Introduction to and spread of COVID-19-like illness in care homes in Norfolk, UK

COVID-19 in Scottish care homes: A metapopulation model of spread among residents and staff

The movement of populations between locations and activities can result in complex transmission dynamics, posing significant challenges in controlling infectious diseases like COVID-19. Notably, networks of care homes create an ecosystem where staff and visitor movement acts as a vector for disease transmission, contributing to the heightened risk for their vulnerable communities. Care homes in the UK were disproportionately affected by the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, accounting for almost half of COVID-19 deaths during the period of 6th March - 15th June 2020 and so there is a pressing need to explore modelling approaches suitable for such systems. We develop a generic compartmental Susceptible - Exposed - Infectious - Recovered - Dead (SEIRD) metapopulation model, with care home residents, care home workers, and the general population modelled as subpopulations, interacting on a network describing their mixing habits. We illustrate the model application by analysing the spread of COVID-19 over the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the NHS Lothian health board, Scotland. We explicitly model the outbreak's reproduction rate and care home visitation level over time for each subpopulation and execute a data fit and sensitivity analysis, focusing on parameters responsible for inter-subpopulation mixing: staff-sharing, staff shift patterns and visitation. The results from our sensitivity analysis show that restricting staff sharing between homes and staff interaction with the general public would significantly mitigate the disease burden. Our findings indicate that protecting care home staff from disease, coupled with reductions in staff-sharing across care homes and expedient cancellations of visitations, can significantly reduce the size of outbreaks in care home settings.

Long term care facilities in England during the COVID-19 pandemic-a scoping review of guidelines, policy and recommendations

BACKGROUND

The disproportionate effect of COVID-19 on long term care facility (LTCF) residents has highlighted the need for clear, consistent guidance on the management of pandemics in such settings. As research exploring the experiences of LTCFs during the pandemic and the implications of mass hospital discharge, restricting staff movement, and limiting visitation from relatives are emerging, an in-depth review of policies, guidance and recommendations issued during this time could facilitate wider understanding in this area.

AIMS

To identify policies, guidance, and recommendations related to LTCF staff and residents, in England issued by the government during the COVID-19 pandemic, developing a timeline of key events and synthesizing the policy aims, recommendations, implementation and intended outcomes.

METHOD

A scoping review of publicly available policy documents, guidance, and recommendations related to COVID-19 in LTCFs in England, identified using systematic searches of UK government websites. The main aims, recommendations, implementation and intended outcomes reported in included documents were extracted. Data was analysed using thematic synthesis following a three-stage approach: coding the text, grouping codes into descriptive themes, and development of analytical themes.

RESULTS

Thirty-three key policy documents were included in the review. Six areas of recommendations were identified: infection prevention and control, hospital discharge, testing and vaccination, staffing, visitation and continuing routine care. Seven areas of implementation were identified: funding, collaborative working, monitoring and data collection, reducing workload, decision making and leadership, training and technology, and communication.

DISCUSSION

LTCFs remain complex settings, and it is imperative that lessons are learned from the experiences during COVID-19 to ensure that future pandemics are managed appropriately. This review has synthesized the policies issued during this time, however, the extent to which such guidance was communicated to LTCFs, and subsequently implemented, in addition to being effective, requires further research. In particular, understanding the secondary effects of such policies and how they can be introduced within the existing challenges inherent to adult social care, need addressing.

Exploratory study of risk factors related to SARS-CoV-2 prevalence in nursing homes in Flanders (Belgium) during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic

In a previous study in Belgian nursing homes (NH) during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, we found a SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence of 17% with a large variability (0-45%) between NH. The current exploratory study aimed to identify nursing home-specific risk factors for high SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence. Between October 19th, 2020 and November 13th, 2020, during the second COVID-19 wave in Belgium, capillary blood was collected on dried blood spots from 60 residents and staff in each of the 20 participating NH in Flanders and Brussels. The presence of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG antibodies was assessed by ELISA. Risk factors were evaluated using a questionnaire, filled in by the director or manager of the NH. Assessed risk factors comprised community-related factors, resident-related factors, management and performance features as well as building-related aspects. The relation between risk factors and seroprevalence was assessed by applying random forest modelling, generalized linear models and Bayesian linear regression. The present analyses showed that the prevalence of residents with dementia, the scarcity of personal protective equipment (surgical masks, FFP2 masks, glasses and face shields), and inadequate PCR test capacity were related to a higher seroprevalence. Generally, our study put forward that the various aspects of infection prevention in NH require more attention and investment. This exploratory study suggests that the ratio of residents with dementia, the availability of test capacity and personal protective equipment may have played a role in the SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence of NH, after the first wave. It underscores the importance of the availability of PPE and education in infection prevention. Moreover, investments may also yield benefits in the prevention of other respiratory infections (such as influenza).

The use and impact of digital COVID-19 tracking in adult social care: a prospective cohort study of care homes in Greater Manchester

BACKGROUND

To support proactive care during the coronavirus pandemic, a digital COVID-19 symptom tracker was deployed in Greater Manchester (UK) care homes. This study aimed to understand what factors were associated with the post-uptake use of the tracker and whether the tracker had any effects in controlling the spread of COVID-19.

METHODS

Daily data on COVID-19, tracker uptake and use, and other key indicators such as staffing levels, the number of staff self-isolating, availability of personal protective equipment, bed occupancy levels, and any problems in accepting new residents were analysed for 547 care homes across Greater Manchester for the period April 2020 to April 2021. Differences in tracker use across local authorities, types of care homes, and over time were assessed using correlated effects logistic regressions. Differences in numbers of COVID-19 cases in homes adopting versus not adopting the tracker were compared via event design difference-in-difference estimations.

RESULTS

Homes adopting the tracker used it on 44% of days post-adoption. Use decreased by 88% after one year of uptake (odds ratio 0.12; 95% confidence interval 0.06-0.28). Use was highest in the locality initiating the project (odds ratio 31.73; 95% CI 3.76-268.05). Care homes owned by a chain had lower use (odds ratio 0.30; 95% CI 0.14-0.63 versus single ownership care homes), and use was not associated with COVID-19 or staffing levels. Tracker uptake had no impact on controlling COVID-19 spread. Staff self-isolating and local area COVID-19 cases were positively associated with lagged COVID-19 spread in care homes (relative risks 1.29; 1.2-1.4 and 1.05; 1.0-1.1, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the COVID-19 symptom tracker in care homes was not maintained except in Locality 1 and did not appear to reduce the COVID-19 spread. COVID-19 cases in care homes were mainly driven by care home local-area COVID-19 cases and infections among the staff members. Digital deterioration trackers should be co-produced with care home staff, and local authorities should provide long-term support in their adoption and use.

Safe at home: Acceptance of surveillance technology among caregivers for persons with dementia

The increasing incidence of dementia calls for effective and innovative approaches to alleviate societal and personal burdens. Aging in place is a sustainable paradigm which ensures the best utilization of societal resources, supports caregivers, secures normalcy, and optimizes care for persons with dementia (PwD). Home-based surveillance technology can support PwD in safely aging in place. This study examines factors associated with the adoption of home-based surveillance technologies among unpaid dementia caregivers. Through an online survey (N = 203), we apply ordinal logistic regression to identify five variables that predict the likelihood of caregivers' surveillance technology adoption for dementia care. The predictors are caregivers': (1) trouble concerns about PwD, (2) online support group membership, (3) perceived social norms regarding surveillance technology use, (4) perceived usefulness of surveillance devices, and (5) depth of information and communication technologies (ICT) use. Theoretical and practical implications for dementia healthcare are discussed.

SARS CoV-2 Infection among Health Care Workers from Different Health Care Facilities in Western Norway: A Prospective, Cross-Sectional Study

Background: Comparative data on COVID-19 among health care workers (HCWs) in different health care settings are scarce. This study investigated the rates of previous COVID-19 among HCWs in nursing homes, hospitals and a municipal emergency room (ER). Methods: We prospectively included 747 HCWs: 313 from nursing homes, 394 from hospitals and 40 from the ER. The diagnosis of COVID-19 was based on serological evidence of SARS-CoV-2 antibody positivity and self-reported RT-PCR positivity prior to inclusion. Information regarding age, sex and exposure to SARS-CoV-2 infection was collected. Results: A total of 4% (11/313) of nursing home HCWs and 6% (28/434) of HCWs in hospitals/the ER tested positive by serology and/or RT-PCR (p = 0.095). Fewer HCWs in nursing homes had occupational exposure to SARS-CoV-2 compared to those in hospitals/the ER (16% vs. 48%, p < 0, 001), but nursing homes had a higher proportion of HCWs with occupational exposure using partial/no PPE (56% vs. 19%, p < 0.001). Nevertheless, no significant differences in the risk for COVID-19 were found in relation to the rate of occupational exposure (p = 0.755) or use of inadequate PPE (p = 0.631). Conclusions: Despite a small sample size, the risk for COVID-19 among HCWs did not appear to be related to the type of health care facility, rates of occupational exposure or use of PPE.

Understanding advance care planning in care homes throughout the COVID-19 pandemic: A critical realist review and synthesis

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted advance care planning discussions in care homes, particularly discussions involving relatives and surrogate decision makers. There is a need to collate and examine current evidence to assess the extent of the problem.

AIM

To examine the processes and experiences involved in advance care planning in care homes throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN

A critical realist review and synthesis.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, psycINFO, SCOPUS and CINAHL were searched between December 2019 and May 2022.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included. Communication difficulties associated with remote technologies meant that care home staff's concerns about engaging effectively with relatives further exacerbated the emotional toll of dealing with high death rates in circumstances where staff shortages stretched the capacity of those remaining to provide timely advance care planning discussions. The threat of the pandemic tended to encourage earlier and more frequent advance care planning discussions, though this tendency was partially countervailed by the difficulties that some residents and relatives had in engaging with remote communication modes. There was evidence that education and training in advance care planning increased staff's confidence and readiness to engage in care planning during pandemic conditions.

CONCLUSION

Results highlight part of the new context facing staff, relatives and residents in care homes, thus providing valuable insight for future intervention development required to maintain and improve the effectiveness of advance care planning in care homes during and beyond the pandemic.

English care home staff morale and preparedness during the Covid pandemic: A longitudinal analysis

BACKGROUND

: Staff actions to prevent infection introduction and transmission in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) were key to reducing morbidity and mortality from COVID-19. Implementing infection control measures (ICMs) requires training, adherence and complex decision making while trying to deliver high quality care. We surveyed LTCF staff in England about their preparedness and morale at three timepoints during the COVID-19 epidemic.

METHODS

: Online structured survey targeted at LTCF workers (any role) administered at three timepoints (November 2020-January 2021; August-November 2021; March-May 2022). Narrative summary of answers, narrative and statistical summary (proportionality with Pearson's chi-square or Fisher's Exact Test) of possible differences in answers between waves.

RESULTS

: Across all three survey waves, 387 responses were received. Morale, attitudes towards working environment and perception about colleague collaboration were mostly positive at all survey points. Infection control training was perceived as adequate. Staff felt mostly positive emotions at work. The working environment remained challenging. Masks were the single form of PPE most consistently used; eye protection the least used. Mask-wearing was linked to poorer communication and resident discomfort as well as mild negative health impacts on many staff, such as dehydration and adverse skin reactions. Hand sanitiser caused skin irritation.

CONCUSIONS

: Staff morale and working practices were generally good even though the working environment provided many new challenges that did not exist pre-pandemic.

Characteristics of nursing homes and early preventive measures associated with risk of infection from COVID-19 in Lazio region, Italy: a retrospective case-control study

OBJECTIVES

To understand which organisational-structural characteristics of nursing homes-also referred to as long-term care facilities (LTCFs)-and the preventative measures adopted in response to the pandemic are associated with the risk of a COVID-19 outbreak.

SETTING

LTCFs in Lazio region in Italy.

DESIGN

The study adopts a case-control design.

PARTICIPANTS

We included 141 facilities and 100 provided information for the study. Cases were defined as facilities reporting a COVID-19 outbreak (two or more cases) in March-December 2020; controls were defined as LTCFs reporting one case or zero. The exposures include the structural-organisational characteristics of the LTCFs as reported by the facilities, preventative measures employed and relevant external factors.

RESULTS

Twenty facilities reported an outbreak of COVID-19. In binary logistic regression models, facilities with more than 15 beds were five times more likely to experience an outbreak than facilities with less than 15 beds OR=5.60 (CI 1.61 to 25.12; p value 0.002); admitting new residents to facilities was associated with a substantially higher risk of an outbreak: 6.46 (CI 1.58 to 27.58, p value 0.004). In a multivariable analysis, facility size was the only variable that was significantly associated with a COVID-19 outbreak OR= 5.37 (CI 1.58 to 22.8; p value 0.012) for larger facilities (>15 beds) versus smaller (<15 beds). Other characteristics and measures were not associated with an outbreak.

CONCLUSION

There was evidence of a higher risk of COVID-19 in larger facilities and when new patients were admitted during the pandemic. All other structural-organisational characteristics and preventative measures were not associated with an outbreak. This finding calls into question existing policies, especially where there is a risk of harm to residents. One such example is the restriction of visitor access to facilities, resulting in the social isolation of residents.

Is long-term care a building or a societal moral philosophy?

The number of Older Adults (OA) in Ontario will double in two decades. The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated that the model of subsidized Long-Term Care (LTC) homes does not reflect the care needs of OAs. Many nations have implemented LTC models as a continuum of care for OAs promoting independent home/community living. These models help delay admission to LTC homes and achieve a higher quality-of-life for OAs. Current financial pressure on the healthcare system and inadequacies of LTC homes necessitate a broader social welfare policy. One viable option for sustainable LTC is implementing Ontario's mandatory public long-term care insurance policy.

Social Distancing and Isolation Strategies to Prevent and Control the Transmission of COVID-19 and Other Infectious Diseases in Care Homes for Older People: An International Review

Older people living in care homes are at high risk of poor health outcomes and mortality if they contract COVID-19 or other infectious diseases. Measures used to protect residents include social distancing and isolation, although implementation is challenging. This review aimed to assess the social distancing and isolation strategies used by care homes to prevent and control the transmission of COVID-19 and other infectious diseases. Seven electronic databases were searched: Medline, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, HMIC, Social Care Online, and Web of Science Core Collection. Grey literature was searched using MedRxiv, PDQ-Evidence, NICE Evidence Search, LTCCovid19.org and TRIP. Extracted data were synthesised using narrative synthesis and tabulation. 103 papers were included (10 empirical studies, seven literature reviews, and 86 policy documents). Strategies used to prevent and control the transmission of COVID-19 and other infectious diseases included social distancing and isolation of residents and staff, zoning and cohorting of residents, restriction of resident movement/activities, restriction of visitors and restriction of staff working patterns. This review demonstrates a lack of empirical evidence and the limited nature of policy documentation around social distancing and isolation measures in care homes. Evaluative research on these interventions is needed urgently, focusing on the well-being of all residents, particularly those with hearing, vision or cognitive impairments.

Mortality among Care Home Residents in England during the first and second waves of the COVID-19 pandemic: an observational study of 4.3 million adults over the age of 65

BACKGROUND

Residents in care homes have been severely impacted by COVID-19. We describe trends in the mortality risk among residents of care homes compared to private homes.

METHODS

On behalf of NHS England we used OpenSAFELY-TPP to calculate monthly age-standardised risks of death due to all causes and COVID-19 among adults aged >=65 years between 1/2/2019 and 31/03/2021. Care home residents were identified using linkage to Care and Quality Commission data.

FINDINGS

We included 4,340,648 people aged 65 years or older on the 1st of February 2019, 2.2% of whom were classified as residing in a care or nursing home. Age-standardised mortality risks were approximately 10 times higher among care home residents compared to those in private housing in February 2019: comparative mortality figure (CMF) = 10.59 (95%CI = 9.51, 11.81) among women, and 10.87 (9.93, 11.90) among men. By April 2020 these relative differences had increased to more than 17 times with CMFs of 17.57 (16.43, 18.79) among women and 18.17 (17.22, 19.17) among men. CMFs did not increase during the second wave, despite a rise in the absolute age-standardised COVID-19 mortality risks.

INTERPRETATION

COVID-19 has had a disproportionate impact on the mortality of care home residents in England compared to older residents of private homes, but only in the first wave. This may be explained by a degree of acquired immunity, improved protective measures or changes in the underlying frailty of the populations. The care home population should be prioritised for measures aimed at controlling COVID-19.

FUNDING

Medical Research Council MR/V015737/1.

COVID-19 outbreaks in nursing homes: A strong link with the coronavirus spread in the surrounding population, France, March to July 2020

Background

Worldwide, COVID-19 outbreaks in nursing homes have often been sudden and massive. The study investigated the role SARS-CoV-2 virus spread in nearby population plays in introducing the disease in nursing homes.

Material and methods

This was carried out through modelling the occurrences of first cases in each of 943 nursing homes of Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes French Region over the first epidemic wave (March-July, 2020). The cumulative probabilities of COVID-19 outbreak in the nursing homes and those of hospitalization for the disease in the population were modelled in each of the twelve Départements of the Region over period March-July 2020. This allowed estimating the duration of the active outbreak period, the dates and heights of the peaks of outbreak probabilities in nursing homes, and the dates and heights of the peaks of hospitalization probabilities in the population. Spearman coefficient estimated the correlation between the two peak series.

Results

The cumulative proportion of nursing homes with COVID-19 outbreaks was 52% (490/943; range: 22–70% acc. Département). The active outbreak period in the nursing homes lasted 11 to 21 days (acc. Département) and ended before lockdown end. Spearman correlation between outbreak probability peaks in nursing homes and hospitalization probability peaks in the population (surrogate of the incidence peaks) was estimated at 0.71 (95% CI: [0.66; 0.78]).

Conclusion

The modelling highlighted a strong correlation between the outbreak in nursing homes and the external pressure of the disease. It indicated that avoiding disease outbreaks in nursing homes requires a tight control of virus spread in the surrounding populations.

A rapid systematic review of measures to protect older people in long-term care facilities from COVID-19

OBJECTIVES

The global COVID-19 pandemic produced large-scale health and economic complications. Older people and those with comorbidities are particularly vulnerable to this virus, with nursing homes and long term care facilities (LTCF) experiencing significant morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19 outbreaks. The aim of this rapid systematic review was to investigate measures implemented in LTCF to reduce transmission of COVID-19 and their effect on morbidity and mortality of residents, staff and visitors.

SETTING

Long-term care facilities.

PARTICIPANTS

Residents, staff and visitors of facilities.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Databases and repositories and MedRXiv prepublished database) were systematically searched from inception to 27 July 2020 to identify studies reporting assessment of interventions to reduce transmission of COVID-19 in nursing homes among residents, staff or visitors. Outcome measures include facility characteristics, morbidity data, case fatalities and transmission rates. Due to study quality and heterogeneity, no meta-analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

The search yielded 1414 articles, with 38 studies included. Reported interventions include mass testing, use of personal protective equipment, symptom screening, visitor restrictions, hand hygiene and droplet/contact precautions, and resident cohorting. Prevalence rates ranged from 1.2% to 85.4% in residents and 0.6% to 62.6% in staff. Mortality rates ranged from 5.3% to 55.3% in residents.

CONCLUSIONS

Novel evidence in this review details the impact of facility size, availability of staff and practices of operating between multiple facilities, and for-profit status of facilities as factors contributing to the size and number of COVID-19 outbreaks. No causative relationships can be determined; however, this review provides evidence of interventions that reduce transmission of COVID-19 in LTCF.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020191569.

Non-pharmacological measures implemented in the setting of long-term care facilities to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infections and their consequences: a rapid review

BACKGROUND

Starting in late 2019, COVID-19, caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, spread around the world. Long-term care facilities are at particularly high risk of outbreaks, and the burden of morbidity and mortality is very high among residents living in these facilities.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of non-pharmacological measures implemented in long-term care facilities to prevent or reduce the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection among residents, staff, and visitors.

SEARCH METHODS

On 22 January 2021, we searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease, Web of Science, and CINAHL. We also conducted backward citation searches of existing reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered experimental, quasi-experimental, observational and modelling studies that assessed the effects of the measures implemented in long-term care facilities to protect residents and staff against SARS-CoV-2 infection. Primary outcomes were infections, hospitalisations and deaths due to COVID-19, contaminations of and outbreaks in long-term care facilities, and adverse health effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts. One review author performed data extractions, risk of bias assessments and quality appraisals, and at least one other author checked their accuracy. Risk of bias and quality assessments were conducted using the ROBINS-I tool for cohort and interrupted-time-series studies, the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist for case-control studies, and a bespoke tool for modelling studies. We synthesised findings narratively, focusing on the direction of effect. One review author assessed certainty of evidence with GRADE, with the author team critically discussing the ratings.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 observational studies and 11 modelling studies in the analysis. All studies were conducted in high-income countries. Most studies compared outcomes in long-term care facilities that implemented the measures with predicted or observed control scenarios without the measure (but often with baseline infection control measures also in place). Several modelling studies assessed additional comparator scenarios, such as comparing higher with lower rates of testing. There were serious concerns regarding risk of bias in almost all observational studies and major or critical concerns regarding the quality of many modelling studies. Most observational studies did not adequately control for confounding. Many modelling studies used inappropriate assumptions about the structure and input parameters of the models, and failed to adequately assess uncertainty. Overall, we identified five intervention domains, each including a number of specific measures. Entry regulation measures (4 observational studies; 4 modelling studies) Self-confinement of staff with residents may reduce the number of infections, probability of facility contamination, and number of deaths. Quarantine for new admissions may reduce the number of infections. Testing of new admissions and intensified testing of residents and of staff after holidays may reduce the number of infections, but the evidence is very uncertain. The evidence is very uncertain regarding whether restricting admissions of new residents reduces the number of infections, but the measure may reduce the probability of facility contamination. Visiting restrictions may reduce the number of infections and deaths. Furthermore, it may increase the probability of facility contamination, but the evidence is very uncertain. It is very uncertain how visiting restrictions may adversely affect the mental health of residents. Contact-regulating and transmission-reducing measures (6 observational studies; 2 modelling studies) Barrier nursing may increase the number of infections and the probability of outbreaks, but the evidence is very uncertain. Multicomponent cleaning and environmental hygiene measures may reduce the number of infections, but the evidence is very uncertain. It is unclear how contact reduction measures affect the probability of outbreaks. These measures may reduce the number of infections, but the evidence is very uncertain. Personal hygiene measures may reduce the probability of outbreaks, but the evidence is very uncertain.  Mask and personal protective equipment usage may reduce the number of infections, the probability of outbreaks, and the number of deaths, but the evidence is very uncertain. Cohorting residents and staff may reduce the number of infections, although evidence is very uncertain. Multicomponent contact -regulating and transmission -reducing measures may reduce the probability of outbreaks, but the evidence is very uncertain. Surveillance measures (2 observational studies; 6 modelling studies) Routine testing of residents and staff independent of symptoms may reduce the number of infections. It may reduce the probability of outbreaks, but the evidence is very uncertain. Evidence from one observational study suggests that the measure may reduce, while the evidence from one modelling study suggests that it probably reduces hospitalisations. The measure may reduce the number of deaths among residents, but the evidence on deaths among staff is unclear.  Symptom-based surveillance testing may reduce the number of infections and the probability of outbreaks, but the evidence is very uncertain. Outbreak control measures (4 observational studies; 3 modelling studies) Separating infected and non-infected residents or staff caring for them may reduce the number of infections. The measure may reduce the probability of outbreaks and may reduce the number of deaths, but the evidence for the latter is very uncertain. Isolation of cases may reduce the number of infections and the probability of outbreaks, but the evidence is very uncertain. Multicomponent measures (2 observational studies; 1 modelling study) A combination of multiple infection-control measures, including various combinations of the above categories, may reduce the number of infections and may reduce the number of deaths, but the evidence for the latter is very uncertain.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review provides a comprehensive framework and synthesis of a range of non-pharmacological measures implemented in long-term care facilities. These may prevent SARS-CoV-2 infections and their consequences. However, the certainty of evidence is predominantly low to very low, due to the limited availability of evidence and the design and quality of available studies. Therefore, true effects may be substantially different from those reported here. Overall, more studies producing stronger evidence on the effects of non-pharmacological measures are needed, especially in low- and middle-income countries and on possible unintended consequences of these measures. Future research should explore the reasons behind the paucity of evidence to guide pandemic research priority setting in the future.

Experiences of a National Early Warning Score (NEWS) intervention in care homes during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative interview study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has taken a heavy toll on the care home sector, with residents accounting for up to half of all deaths in Europe. The response to acute illness in care homes plays a particularly important role in the care of residents during a pandemic. Digital recording of a National Early Warning Score (NEWS), which involves the measurement of physical observations, started in care homes in one area of England in 2016. Implementation of a NEWS intervention (including equipment, training and support) was accelerated early in the pandemic, despite limited evidence for its use in the care home setting.

OBJECTIVES

To understand how a NEWS intervention has been used in care homes in one area of North-East England during the COVID-19 pandemic, and how it has influenced resident care, from the perspective of stakeholders involved in care delivery and commissioning.

METHODS

A qualitative interview study with care home (n=10) and National Health Service (n=7) staff. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Use of the NEWS intervention in care homes in this area accelerated during the COVID-19 pandemic. Stakeholders felt that NEWS, and its associated education and support package, improved the response of care homes and healthcare professionals to deterioration in residents' health during the pandemic. Healthcare professionals valued the ability to remotely monitor resident observations, which facilitated triage and treatment decisions. Care home staff felt empowered by NEWS, providing a common clinical language to communicate concerns with external services, acting as an adjunct to staff intuition of resident deterioration.

CONCLUSIONS

The NEWS intervention formed an important part of the care home response to COVID-19 in the study area. Positive staff perceptions now need to be supplemented with data on the impact on resident health and well-being, workload, and service utilisation, during the pandemic and beyond.

COVID-19 Prevention and Control Measures in Workplace Settings: A Rapid Review and Meta-Analysis

Workplaces can be high-risk environments for SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks and subsequent community transmission. Identifying, understanding, and implementing effective workplace SARS-CoV-2 infection prevention and control (IPC) measures is critical to protect workers, their families, and communities. A rapid review and meta-analysis were conducted to synthesize evidence assessing the effectiveness of COVID-19 IPC measures implemented in global workplace settings through April 2021. Medline, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies that quantitatively assessed the effectiveness of workplace COVID-19 IPC measures. The included studies comprised varying empirical designs and occupational settings. Measures of interest included surveillance measures, outbreak investigations, environmental adjustments, personal protective equipment (PPE), changes in work arrangements, and worker education. Sixty-one studies from healthcare, nursing home, meatpacking, manufacturing, and office settings were included, accounting for ~280,000 employees based in Europe, Asia, and North America. Meta-analyses showed that combined IPC measures resulted in lower employee COVID-19 positivity rates (0.2% positivity; 95% CI 0–0.4%) than single measures such as asymptomatic PCR testing (1.7%; 95% CI 0.9–2.9%) and universal masking (24%; 95% CI 3.4–55.5%). Modelling studies showed that combinations of (i) timely and widespread contact tracing and case isolation, (ii) facilitating smaller worker cohorts, and (iii) effective use of PPE can reduce workplace transmission. Comprehensive COVID-19 IPC measures incorporating swift contact tracing and case isolation, PPE, and facility zoning can effectively prevent workplace outbreaks. Masking alone should not be considered sufficient protection from SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks in the workplace.

Game theory to enhance stock management of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) during the COVID-19 outbreak

Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, many healthcare facilities have suffered from shortages in medical resources, particularly in Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). In this paper, we propose a game-theoretic approach to schedule PPE orders among healthcare facilities. In this PPE game, each independent healthcare facility optimises its own storage utilisation in order to keep its PPE cost at a minimum. Such a model can reduce peak demand considerably when applied to a variable PPE consumption profile. Experiments conducted for NHS England regions using actual data confirm that the challenge of securing PPE supply during disasters such as COVID-19 can be eased if proper stock management procedures are adopted. These procedures can include early stockpiling, increasing storage capacities and implementing measures that can prolong the time period between successive infection waves, such as social distancing measures. Simulation results suggest that the provision of PPE dedicated storage space can be a viable solution to avoid straining PPE supply chains in case a second wave of COVID-19 infections occurs.