Health and illness beliefs in adults with tuberculosis infection during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK.

Background: COVID-19 disrupted the TB prevention programme in the UK, especially for TB infection (TBI) care. We explore whether experience of the COVID-19 pandemic impacted on patients' perceptions of TBI and its treatment. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted as part of the Research to Improve Detection and Treatment of TBI (RID-TB) programme, exploring perceptual and practical barriers to TBI treatment. Nineteen people diagnosed with TBI were interviewed between August 2020 and April 2021. Recordings were transcribed and analysed using a constant comparative approach, allowing for a dynamic and iterative exploration of themes. Themes are organised using the Perceptions and Practicalities Approach. Findings: Some participants perceived TBI as a risk factor for increased susceptibility to COVID-19, while some thought that treatment for TBI might protect against COVID-19 or mitigate its effects. Adaptations to TB services (e.g., remote follow-up) and integrated practices during the COVID-19 restrictions (e.g., medication being posted) addressed some practical barriers to TBI treatment. However, we identified beliefs about TBI and COVID-19 that are likely to act as barriers to engagement with TBI treatment, including: interpreting service delays as an indication of TBI not being serious enough for treatment and concerns about contracting COVID-19 in TB clinics. Interpretation: COVID-19 and TBI service delays influence people's perceptions and practical barriers to TBI treatment adherence. Failure to address these beliefs may lead to people's concerns about their treatment not being fully addressed. Utilised service adaptations like remote consultations to address practical barriers may be relevant beyond COVID-19. Funding: NIHR RID-TB Program (RP-PG-0217-20009).

COVID-19 in non-hospitalised adults caused by either SARS-CoV-2 sub-variants Omicron BA.1, BA.2, BA.4/5 or Delta associates with similar illness duration, symptom severity and viral kinetics, irrespective of vaccination history.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 variant Omicron rapidly evolved over 2022, causing three waves of infection due to sub-variants BA.1, BA.2 and BA.4/5. We sought to characterise symptoms and viral loads over the course of COVID-19 infection with these sub-variants in otherwise-healthy, vaccinated, non-hospitalised adults, and compared data to infections with the preceding Delta variant of concern (VOC). METHODS: In a prospective, observational cohort study, healthy vaccinated UK adults who reported a positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or lateral flow test, self-swabbed on alternate weekdays until day 10. We compared participant-reported symptoms and viral load trajectories between infections caused by VOCs Delta and Omicron (sub-variants BA.1, BA.2 or BA.4/5), and tested for relationships between vaccine dose, symptoms and PCR cycle threshold (Ct) as a proxy for viral load using Chi-squared (χ2) and Wilcoxon tests. RESULTS: 563 infection episodes were reported among 491 participants. Across infection episodes, there was little variation in symptom burden (4 [IQR 3-5] symptoms) and duration (8 [IQR 6-11] days). Whilst symptom profiles differed among infections caused by Delta compared to Omicron sub-variants, symptom profiles were similar between Omicron sub-variants. Anosmia was reported more frequently in Delta infections after 2 doses compared with Omicron sub-variant infections after 3 doses, for example: 42% (25/60) of participants with Delta infection compared to 9% (6/67) with Omicron BA.4/5 (χ2 P < 0.001; OR 7.3 [95% CI 2.7-19.4]). Fever was less common with Delta (20/60 participants; 33%) than Omicron BA.4/5 (39/67; 58%; χ2 P = 0.008; OR 0.4 [CI 0.2-0.7]). Amongst infections with an Omicron sub-variants, symptoms of coryza, fatigue, cough and myalgia predominated. Viral load trajectories and peaks did not differ between Delta, and Omicron, irrespective of symptom severity (including asymptomatic participants), VOC or vaccination status. PCR Ct values were negatively associated with time since vaccination in participants infected with BA.1 (ß = -0.05 (CI -0.10-0.01); P = 0.031); however, this trend was not observed in BA.2 or BA.4/5 infections. CONCLUSION: Our study emphasises both the changing symptom profile of COVID-19 infections in the Omicron era, and ongoing transmission risk of Omicron sub-variants in vaccinated adults. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04750356.

Investigating the impact of financial concerns on symptoms of depression in UK healthcare workers: data from the UK-REACH nationwide cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Exploration of the association between financial concerns and depression in UK healthcare workers (HCWs) is paramount given the current 'cost of living crisis', ongoing strike action and recruitment/retention problems in the National Health Service. AIMS: To assess the impact of financial concerns on the risk of depression in HCWs, how these concerns have changed over time and what factors might predict financial concerns. METHOD: We used longitudinal survey data from a UK-wide cohort of HCWs to determine whether financial concerns at baseline (December 2020 to March 2021) were associated with depression (measured with the Public Health Questionnaire-2) at follow-up (June to October 2022). We used logistic regression to examine the association between financial concerns and depression, and ordinal logistic regression to establish predictors of developing financial concerns. RESULTS: A total of 3521 HCWs were included. Those concerned about their financial situation at baseline had higher odds of developing depressive symptoms at follow-up. Financial concerns increased in 43.8% of HCWs and decreased in 9%. Those in nursing, midwifery and other nursing roles had over twice the odds of developing financial concerns compared with those in medical roles. CONCLUSIONS: Financial concerns are increasing in prevalence and predict the later development of depressive symptoms in UK HCWs. Those in nursing, midwifery and other allied nursing roles may have been disproportionately affected. Our results are concerning given the potential effects on sickness absence and staff retention. Policy makers should act to alleviate financial concerns to reduce the impact this may have on a discontent workforce plagued by understaffing.

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.

Caring for Those Who Take Care of Others: Developing Systemic and Sustainable Mental Health Support for the Diverse Healthcare Workforce in the United Kingdom.

Pressures such as high workload, stretched resources, and financial stress are resulting in healthcare workers experiencing high rates of mental health conditions, high suicide rates, high rates of staff absences from work, and high vacancy rates for certain healthcare professions. All of these factors point to the fact that a systematic and sustainable approach to mental health support at different levels and in different ways is more important than ever. In response, we present a holistic analysis of the mental health and wellbeing needs of healthcare workers across the United Kingdom healthcare ecosystem. We recommend that healthcare organisations should consider the specific circumstances of these staff and develop strategies to counter the negative impact of these factors and help safeguard the mental health of their staff.

Treatment Strategy for Rifampin-Susceptible Tuberculosis.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis is usually treated with a 6-month rifampin-based regimen. Whether a strategy involving shorter initial treatment may lead to similar outcomes is unclear. METHODS: In this adaptive, open-label, noninferiority trial, we randomly assigned participants with rifampin-susceptible pulmonary tuberculosis to undergo either standard treatment (rifampin and isoniazid for 24 weeks with pyrazinamide and ethambutol for the first 8 weeks) or a strategy involving initial treatment with an 8-week regimen, extended treatment for persistent clinical disease, monitoring after treatment, and retreatment for relapse. There were four strategy groups with different initial regimens; noninferiority was assessed in the two strategy groups with complete enrollment, which had initial regimens of high-dose rifampin-linezolid and bedaquiline-linezolid (each with isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol). The primary outcome was a composite of death, ongoing treatment, or active disease at week 96. The noninferiority margin was 12 percentage points. RESULTS: Of the 674 participants in the intention-to-treat population, 4 (0.6%) withdrew consent or were lost to follow-up. A primary-outcome event occurred in 7 of the 181 participants (3.9%) in the standard-treatment group, as compared with 21 of the 184 participants (11.4%) in the strategy group with an initial rifampin-linezolid regimen (adjusted difference, 7.4 percentage points; 97.5% confidence interval [CI], 1.7 to 13.2; noninferiority not met) and 11 of the 189 participants (5.8%) in the strategy group with an initial bedaquiline-linezolid regimen (adjusted difference, 0.8 percentage points; 97.5% CI, -3.4 to 5.1; noninferiority met). The mean total duration of treatment was 180 days in the standard-treatment group, 106 days in the rifampin-linezolid strategy group, and 85 days in the bedaquiline-linezolid strategy group. The incidences of grade 3 or 4 adverse events and serious adverse events were similar in the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: A strategy involving initial treatment with an 8-week bedaquiline-linezolid regimen was noninferior to standard treatment for tuberculosis with respect to clinical outcomes. The strategy was associated with a shorter total duration of treatment and with no evident safety concerns. (Funded by the Singapore National Medical Research Council and others; TRUNCATE-TB ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03474198.).

Healthcare workers' views on mandatory SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in the UK: A cross-sectional, mixed-methods analysis from the UK-REACH study.

Background: Several countries now have mandatory SARS-CoV-2 vaccination for healthcare workers (HCWs) or the general population. HCWs' views on this are largely unknown. Using data from the nationwide UK-REACH study we aimed to understand UK HCW's views on improving SARS-CoV-2 vaccination coverage, including mandatory vaccination. Methods: Between 21st April and 26th June 2021, we administered an online questionnaire via email to 17 891 UK HCWs recruited as part of a longitudinal cohort from across the UK who had previously responded to a baseline questionnaire (primarily recruited through email) as part of the United Kingdom Research study into Ethnicity And COVID-19 outcomes in Healthcare workers (UK-REACH) nationwide prospective cohort study. We categorised responses to a free-text question "What should society do if people do not get vaccinated against COVID-19?" using qualitative content analysis. We collapsed categories into a binary variable: favours mandatory vaccination or not, using logistic regression to calculate its demographic predictors, and its occupational, health, and attitudinal predictors adjusted for demographics. Findings: Of 5633 questionnaire respondents, 3235 answered the free text question. Median age of free text responders was 47 years (IQR 36-56) and 2705 (74.3%) were female. 18% (n = 578) favoured mandatory vaccination (201 [6%] participants for HCWs and others working with vulnerable populations; 377 [12%] for the general population), but the most frequent suggestion was education (32%, n = 1047). Older HCWs (OR 1.84; 95% CI 1.44-2.34 [≥55 years vs 16 years to <40 years]), HCWs vaccinated against influenza (OR 1.49; 95% CI 1.11-2.01 [2 vaccines vs none]), and with more positive vaccination attitudes generally (OR 1.10; 95% CI 1.06-1.15) were more likely to favour mandatory vaccination, whereas female HCWs (OR= 0.79, 95% CI 0.63-0.96, vs male HCWs) and Black HCWs (OR=0.46, 95% CI 0.25-0.85, vs white HCWs) were less likely to. Interpretation: Only one in six of the HCWs in this large, diverse, UK-wide sample favoured mandatory vaccination. Building trust, educating, and supporting HCWs who are hesitant about vaccination may be more acceptable, effective, and equitable. Funding: MRC-UK Research and Innovation grant (MR/V027549/1) and the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) via the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). Core funding was also provided by NIHR Biomedical Research Centres.

Histoplasmosis.

Histoplasmosis is one of the commonest endemic mycoses in the Americas yet is often underdiagnosed and neglected as a public health priority. This review outlines the evolving understanding of its epidemiology and the clinical syndromes of histoplasmosis, in addition to up-to-date diagnostic and treatment guidelines. A focus on histoplasmosis in advanced HIV is included. The challenges pertinent to histoplasmosis management in Latin America, with recommendations made through international expert consensus are discussed.

False-negative RT-PCR for COVID-19 and a diagnostic risk score: a retrospective cohort study among patients admitted to hospital.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the characteristics and outcomes of patients with a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 and false-negative SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR), and develop and internally validate a diagnostic risk score to predict risk of COVID-19 (including RT-PCR-negative COVID-19) among medical admissions. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Two hospitals within an acute NHS Trust in London, UK. PARTICIPANTS: All patients admitted to medical wards between 2 March and 3 May 2020. OUTCOMES: Main outcomes were diagnosis of COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR results, sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR and mortality during hospital admission. For the diagnostic risk score, we report discrimination, calibration and diagnostic accuracy of the model and simplified risk score and internal validation. RESULTS: 4008 patients were admitted between 2 March and 3 May 2020. 1792 patients (44.8%) were diagnosed with COVID-19, of whom 1391 were SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positive and 283 had only negative RT-PCRs. Compared with a clinical reference standard, sensitivity of RT-PCR in hospital patients was 83.1% (95% CI 81.2%-84.8%). Broadly, patients with false-negative RT-PCR COVID-19 and those confirmed by positive PCR had similar demographic and clinical characteristics but lower risk of intensive care unit admission and lower in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.27-0.61). A simple diagnostic risk score comprising of age, sex, ethnicity, cough, fever or shortness of breath, National Early Warning Score 2, C reactive protein and chest radiograph appearance had moderate discrimination (area under the receiver-operator curve 0.83, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.85), good calibration and was internally validated. CONCLUSION: RT-PCR-negative COVID-19 is common and is associated with lower mortality despite similar presentation. Diagnostic risk scores could potentially help triage patients requiring admission but need external validation.

Cross-sectional observational study of epidemiology of COVID-19 and clinical outcomes of hospitalised patients in North West London during March and April 2020.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to describe evolution, epidemiology and clinical outcomes of COVID-19 in subjects tested at or admitted to hospitals in North West London. DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING: London North West Healthcare NHS Trust (LNWH). PARTICIPANTS: Patients tested and/or admitted for COVID-19 at LNWH during March and April 2020 MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Descriptive and analytical epidemiology of demographic and clinical outcomes (intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mechanical ventilation and mortality) of those who tested positive for COVID-19. RESULTS: The outbreak began in the first week of March 2020 and reached a peak by the end of March and first week of April. In the study period, 6183 tests were performed in on 4981 people. Of the 2086 laboratory confirmed COVID-19 cases, 1901 were admitted to hospital. Older age group, men and those of black or Asian minority ethnic (BAME) group were predominantly affected (p<0.05). These groups also had more severe infection resulting in ICU admission and need for mechanical ventilation (p<0.05). However, in a multivariate analysis, only increasing age was independently associated with increased risk of death (p<0.05). Mortality rate was 26.9% in hospitalised patients. CONCLUSION: The findings confirm that men, BAME and older population were most commonly and severely affected groups. Only older age was independently associated with mortality.

Experience of a novel community testing programme for COVID-19 in London: Lessons learnt.

We describe the London community testing programme developed for COVID-19, audit its effectiveness and report patient acceptability and patient adherence to isolation guidance, based upon a survey conducted with participants.Any patients meeting the Public Health England (PHE) case definition for COVID-19 who did not require hospital admission were eligible for community testing. 2,053 patients with suspected COVID-19 were tested in the community between January and March 2020. Of those tested, 75 (3.6%) were positive. 88% of patients that completed a patient survey felt safe and 82% agreed that community testing was preferable to hospital admission. 97% were able to remain within their own home during the isolation period but just 41% were able to reliably isolate from other members of their household.The London community testing programme allowed widespread testing for COVID-19 while minimising patient transport, hospital admissions and staff exposures. Community testing was acceptable to patients and preferable to admission to hospital. Patients were able to reliably isolate in their home but not from household contacts. The authors believe in the importance, feasibility and acceptability of community testing for COVID-19 as a part of a package of interventions to mitigate a second wave of infection.