Risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection in a multiethnic cohort of United Kingdom healthcare workers (UK-REACH): A cross-sectional analysis

Epidemiology, risk factors, and vaccine effectiveness for SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers during the omicron pandemic in Shanghai, China

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed healthcare workers (HCWs) to serious risk of infection. The aims of our study were to investigate the epidemiological characteristics and risk factors of SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs, and evaluate the vaccine effectiveness (VE) during the Omicron pandemic in Shanghai, China.

Methods

Active surveillance of COVID-19 was performed among HCWs who worked in Shanghai General Hospital from December 2022 to January 2023. A case-control study was conducted by questionnaire survey to analyse the infection-related risk factors. A retrospective cohort study was explored to evaluate VE against primary infection.

Results

During the Omicron outbreak, 2,008 of 2,460 (81.6%) HCWs were infected with SARS-CoV-2. The infection rate was higher in women, younger age groups, nurses and medical technicians. Among the 1,742 participants in the questionnaire, 1,463 (84.0%) were tested positive, and 95.1% of them developed symptoms. Most of the infections (53.0%) were acquired outside the hospital. The risk factors associated with higher odds of infection were working in the emergency department (aOR 3.77, 95% CI 1.69-8.38) and medical examination area (aOR 2.47, 95% CI 1.10-5.51). The protective factors associated with lower odds of infection were previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 (aOR 0.01, 95% CI 0-0.07) and receiving four doses of vaccines (aOR 0.40, 95% CI 0.17-0.97). For frontline HCWs, those who had oral-nasal exposure to coworkers were more likely to be infected (aOR 1.74, 95% CI 1.21-2.51). In VE analysis, the risk of primary infection was lower in HCWs who received the emergency heterologous booster (the fourth dose) during the epidemic (aHR 0.25, 95% CI 0.15-0.40), resulting in an adjusted-VE of 75.1%.

Conclusions

In response to future pandemic, it is important for public health policies to aim at protecting HCWs through risk-differentiated infection control measures, strengthening personal protection and recommending vaccination to vulnerable individuals before the arrival of Omicron wave.

Impact of COVID-19 on Ethnically Minoritised Carers in UK's Care Home Settings: a Systematic Scoping Review

COVID-19 has impacted disproportionately two groups in the UK: healthcare workers and people from ethnically minoritised groups. However, there is a lack of evidence on how COVID-19 affected ethnically minoritised carers in care homes. Therefore, the present study aimed to explore the available evidence regarding the impact of COVID-19 on ethnically minoritised carers in UK. The relevant records were systematically searched in Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register and WHO COVID-19 global literature. A total of 3164 records were retrieved. Following duplicate elimination and abstract, title, and full-text screening, 10 studies were identified as eligible for the present scoping review. Most of the studies were conducted in the UK and USA, involving diverse healthcare occupations and methodologies. Multiple studies found anxiety, depression, stress, and post-traumatic stress disorder among carers with high odds among ethnically minoritised carers. Limited access to personal protective equipment and workplace discrimination was noted and linked with poor mental health. The carers reported difficulties in care delivery and managing extra workload arising from staff shortages. The risk of infection and clinically significant mental disorders was higher among carers from the ethnically minoritised background. They exhibited fear about care homes' uncertain futures and consequential financial losses. Conclusively, COVID-19 appeared to exert adverse effects on practices and experiences of ethnically minoritised carers in the UK's care homes; however, further studies are warranted to increase the understanding of COVID-19-related experiences of this group of carers which significantly contribute to the country's healthcare system.

Discrimination, disadvantage and disempowerment during COVID-19: a qualitative intrasectional analysis of the lived experiences of an ethnically diverse healthcare workforce in the United Kingdom

BACKGROUND

Healthcare workers (HCWs) in the United Kingdom (UK) have faced many challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, some of these arising out of their social positions. Existing literature explicating these challenges (e.g., lack of appropriate PPE, redeployment, understaffing) have highlighted inequities in how these have been experienced by HCWs based on ethnicity, gender or, job role. In this paper, we move a step ahead and examine how the intersection of these social positions have impacted HCWs' experiences of challenges during the pandemic.

METHODS

We collected qualitative data, using interviews and focus groups, from 164 HCWs from different ethnicities, gender, job roles, migration statuses, and regions in the United Kingdom (UK) between December 2020 and July 2021. Interviews and focus groups were conducted online or by telephone, and recorded with participants' permission. Recordings were transcribed and a hybrid thematic analytical approach integrating inductive data-driven codes with deductive ones informed by an intersectional framework was adopted to analyse the transcripts.

RESULTS

Thematic analysis of transcripts identified disempowerment, disadvantage and, discrimination as the three main themes around which HCWs' experiences of challenges were centred, based on their intersecting identities (e.g., ethnicity gender, and/or migration status). Our analysis also acknowledges that disadvantages faced by HCWs were linked to systemic and structural factors at the micro, meso and macro ecosystemic levels. This merging of analysis which is grounded in intersectionality and considers the ecosystemic levels has been termed as 'intrasectionalism'.

DISCUSSION

Our research demonstrates how an intrasectional lens can help better understand how different forms of mutually reinforcing inequities exist at all levels within the healthcare workforce and how these impact HCWs from certain backgrounds who face greater disadvantage, discrimination and disempowerment, particularly during times of crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic.

Impact of age on the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in healthcare workers : Influence of nonoccupational risk factors

BACKGROUND

The incidence of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV‑2) infection was highest among older adults early in the COVID-19 pandemic; however, this pattern was later reversed with young adults showing the highest incidence. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors in healthcare workers (HCWs) associated with this evolution.

METHODS

We conducted a survey nested within a prospective cohort study of 680 HCWs from a tertiary referral public hospital who received 2 doses of SARS-CoV‑2 vaccine in January and February 2021 (VACCICO-VAO cohort). In October 2022 all participants were invited to participate in a survey. Risk factors were tested for association with COVID-19 ever, the number of COVID-19 episodes, and the time to the first episode.

RESULTS

Among 350 respondents (51% response rate, 90% female, mean age 48.1 years), 323 COVID-19 episodes were diagnosed during the study period. Multivariable analysis revealed that age < 35 years vs. > 50 years (odds ratio, OR 2.12, 95% confidence interval, CI 1.27-3.51; P = 0.004) and not maintaining social distance at social events (OR: 1.82, 95% CI: 1.16-3.19; P = 0.011) were associated with a higher risk of COVID-19. Age < 35 years (hazard ratio, HR 1.70, 95% CI 1.14-2.54; P = 0.010), and not maintaining social distance (HR 1.34, 95% CI 1.05-1.72; P = 0.020) were also associated with the time to the first episode.

CONCLUSIONS

The youngest HCWs had the highest incidence rate of COVID-19, which was not explained by occupational risk factors or health conditions. The increase in nonoccupational exposure since the end of the lockdowns in summer 2020 could by a key factor.

Disproportionate infection, hospitalisation and death from COVID-19 in ethnic minority groups and Indigenous Peoples: an application of the Priority Public Health Conditions analytical framework

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in disproportionate consequences for ethnic minority groups and Indigenous Peoples. We present an application of the Priority Public Health Conditions (PPHC) framework from the World Health Organisation (WHO), to explicitly address COVID-19 and other respiratory viruses of pandemic potential. This application is supported by evidence that ethnic minority groups were more likely to be infected, implying differential exposure (PPHC level two), be more vulnerable to severe disease once infected (PPHC level three) and have poorer health outcomes following infection (PPHC level four). These inequities are driven by various interconnected dimensions of racism, that compounds with socioeconomic context and position (PPHC level one). We show that, for respiratory viruses, it is important to stratify levels of the PPHC framework by infection status and by societal, community, and individual factors to develop optimal interventions to reduce inequity from COVID-19 and future infectious diseases outbreaks.

Designed for a pandemic: Mitigating the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission through hospital design and infrastructure

BACKGROUND

To describe the new Royal Adelaide Hospital (RAH) design and infrastructure features that helped mitigate the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission within the hospital during the pre-vaccination and pre-antiviral period.

METHOD

The RAH infrastructure, design and initial pandemic response was assessed. A retrospective review of all confirmed or suspected coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients admitted from 1 February 2020 to 30 May 2020 was also performed to assess risk of transmission. Outbreak response reports were reviewed to identify episodes of nosocomial COVID-19.

RESULTS

Key infrastructure features include single-bed overnight rooms with dedicated bathrooms, creation of pandemic areas accessible only to pandemic staff, and sophisticated air-handling units with improved ventilation. A total of 264 COVID-19 related admission occurred, with 113 confirmed cases and 1579 total cumulative bed days. Despite a limited understanding of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, no vaccination or anti-viral therapy, global shortages of particulate filter respirators and restricted testing during this period, only one probable nosocomial COVID-19 case occurred in a healthcare worker, with no nosocomial cases involving patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The RAH design and pandemic features complimented existing infection control interventions and was important in limiting nosocomial spread of SARS-CoV-2.

Quantifying hospital environmental ventilation using carbon dioxide monitoring - a multicentre study

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of environmental ventilation in reducing airborne pathogen transmission. Carbon dioxide monitoring is recommended in the community to ensure adequate ventilation. Dynamic measurements of ventilation quantifying human exhaled waste gas accumulation are not conducted routinely in hospitals. Instead, environmental ventilation is allocated using static hourly air change rates. These vary according to the degree of perceived hazard, with the highest change rates reserved for locations where aerosol-generating procedures are performed, where medical/anaesthetic gases are used and where a small number of high-risk infective or immunocompromised patients may be isolated to reduce cross-infection. We aimed to quantify the quality and distribution of ventilation in hospital by measuring carbon dioxide levels in a two-phased prospective observational study. First, under controlled conditions, we validated our method and the relationship between human occupancy, ventilation and carbon dioxide levels using non-dispersive infrared carbon dioxide monitors. We then assessed ventilation quality in patient-occupied (clinical) and staff break and office (non-clinical) areas across two hospitals in Scotland. We selected acute medical and respiratory wards in which patients with COVID-19 are cared for routinely, as well as ICUs and operating theatres where aerosol-generating procedures  are performed routinely. Between November and December 2022, 127,680 carbon dioxide measurements were obtained across 32 areas over 8 weeks. Carbon dioxide levels breached the 800 ppm threshold for 14% of the time in non-clinical areas vs. 7% in clinical areas (p < 0.001). In non-clinical areas, carbon dioxide levels were > 800 ppm for 20% of the time in both ICUs and wards, vs. 1% in operating theatres (p < 0.001). In clinical areas, carbon dioxide was > 800 ppm for 16% of the time in wards, vs. 0% in ICUs and operating theatres (p < 0.001). We conclude that staff break, office and clinical areas on acute medical and respiratory wards frequently had inadequate ventilation, potentially increasing the risks of airborne pathogen transmission to staff and patients. Conversely, ventilation was consistently high in the ICU and operating theatre clinical environments. Carbon dioxide monitoring could be used to measure and guide improvements in hospital ventilation.

Gut Microbiota and Mitochondria: Health and Pathophysiological Aspects of Long COVID

The current understanding of long COVID (LC) is still limited. This review highlights key findings regarding the role of gut microbiota, mitochondria, and the main pathophysiological aspects of LC revealed by clinical studies, related to the complex interplay between infection, intestinal dysbiosis, dysfunctional mitochondria, and systemic inflammation generated in a vicious circle, reflecting the molecular and cellular processes from the "leaky gut" to the "leaky electron transport chain (ETC)" into a quantum leap. The heterogeneity of LC has hindered progress in deciphering all the pathophysiological mechanisms, and therefore, the approach must be multidisciplinary, with a special focus not only on symptomatic management but also on addressing the underlying health problems of the patients. It is imperative to further assess and validate the effects of COVID-19 and LC on the gut microbiome and their relationship to infections with other viral agents or pathogens. Further studies are needed to better understand LC and expand the interdisciplinary points of view that are required to accurately diagnose and effectively treat this heterogeneous condition. Given the ability of SARS-CoV-2 to induce autoimmunity in susceptible patients, they should be monitored for symptoms of autoimmune disease after contracting the viral infection. One question remains open, namely, whether the various vaccines developed to end the pandemic will also induce autoimmunity. Recent data highlighted in this review have revealed that the persistence of SARS-CoV-2 and dysfunctional mitochondria in organs such as the heart and, to a lesser extent, the kidneys, liver, and lymph nodes, long after the organism has been able to clear the virus from the lungs, could be an explanation for LC.

The impact of SARS-CoV-2 on healthcare workers of a large University Hospital in the Veneto Region: risk of infection and clinical presentation in relation to different pandemic phases and some relevant determinants

Aim

The aim of this study is to evaluate the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and the prevalence of COVID-19-related symptoms in relation to pandemic phases and some relevant variables in a cohort of 8,029 HCWs from one of the largest Italian University Hospitals.

Methods

A single-center retrospective study was performed on data collected during SARS-CoV-2 infection surveillance of HCWs. Cox's multiple regression was performed to estimate hazard ratios of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Logistic multivariate regression was used to assess the risk of asymptomatic infections and the onset of the most frequent symptoms. All analyses were adjusted for sociodemographic and occupational factors, pandemic phases, vaccination status, and previous infections.

Results

A total of 3,760 HCWs resulted positive (2.0%-18.6% across five study phases). The total incidence rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection was 7.31 cases per 10,000 person-days, significantly lower in phase 1 and higher in phases 4 and 5, compared to phase 3. Younger HCWs, healthcare personnel, and unvaccinated subjects showed a higher risk of infection. Overall, 24.5% were asymptomatic infections, with a higher probability for men, physicians, and HCWs tested for screening, fully vaccinated, and those with previous infection. The clinical presentation changed over the phases in relation to vaccination status and the emergence of new variants.

Conclusion

The screening activities of HCWs allowed for the early detection of asymptomatic cases, limiting the epidemic clusters inside the hospital wards. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination reduced infections and symptomatic cases, demonstrating again its paramount value as a preventive tool for occupational and public health.

Circadian Disruption in Night Shift Work and Its Association with Chronic Pulmonary Diseases

Globalization and the expansion of essential services over continuous 24 h cycles have necessitated the adaptation of the human workforce to shift-based schedules. Night shift work (NSW) causes a state of desynchrony between the internal circadian machinery and external environmental cues, which can impact inflammatory and metabolic pathways. The discovery of clock genes in the lung has shed light on potential mechanisms of circadian misalignment in chronic pulmonary disease. Here, the current knowledge of circadian clock disruption caused by NSW and its impact on lung inflammation and associated pathophysiology in chronic lung diseases, such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pulmonary fibrosis, and COVID-19, is reviewed. Furthermore, the limitations of the current understanding of circadian disruption and potential future chronotherapeutic advances are discussed.

Pandemic preparedness with 20/20 vision: Applying an intersectional equity lens to health workforce planning

Human resource for health (HRH) is considered critical for achieving Universal Health Coverage, and the crisis surrounding HRH is now established as a global emergency. Their vital role has been central in the pandemic response. Yet, the discussions and deliberations on the recent pandemic treaty circumscribe HRH discussions to their capacities and protection, and address discrimination mainly in relation to gender. While this paper endorses the case for prioritisation of HRH in global pandemic preparedness planning, it re-frames the HRH crisis in relation to the institutional and structural factors driving HRH shortage, maldistribution and skills-needs misalignment. We critique the supply-and-demand framing of HRH crisis as one that obliviates the systematic inequalities within health systems that underpin health workforce motivations, distribution, satisfaction and performance. We propose an intersectional equity lens to redefine the HRH challenges, understand their underlying drivers and accordingly integrate in the global pandemic preparedness plans.

The Influence of COVID-19 in Endocrine Research: Critical Overview, Methodological Implications and a Guideline for Future Designs

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed many aspects of people's lives, including not only individual social behavior, healthcare procedures, and altered physiological and pathophysiological responses. As a result, some medical studies may be influenced by one or more hidden factors brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. Using the literature review method, we are briefly discussing the studies that are confounded by COVID-19 and facemask-induced partiality and how these factors can be further complicated with other confounding variables. Facemask wearing has been reported to produce partiality in studies of ophthalmology (particularly dry eye and related ocular diseases), sleep studies, cognitive studies (such as emotion-recognition accuracy research, etc.), and gender-influenced studies, to mention a few. There is a possibility that some other COVID-19 related influences remain unrecognized in medical research. To account for heterogeneity, current and future studies need to consider the severity of the initial illness (such as diabetes, other endocrine disorders), and COVID-19 infection, the timing of analysis, or the presence of a control group. Face mask-induced influences may confound the results of diabetes studies in many ways.

Migrant healthcare workers during COVID-19: bringing an intersectional health system-related approach into pandemic protection. A German case study

Introduction

Migrant healthcare workers played an important role during the COVID-19 pandemic, but data are lacking especially for high-resourced European healthcare systems. This study aims to research migrant healthcare workers through an intersectional health system-related approach, using Germany as a case study.

Methods

An intersectional research framework was created and a rapid scoping study performed. Secondary analysis of selected items taken from two COVID-19 surveys was undertaken to compare perceptions of national and foreign-born healthcare workers, using descriptive statistics.

Results

Available research is focused on worst-case pandemic scenarios of Brazil and the United Kingdom, highlighting racialised discrimination and higher risks of migrant healthcare workers. The German data did not reveal significant differences between national-born and foreign-born healthcare workers for items related to health status including SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination, and perception of infection risk, protective workplace measures, and government measures, but items related to social participation and work conditions with higher infection risk indicate a higher burden of migrant healthcare workers.

Conclusions

COVID-19 pandemic policy must include migrant healthcare workers, but simply adding the migration status is not enough. We introduce an intersectional health systems-related approach to understand how pandemic policies create social inequalities and how the protection of migrant healthcare workers may be improved.

Coverage, completion and outcomes of COVID-19 risk assessments in a multi-ethnic nationwide cohort of UK healthcare workers: a cross-sectional analysis from the UK-REACH Study

INTRODUCTION

There are limited data on the outcomes of COVID-19 risk assessment in healthcare workers (HCWs) or the association of ethnicity, other sociodemographic and occupational factors with risk assessment outcomes.

METHODS

We used questionnaire data from UK-REACH (UK Research study into Ethnicity And COVID-19 outcomes in Healthcare workers), an ethnically diverse, nationwide cohort of UK HCWs. We derived four binary outcomes: (1) offered a risk assessment; (2) completed a risk assessment; (3) working practices changed as a result of the risk assessment; (4) wanted changes to working practices after risk assessment but working practices did not change.We examined the association of ethnicity, other sociodemographic/occupational factors and actual/perceived COVID-19 risk variables on our outcomes using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

8649 HCWs were included in total. HCWs from ethnic minority groups were more likely to report being offered a risk assessment than white HCWs, and those from Asian and black ethnic groups were more likely to report having completed an assessment if offered. Ethnic minority HCWs had lower odds of reporting having their work change as a result of risk assessment. Those from Asian and black ethnic groups were more likely to report no changes to their working practices despite wanting them.Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with lower odds of being offered a risk assessment and having adjustments made to working practices.

DISCUSSION

We found differences in risk assessment outcomes by ethnicity, other sociodemographic/occupational factors and actual/perceived COVID-19 risk factors. These findings are concerning and warrant further research using actual (rather than reported) risk assessment outcomes in an unselected cohort.

The prevalence and determinants of SARS-CoV-2 infections among healthcare workers, results of a cross-sectional study in the Silesian Voivodeship

OBJECTIVES

A significant proportion of healthcare workers (HCWs) had been infected with SARS-CoV-2, which complicated the organization of patient care during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the exact scale of infection prevalence among the group of HCWs is not known, therefore this study aimed to assess the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs in the Silesian voivodeship, Poland, and to define its determinants.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The cross-sectional study was conducted in 2 multidisciplinary hospitals in the Silesian voivodeship during the period October 2021-February 2022. The standardized WHO questionnaire Surveillance protocol for SARS-CoV-2 infection among health workers was completed by 242 HCWs. To assess the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and its determinants, such as personal, occupational, and work environment-related conditions and preventive behaviors, the collected data were subjected to statistical analysis. For this purpose, descriptive and analytical statistics (significance of differences in χ2 test) were used.

RESULTS

Almost half (42.6%) of subjects were infected with coronavirus, most frequently care assistants (57.1%) and paramedics (50%). People suffering from chronic diseases were infected significantly more often (p < 0.001). The majority of the infected HCWs declared previous contact with COVID-19 patients (56.3%). Unfortunately, 10.3% of respondents refused to be vaccinated against COVID-19, most often care assistants (38.1%) and nurses (10.6%). The determinants such as sex, age, occupation, place of work (ward), participation in occupational safety and health training, use of personal protective equipment (PPE), or preventive behaviors did not significantly affect the risk of infection (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Even though the PPE was used and the percentage of fully vaccinated HCWs against COVID-19 was high (89.7%), the frequency of SARS-CoV-2 infected HCWs remains high at 42.6% (95% CI: 40.7-44.5%). The main determinants of SARS-CoV-2 infection risk among HCWs were previous contact with infected individuals and the presence of chronic disease. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2023;36(2):201-13.

Circulating eosinophils associated with responsiveness to COVID-19 vaccine and the disease severity in patients with SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant infection

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the longitudinal circulating eosinophil (EOS) data impacted by the COVID-19 vaccine, the predictive role of circulating EOS in the disease severity, and its association with T cell immunity in patients with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2 variant infection in Shanghai, China.

METHODS

We collected a cohort of 1,157 patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron/BA.2 variant in Shanghai, China. These patients were diagnosed or admitted between Feb 20, 2022, and May 10, 2022, and were classified as asymptomatic (n = 705), mild (n = 286) and severe (n = 166) groups. We compiled and analyzed data of patients' clinical demographic characteristics, laboratory findings, and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

COVID-19 vaccine reduced the incidence of severe cases. Severe patients were shown to have declined peripheral blood EOS. Both the 2 doses and 3 doses of inactivated COVID-19 vaccines promoted the circulating EOS levels. In particular, the 3rd booster shot of inactivated COVID-19 vaccine was shown to have a sustained promoting effect on circulating EOS. Univariate analysis showed that there was a significant difference in age, underlying comorbidities, EOS, lymphocytes, CRP, CD4, and CD8 T cell counts between the mild and the severe patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis and ROC curve analysis indicate that circulating EOS (AUC = 0.828, p = 0.025), the combination of EOS and CD4 T cell (AUC = 0.920, p = 0.017) can predict the risk of disease severity in patients with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2 variant infection.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 vaccine promotes circulating EOS and reduces the risk of severe illness, and particularly the 3rd booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine sustainedly promotes EOS. Circulating EOS, along with T cell immunity, may have a predictive value for the disease severity in SARS-CoV-2 Omicron infected patients.

Vaccination and Factors Related to the Clinical Outcome of COVID-19 in Healthcare Workers-A Romanian Front-Line Hospital's Experience

The study aims to describe the frequency of COVID-19 in healthcare workers (HCWs) in a designated hospital for COVID-19 treatment in Bucharest, Romania, and to explore COVID-19 vaccination and other factors associated with the clinical outcome. We actively surveyed all HCWs from 26 February 2020 to 31 December 2021. Cases were laboratory-confirmed with RT-PCR or rapid test antigen. Epidemiological, demographic, clinical outcomes, vaccination status, and co-morbidities data were collected. Data were analyzed using Microsoft Excel, SPSS, and MedCalc. A total of 490 cases of COVID-19 in HCWs were diagnosed. The comparison groups were related to the severity of the clinical outcome: the non-severe group (279, 64.65%) included mild and asymptomatic cases, and the potentially severe group included moderate and severe cases. Significant differences between groups were registered for high-risk departments (p = 0.0003), exposure to COVID-19 patients (p = 0.0003, vaccination (p = 0.0003), and the presence of co-morbidities (p < 0.0001). Age, obesity, anemia, and exposure to COVID-19 patients predicted the severity of the clinical outcomes (χ² (4, n = 425) = 65.69, p < 0.001). The strongest predictors were anemia and obesity (OR 5.82 and 4.94, respectively). In HCWs, mild COVID-19 cases were more frequent than severe cases. Vaccination history, exposure, and individual risk influenced the clinical outcome suggesting that measures to protect HCWs and occupational medicine are important for pandemic preparedness.

Factors associated with receipt of COVID-19 vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity among healthcare workers in Albania (February 2021-June 2022): secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study

Background

Healthcare workers (HCWs) have been disproportionally affected by COVID-19. We investigated factors associated with two- and three-dose COVID-19 vaccine uptake and SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity among 1504 HCWs enrolled (19 February-7 May 2021) in a prospective COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness cohort in Albania through a secondary analysis.

Methods

We collected sociodemographic, occupational, health, prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, and COVID-19 vaccination data from all HCWs at enrollment. Vaccination status was assessed weekly through June 2022. A serum sample was collected from all participants at enrollment and tested for anti-spike SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. We analyzed HCWs characteristics and outcomes using multivariable logistic regression.

Findings

By 11 June 2022, 1337 (88.9%) HCWs had received two COVID-19 vaccine doses, of whom 255 (19.1%) received a booster. Factors significantly associated with receiving three doses (adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 95% CIs) were being ≥35 years (35-44 years: 1.76 (1.05-2.97); 45-54 years: 3.11 (1.92-5.05); ≥55 years: 3.38 (2.04-5.59)) and vaccinated against influenza (1.78; 1.20-2.64). Booster dose receipt was lower among females (0.58; 0.41-0.81), previously infected (0.67; 0.48-0.93), nurses and midwives (0.31; 0.22-0.45), and support staff (0.19; 0.11-0.32). Overall 1076 (72%) were SARS-CoV-2 seropositive at enrollment. Nurses and midwifes (1.45; 1.05-2.02), support staff (1.57; 1.03-2.41), and HCWs performing aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) (1.40; 1.01-1.94) had higher odds of being seropositive, while smokers had reduced odds (0.55; 0.40-0.75).

Interpretation

In a large cohort of Albanian HCWs, COVID-19 vaccine booster dose uptake was very low, particularly among younger, female, and non-physician HCWs, despite evidence demonstrating the added benefit of boosters in preventing infection and severe disease. Reasons behind these disparities should be explored to develop targeted strategies in order to promote uptake in this critical population. SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was higher among non-physicians and HCWs performing APGs. A better understanding of the factors contributing to these differences is needed to inform interventions that could reduce infections in the future.

Funding

This study was funded by the Task Force for Global Health (US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) cooperative agreement # NU51IP000873) and the World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe.

The evolution of workplace risk for Covid-19 in Canadian healthcare workers and its relation to vaccination: A nested case-referent study

BACKGROUND

During the early months of the Covid-19 pandemic, studies demonstrated that healthcare workers (HCWs) were at increased risk of infection. Few modifiable risks were identified. It is largely unknown how these evolved over time.

METHODS

A prospective case-referent study was established and nested within a cohort study of Canadian HCWs. Cases of Covid-19, confirmed by polymerase chain reaction, were matched with up to four referents on job, province, gender, and date of first vaccination. Cases and referents completed a questionnaire reporting exposures and experiences in the 21 days before case date. Participants were recruited from October 2020 to March 2022. Workplace factors were examined by mixed-effects logistic regression allowing for competing exposures. A sensitivity analysis was limited to those for whom family/community transmission seemed unlikely.

RESULTS

533 cases were matched with 1697 referents. Among unvaccinated HCWs, the risk of infection was increased if they worked hands-on with patients with Covid-19, on a ward designated for care of infected patients, or handled objects used by infected patients. Sensitivity analysis identified work in residential institutions and geriatric wards as high risk for unvaccinated HCWs. Later, with almost universal HCW vaccination, risk from working with infected patients was much reduced but cases were more likely than referents to report being unable to access an N95 mask or that decontaminated N95 masks were reused.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that, after a rocky start, the risks of Covid-19 infection from work in health care are now largely contained in Canada but with need for continued vigilance.

Ethnic inequalities in COVID-19 infection, hospitalisation, intensive care admission, and death: a global systematic review and meta-analysis of over 200 million study participants

Background

COVID-19 has exacerbated existing ethnic inequalities in health. Little is known about whether inequalities in severe disease and deaths, observed globally among minoritised ethnic groups, relates to greater infection risk, poorer prognosis, or both. We analysed global data on COVID-19 clinical outcomes examining inequalities between people from minoritised ethnic groups compared to the ethnic majority group.

Methods

Databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, EMCARE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library) were searched from 1st December 2019 to 3rd October 2022, for studies reporting original clinical data for COVID-19 outcomes disaggregated by ethnicity: infection, hospitalisation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and mortality. We assessed inequalities in incidence and prognosis using random-effects meta-analyses, with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) use to assess certainty of findings. Meta-regressions explored the impact of region and time-frame (vaccine roll-out) on heterogeneity. PROSPERO: CRD42021284981.

Findings

77 studies comprising over 200,000,000 participants were included. Compared with White majority populations, we observed an increased risk of testing positive for infection for people from Black (adjusted Risk Ratio [aRR]:1.78, 95% CI:1.59-1.99, I2 = 99.1), South Asian (aRR:3.00, 95% CI:1.59-5.66, I2 = 99.1), Mixed (aRR:1.64, 95% CI:1.02-1.67, I2 = 93.2) and Other ethnic groups (aRR:1.36, 95% CI:1.01-1.82, I2 = 85.6). Black, Hispanic, and South Asian people were more likely to be seropositive. Among population-based studies, Black and Hispanic ethnic groups and Indigenous peoples had an increased risk of hospitalisation; Black, Hispanic, South Asian, East Asian and Mixed ethnic groups and Indigenous peoples had an increased risk of ICU admission. Mortality risk was increased for Hispanic, Mixed, and Indigenous groups. Smaller differences were seen for prognosis following infection. Following hospitalisation, South Asian, East Asian, Black and Mixed ethnic groups had an increased risk of ICU admission, and mortality risk was greater in Mixed ethnic groups. Certainty of evidence ranged from very low to moderate.

Interpretation

Our study suggests that systematic ethnic inequalities in COVID-19 health outcomes exist, with large differences in exposure risk and some differences in prognosis following hospitalisation. Response and recovery interventions must focus on tackling drivers of ethnic inequalities which increase exposure risk and vulnerabilities to severe disease, including structural racism and racial discrimination.

Funding

ESRC:ES/W000849/1.

"Data makes the story come to life:" understanding the ethical and legal implications of Big Data research involving ethnic minority healthcare workers in the United Kingdom-a qualitative study

The aim of UK-REACH ("The United Kingdom Research study into Ethnicity And COVID-19 outcomes in Healthcare workers") is to understand if, how, and why healthcare workers (HCWs) in the United Kingdom (UK) from ethnic minority groups are at increased risk of poor outcomes from COVID-19. In this article, we present findings from the ethical and legal stream of the study, which undertook qualitative research seeking to understand and address legal, ethical, and social acceptability issues around data protection, privacy, and information governance associated with the linkage of HCWs' registration data and healthcare data. We interviewed 22 key opinion leaders in healthcare and health research from across the UK in two-to-one semi-structured interviews. Transcripts were coded using qualitative thematic analysis. Participants told us that a significant aspect of Big Data research in public health is varying drivers of mistrust-of the research itself, research staff and funders, and broader concerns of mistrust within participant communities, particularly in the context of COVID-19 and those situated in more marginalised community settings. However, despite the challenges, participants also identified ways in which legally compliant and ethically informed approaches to research can be crafted to mitigate or overcome mistrust and establish greater confidence in Big Data public health research. Overall, our research indicates that a "Big Data Ethics by Design" approach to research in this area can help assure (1) that meaningful community and participant engagement is taking place and that extant challenges are addressed, and (2) that any new challenges or hitherto unknown unknowns can be rapidly and properly considered to ensure potential (but material) harms are identified and minimised where necessary. Our findings indicate such an approach, in turn, will help drive better scientific breakthroughs that translate into medical innovations and effective public health interventions, which benefit the publics studied, including those who are often marginalised in research.

Antibody correlates of protection from SARS-CoV-2 reinfection prior to vaccination: A nested case-control within the SIREN study

OBJECTIVES

To investigate serological differences between SARS-CoV-2 reinfection cases and contemporary controls, to identify antibody correlates of protection against reinfection.

METHODS

We performed a case-control study, comparing reinfection cases with singly infected individuals pre-vaccination, matched by gender, age, region and timing of first infection. Serum samples were tested for anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike (anti-S), anti-SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (anti-N), live virus microneutralisation (LV-N) and pseudovirus microneutralisation (PV-N). Results were analysed using fixed effect linear regression and fitted into conditional logistic regression models.

RESULTS

We identified 23 cases and 92 controls. First infections occurred before November 2020; reinfections occurred before February 2021, pre-vaccination. Anti-S levels, LV-N and PV-N titres were significantly lower among cases; no difference was found for anti-N levels. Increasing anti-S levels were associated with reduced risk of reinfection (OR 0·63, CI 0·47-0·85), but no association for anti-N levels (OR 0·88, CI 0·73-1·05). Titres >40 were correlated with protection against reinfection for LV-N Wuhan (OR 0·02, CI 0·001-0·31) and LV-N Alpha (OR 0·07, CI 0·009-0·62). For PV-N, titres >100 were associated with protection against Wuhan (OR 0·14, CI 0·03-0·64) and Alpha (0·06, CI 0·008-0·40).

CONCLUSIONS

Before vaccination, protection against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection was directly correlated with anti-S levels, PV-N and LV-N titres, but not with anti-N levels. Detectable LV-N titres were sufficient for protection, whilst PV-N titres >100 were required for a protective effect.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN11041050.

Hesitancy for receiving regular SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in UK healthcare workers: a cross-sectional analysis from the UK-REACH study

BACKGROUND

Regular vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 may be needed to maintain immunity in 'at-risk' populations, which include healthcare workers (HCWs). However, little is known about the proportion of HCWs who might be hesitant about receiving a hypothetical regular SARS-CoV-2 vaccination or the factors associated with this hesitancy.

METHODS

Cross-sectional analysis of questionnaire data collected as part of UK-REACH, a nationwide, longitudinal cohort study of HCWs. The outcome measure was binary, either a participant indicated they would definitely accept regular SARS-CoV-2 vaccination if recommended or they indicated some degree of hesitancy regarding acceptance (probably accept or less likely). We used logistic regression to identify factors associated with hesitancy for receiving regular vaccination.

RESULTS

A total of 5454 HCWs were included in the analysed cohort, 23.5% of whom were hesitant about regular SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Black HCWs were more likely to be hesitant than White HCWs (aOR 2.60, 95%CI 1.80-3.72) as were those who reported a previous episode of COVID-19 (1.33, 1.13-1.57 [vs those who tested negative]). Those who received influenza vaccination in the previous two seasons were over five times less likely to report hesitancy for regular SARS-CoV-2 vaccination than those not vaccinated against influenza in either season (0.18, 0.14-0.21). HCWs who trusted official sources of vaccine information (such as NHS or government adverts or websites) were less likely to report hesitancy for a regular vaccination programme. Those who had been exposed to information advocating against vaccination from friends and family were more likely to be hesitant.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, nearly a quarter of UK HCWs were hesitant about receiving a regular SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. We have identified key factors associated with hesitancy for regular SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, which can be used to identify groups of HCWs at the highest risk of vaccine hesitancy and tailor interventions accordingly. Family and friends of HCWs may influence decisions about regular vaccination. This implies that working with HCWs and their social networks to allay concerns about SARS-CoV-2 vaccination could improve uptake in a regular vaccination programme.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN11811602.

Speaking COVID-19: supporting COVID-19 communication and engagement efforts with people from culturally and linguistically diverse communities

Background

Since the emergence of COVID-19, issues have been raised regarding the approach used to engage with Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CaLD) communities during this public health crisis. This study aimed to understand the factors impacting communication and engagement efforts during the COVID-19 pandemic from the perspective of crucial CaLD community stakeholders and opinion leaders.

Methods

Forty-six semi-structured telephone interviews were undertaken with key stakeholders who have an active role (established before the pandemic) in delivering services and other social support to CaLD communities in Australia.

Results

Seven key themes emerged: (1) the digital divide and how to connect with people; (2) information voids being filled by international material; (3) Differentiating established with new and emerging communities’ needs; (4) speaking COVID-19; (5) ineffectiveness of direct translations of English language resources; (6) coordination is needed to avoid duplication and address gaps and (7) recognising the improvements in governments’ approach.

Conclusion

Alliances must be set up that can be activated in the future to reduce issues around resource development, translation, and dissemination of messages to minimise gaps in the response. Financial assistance must be provided in a timely way to community organisations to support the development and dissemination of culturally appropriate communication materials.