All-cause and cause-specific mortality among people with and without intellectual disabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Netherlands: a population-based cohort study

Did high frequency phone surveys during the COVID-19 pandemic include disability questions? An assessment of COVID-19 surveys from March 2020 to December 2022

OBJECTIVES

In the midst of the pandemic, face-to-face data collection for national censuses and surveys was suspended due to limitations on mobility and social distancing, limiting the collection of already scarce disability data. Responses to these constraints were met with a surge of high-frequency phone surveys (HFPSs) that aimed to provide timely data for understanding the socioeconomic impacts of and responses to the pandemic. This paper provides an assessment of HFPS datasets and their inclusion of disability questions to evaluate the visibility of persons with disabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN

We collected HFPS questionnaires conducted globally from the onset of the pandemic emergency in March 2020 until December 2022 from various online survey repositories. Each HFPS questionnaire was searched using a set of keywords for inclusion of different types of disability questions. Results were recorded in an Excel review log, which was manually reviewed by two researchers.

METHODS

The review of HFPS datasets involved two stages: (1) a main review of 294 HFPS dataset-waves and (2) a semiautomated review of the same dataset-waves using a search engine-powered questionnaire review tool developed by our team. The results from the main review were compared with those of a sensitivity analysis using and testing the tool as an alternative to manual search.

RESULTS

Roughly half of HFPS datasets reviewed and 60% of the countries included in this study had some type of question on disability. While disability questions were not widely absent from HFPS datasets, only 3% of HFPS datasets included functional difficulty questions that meet international standards. The search engine-powered questionnaire review tool proved to be able to streamline the search process for future research on inclusive data.

CONCLUSIONS

The dearth of functional difficulty questions and the Washington-Group Short Set in particular in HFPS has contributed to the relative invisibility of persons with disabilities during the pandemic emergency, the lingering effects of which could impede policy-making, monitoring and advocacy on behalf of persons with disabilities.

Mind the gap: knowledge, attitudes and perceptions on antimicrobial resistance, antimicrobial stewardship and infection prevention and control in long-term care facilities for people with disabilities in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has become one of the major public health threats worldwide, emphasizing the necessity of preventing the development and transmission of drug resistant microorganisms. This is particularly important for people with vulnerable health conditions, such as people with intellectual disabilities (ID) and long-term care residents. This study aimed to assess the current status of AMR, antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) and infection prevention and control (IPC) in Dutch long-term care facilities for people with intellectual disabilities (ID-LTCFs).

METHODS

A web-based cross-sectional survey distributed between July and November 2023, targeting (both nonmedically and medically trained) healthcare professionals working in ID-LTCFs in The Netherlands, to study knowledge, attitudes and perceptions regarding AMR, AMS and IPC.

RESULTS

In total, 109 participants working in 37 long-term care organizations for people with intellectual disabilities throughout the Netherlands completed the questionnaire. The knowledge levels of AMR and IPC among nonmedically trained professionals (e.g., social care professionals) were lower than those among medically trained professionals (p = 0.026). In particular regarding the perceived protective value of glove use, insufficient knowledge levels were found. Furthermore, there was a lack of easy-read resources and useful information regarding IPC and AMR, for both healthcare professionals as well as people with disabilities. The majority of the participants (> 90%) reported that AMR and IPC need more attention within the disability care sector, but paradoxically, only 38.5% mentioned that they would like to receive additional information and training about IPC, and 72.5% would like to receive additional information and training about AMR.

CONCLUSION

Although the importance of AMR and IPC is acknowledged by professionals working in ID-LTCFs, there is room for improvement in regards to appropriate glove use and setting-specific IPC and hygiene policies. As nonmedically trained professionals comprise most of the workforce within ID-LTCFs, it is also important to evaluate their needs. This can have a substantial impact on developing and implementing AMR, AMS and/or IPC guidelines and policies in ID-LTCFs.

The association of multiple sclerosis, traumatic brain injury, and spinal cord injury to acute and long COVID-19 outcomes

BACKGROUND

Although persons with disabilities are a high-risk group, little is known about the association between specific disabling conditions and acute or long COVID outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the severity of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and post-COVID outcomes among people with a preexisting diagnosis of multiple sclerosis (MS), spinal cord injury (SCI), or traumatic brain injury (TBI).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study using the TrinetX Research Database, a large representative database of medical records. COVID-19-positive persons with MS, SCI, or TBI (cases) were matched 1:1 on age, gender, race, ethnicity, and comorbidities to COVID-19-positive persons without these diagnoses (controls). The main outcomes assessed were hospitalization for acute COVID-19, length of stay (LOS), the total number of hospitalizations, mortality, and incidence of six prevalent post-COVID sequelae within 6 months following a COVID-19 diagnosis.

RESULTS

There were 388,297 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases identified. Of these cases, 2204 individuals had one of the following preexisting diagnoses: 51.3% TBI, 31.4% MS, and 17.3% SCI. People with TBI, MS, and SCI were significantly more likely to be hospitalized for COVID-19 (odds ratio [OR] = 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03-1.46) than matched controls. There was no difference in LOS, total hospitalizations, or mortality during the 6 months following the initial COVID diagnosis. Multivariable analyses reveal that persons with TBI, MS, and SCI were more likely to experience new weakness (OR = 1.54, 95% CI = 1.19-2.00), mobility difficulties (OR = 1.66, 95% CI = 1.17-2.35), and cognitive dysfunction (OR = 1.79, 95% CI = 1.38-2.33) than controls, even after controlling for the presence of these symptoms prior to their COVID infection and other risk factors. There were no differences in fatigue, pain, or dyspnea.

CONCLUSIONS

Having a history of MS, SCI or TBI was not associated with higher mortality risk from COVID-19. However, associations between these diagnoses and postacute COVID-19 symptoms raise concern about widening health outcome disparities for individuals with such potentially disabling conditions following COVID-19 infection.

Psychosocial determinants associated with healthcare workers' self-reported compliance with infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study in Dutch residential care facilities for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities

BACKGROUND

Healthcare workers' (HCWs) compliance with infection prevention and control (IPC) is crucial to reduce the infection transmission risk. However, HCWs' compliance with IPC in residential care facilities (RCFs) for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDDs) is known to be suboptimal. Therefore, this study examined sociodemographic and psychosocial determinants associated with IPC non-compliance in this setting, to inform IPC policy and promotion programmes for adequate IPC behaviour.

METHODS

An online questionnaire was administered to 285 HCWs from 16 RCFs between March 2021 and March 2022. Determinants associated with IPC non-compliance were assessed using logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

Being a woman (OR: 3.57; 1.73-7.37), and being a non-medical professional were associated with increased odds of non-compliance (social workers, OR: 2.83; 1.65-4.85; behavioural specialists, OR: 6.09; 1.98-18.72). Perceived inadequate education/training (aOR: 1.62; 1.15-2.27) and perceived time constraints/competing priorities (aOR: 1.43; 1.03-1.98) were also associated with increased odds of non-compliance, independent of sociodemographic variables. In contrast, the belief that the supervisor complies with IPC (descriptive norm supervisor) was associated with decreased odds of non-compliance (aOR: 0.60; 0.41-0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

To improve IPC in disability care settings, the implementation of tailored and structural IPC education and training programmes (e.g., on-the-job training) is recommended to increase HCWs' capabilities and bridge the IPC compliance gap between medical and non-medical professionals. In addition, role models, particularly supervisors, are crucial for promoting IPC behaviour. Facilities should create a culture of IPC compliance by norm setting, acting on, and modelling IPC behaviours at all levels of the organisation (management, medical, and non-medical staff).