outcome and barriers to testing during January 2022 in Victoria, Australia. Respondents were participants of the Optimise Study, a prospective cohort of adults considered at increased risk of COVID-19 or the unintended consequences of COVID-19-related interventions., Results: Of the 577 participants, 78 (14%) reported testing positive to COVID-19, 240 (42%) did not test in January 2022 and 91 of those who did not test (38%) reported COVID-19-like symptoms. Using two different definitions of symptoms, we calculated symptomatic (27% and 39%) and asymptomatic (4% and 11%) test positivity. We extrapolated these positivity rates to participants who did not test and estimated 19-22% of respondents may have had COVID-19 infection in January 2022., Conclusion: The proportion of Victorians infected with COVID-19 in January 2022 was likely considerably higher than officially reported numbers., Implications for Public Health: Our estimate is approximately double the COVID-19 case numbers obtained from official case reporting. This highlights a major limitation of diagnosis data that must be considered when preparing for future waves of infection., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: High vaccine uptake requires strong public support, acceptance, and willingness., Methods: A longitudinal cohort study gathered survey data every four weeks between 1 October 2020 and 9 November 2021 in Victoria, Australia. Data were analysed for 686 participants aged 18 years and older., Results: Vaccine intention in our cohort increased from 60% in October 2020 to 99% in November 2021. Vaccine intention increased in all demographics, but longitudinal trends in vaccine intention differed by age, employment as a healthcare worker, presence of children in the household, and highest qualification attained. Acceptance of vaccine mandates increased from 50% in October 2020 to 71% in November 2021. Acceptance of vaccine mandates increased in all age groups except 18-25 years; acceptance also varied by gender and highest qualification attained. The main reasons for not intending to be vaccinated included safety concerns, including blood clots, and vaccine efficacy., Conclusion: COVID-19 vaccination campaigns should be informed by understanding of the sociodemographic drivers of vaccine acceptance to enable socially and culturally relevant guidance and ensure equitable vaccine coverage. Vaccination policies should be applied judiciously to avoid polarisation.

Background: In Australia, the unrestricted and subsidised availability of direct-acting antivirals for people living with hepatitis C has made the elimination of hepatitis C possible. Recent declining treatment uptake, however, may jeopardise the attainment of this goal. Notification data already exist in many jurisdictions but are presently under-utilised. Despite growing interest in the potential use of data to link people diagnosed with hepatitis C to treatment services, little evidence exists on the acceptability and feasibility of this approach. Our study aimed to address this gap and guide future strategies to enhance treatment uptake., Methods: Twenty-seven people with lived experience of injecting drug use and/or hepatitis C participated in two focus groups exploring views on implementing a system of hepatitis C notification follow-up in Australia, that would direct people to treatment and care. Additionally, qualitative interviews were conducted with 20 key informants to examine the ethical, logistical, and regulatory implications of implementation. Data were thematically analysed using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability - which has been used to assess the acceptability of interventions from the perspectives of intervention deliverers and recipients., Results: While there were clear reservations, there was consensus that the potential benefits of using notification data to contact people with hepatitis C, outweigh harms. The method of contact (including by whom and how), whether follow-up should include recent versus historical diagnoses, and if record linkage should be used to enhance follow-up were important considerations. Ethical and logistical concerns were raised about the risk that such an approach could exacerbate stigma and discrimination., Conclusion: Findings highlight potentially significant benefits of using notifications data to increase access to hepatitis C treatment, a novel approach that can contribute to hepatitis C elimination efforts and prevent hepatitis C-related morbidity and mortality., Competing Interests: Declarations of Interest The author(s) declare no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although people with dementia receive substantial care from informal sources, there is limited research available that investigates how these carers experience end-of-life care., Aim: This review aimed to identify what is currently known about carers' experiences of providing end-of-life care to a family member or friend with dementia and draw implications for palliative care policy and service provision., Design: A scoping literature review was conducted, first using a targeted key word search, followed by assessments of eligibility based on title and then abstract content., Data Sources: Records were sourced through PsycINFO, PubMed and CINAHL databases. Peer-reviewed papers published between 2000 and 2016, reporting on data collected directly from carers, were included for review., Results: Carers' experience centred on relationships (with care recipients, family and friends and health care professionals) and the specific context of caring for someone with dementia. These broad categories of carers' experiences had clear influences on them personally, particularly in relation to their sense of self and their wellbeing., Conclusion: Palliative care services would benefit from ensuring holistic approaches to supporting people with dementia, their carers and wider family networks. Tailoring services to the specific context of dementia would enable effective, personalised support throughout extended periods leading up to care recipient death as well as through the challenges faced beyond bereavement.