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

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers (HCWs), particularly those from ethnic minority groups, have been shown to be at disproportionately higher risk of infection with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) compared to the general population. However, there is insufficient evidence on how demographic and occupational factors influence infection risk among ethnic minority HCWs. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis using data from the baseline questionnaire of the United Kingdom Research study into Ethnicity and Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Outcomes in Healthcare workers (UK-REACH) cohort study, administered between December 2020 and March 2021. We used logistic regression to examine associations of demographic, household, and occupational risk factors with SARS-CoV-2 infection (defined by polymerase chain reaction (PCR), serology, or suspected COVID-19) in a diverse group of HCWs. The primary exposure of interest was self-reported ethnicity. Among 10,772 HCWs who worked during the first UK national lockdown in March 2020, the median age was 45 (interquartile range [IQR] 35 to 54), 75.1% were female and 29.6% were from ethnic minority groups. A total of 2,496 (23.2%) reported previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. The fully adjusted model contained the following dependent variables: demographic factors (age, sex, ethnicity, migration status, deprivation, religiosity), household factors (living with key workers, shared spaces in accommodation, number of people in household), health factors (presence/absence of diabetes or immunosuppression, smoking history, shielding status, SARS-CoV-2 vaccination status), the extent of social mixing outside of the household, and occupational factors (job role, the area in which a participant worked, use of public transport to work, exposure to confirmed suspected COVID-19 patients, personal protective equipment [PPE] access, aerosol generating procedure exposure, night shift pattern, and the UK region of workplace). After adjustment, demographic and household factors associated with increased odds of infection included younger age, living with other key workers, and higher religiosity. Important occupational risk factors associated with increased odds of infection included attending to a higher number of COVID-19 positive patients (aOR 2.59, 95% CI 2.11 to 3.18 for ≥21 patients per week versus none), working in a nursing or midwifery role (1.30, 1.11 to 1.53, compared to doctors), reporting a lack of access to PPE (1.29, 1.17 to 1.43), and working in an ambulance (2.00, 1.56 to 2.58) or hospital inpatient setting (1.55, 1.38 to 1.75). Those who worked in intensive care units were less likely to have been infected (0.76, 0.64 to 0.92) than those who did not. Black HCWs were more likely to have been infected than their White colleagues, an effect which attenuated after adjustment for other known risk factors. This study is limited by self-selection bias and the cross sectional nature of the study means we cannot infer the direction of causality. CONCLUSIONS: We identified key sociodemographic and occupational risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection among UK HCWs, and have determined factors that might contribute to a disproportionate odds of infection in HCWs from Black ethnic groups. These findings demonstrate the importance of social and occupational factors in driving ethnic disparities in COVID-19 outcomes, and should inform policies, including targeted vaccination strategies and risk assessments aimed at protecting HCWs in future waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was prospectively registered at ISRCTN (reference number: ISRCTN11811602).

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.

Access to personal protective equipment in healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom: results from a nationwide cohort study (UK-REACH).

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Effective use of personal protective equipment (PPE) reduces this risk. We sought to determine the prevalence and predictors of self-reported access to appropriate PPE (aPPE) for HCWs in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted cross sectional analyses using data from a nationwide questionnaire-based cohort study administered between December 2020-February 2021. The outcome was a binary measure of self-reported aPPE (access all of the time vs access most of the time or less frequently) at two timepoints: the first national lockdown in the UK in March 2020 (primary analysis) and at the time of questionnaire response (secondary analysis). RESULTS: Ten thousand five hundred eight HCWs were included in the primary analysis, and 12,252 in the secondary analysis. 35.2% of HCWs reported aPPE at all times in the primary analysis; 83.9% reported aPPE at all times in the secondary analysis. In the primary analysis, after adjustment (for age, sex, ethnicity, migration status, occupation, aerosol generating procedure exposure, work sector and region, working hours, night shift frequency and trust in employing organisation), older HCWs and those working in Intensive Care Units were more likely to report aPPE at all times. Asian HCWs (aOR:0.77, 95%CI 0.67-0.89 [vs White]), those in allied health professional and dental roles (vs those in medical roles), and those who saw a higher number of COVID-19 patients compared to those who saw none (≥ 21 patients/week 0.74, 0.61-0.90) were less likely to report aPPE at all times. Those who trusted their employing organisation to deal with concerns about unsafe clinical practice, compared to those who did not, were twice as likely to report aPPE at all times. Significant predictors were largely unchanged in the secondary analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Only a third of HCWs in the UK reported aPPE at all times during the first lockdown and that aPPE had improved later in the pandemic. We also identified key determinants of aPPE during the first UK lockdown, which have mostly persisted since lockdown was eased. These findings have important implications for the safe delivery of healthcare during the pandemic.

The association of skin autofluorescence with cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality in persons with chronic kidney disease stage 3: A prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Tissue advanced glycation end product (AGE) accumulation has been proposed as a marker of cumulative metabolic stress that can be assessed noninvasively by measurement of skin autofluorescence (SAF). In persons on haemodialysis, SAF is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular events (CVEs) and all-cause mortality (ACM), but data at earlier stages of chronic kidney disease (CKD) are inconclusive. We investigated SAF as a risk factor for CVEs and ACM in a prospective study of persons with CKD stage 3. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Participants with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 59 to 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 on two consecutive previous blood tests were recruited from 32 primary care practices across Derbyshire, United Kingdom between 2008 and 2010. SAF was measured in participants with CKD stage 3 at baseline, 1, and 5 years using an AGE reader (DiagnOptics). Data on hospital admissions with CVEs (based on international classification of diseases [ICD]-10 coding) and deaths were obtained from NHS Digital. Cox proportional hazards models were used to investigate baseline variables associated with CVEs and ACM. A total of 1,707 of 1,741 participants with SAF readings at baseline were included in this analysis: The mean (± SD) age was 72.9 ± 9.0 years; 1,036 (60.7%) were female, 1,681 (98.5%) were of white ethnicity, and mean (±SD) eGFR was 53.5 ± 11.9 mL/min/1.73 m2. We observed 319 deaths and 590 CVEs during a mean of 6.0 ± 1.5 and 5.1 ± 2.2 years of observation, respectively. Higher baseline SAF was an independent risk factor for CVEs (hazard ratio [HR] 1.12 per SD, 95% CI 1.03-1.22, p = 0.01) and ACM (HR 1.16, 95% CI 1.03-1.30, p = 0.01). Additionally, increase in SAF over 1 year was independently associated with subsequent CVEs (HR 1.11 per SD, 95% CI 1.00-1.22; p = 0.04) and ACM (HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.09-1.41, p = 0.001). We relied on ICD-10 codes to identify hospital admissions with CVEs, and there may therefore have been some misclassification. CONCLUSIONS: We have identified SAF as an independent risk factor for CVE and ACM in persons with early CKD. These findings suggest that interventions to reduce AGE accumulation, such as dietary AGE restriction, may reduce cardiovascular risk in CKD, but this requires testing in prospective randomised trials. Our findings may not be applicable to more ethnically diverse or younger populations.

Global patterns of mortality in international migrants: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: 258 million people reside outside their country of birth; however, to date no global systematic reviews or meta-analyses of mortality data for these international migrants have been done. We aimed to review and synthesise available mortality data on international migrants. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases for observational studies, systematic reviews, and randomised controlled trials published between Jan 1, 2001, and March 31, 2017, without language restrictions. We included studies reporting mortality outcomes for international migrants of any age residing outside their country of birth. Studies that recruited participants exclusively from intensive care or high dependency hospital units, with an existing health condition or status, or a particular health exposure were excluded. We also excluded studies limited to maternal or perinatal outcomes. We screened studies using systematic review software and extracted data from published reports. The main outcomes were all-cause and International Classification of Diseases, tenth revision (ICD-10) cause-specific standardised mortality ratios (SMRs) and absolute mortality rates. We calculated summary estimates using random-effects models. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42017073608. FINDINGS: Of the 12 480 articles identified by our search, 96 studies were eligible for inclusion. The studies were geographically diverse and included data from all global regions and for 92 countries. 5464 mortality estimates for more than 15·2 million migrants were included, of which 5327 (97%) were from high-income countries, 115 (2%) were from middle-income countries, and 22 (<1%) were from low-income countries. Few studies included mortality estimates for refugees (110 estimates), asylum seekers (144 estimates), or labour migrants (six estimates). The summary estimate of all-cause SMR for international migrants was lower than one when compared with the general population in destination countries (0·70 [95% CI 0·65-0·76]; I2=99·8%). All-cause SMR was lower in both male migrants (0·72 [0·63-0·81]; I2=99·8%) and female migrants (0·75 [0·67-0·84]; I2=99·8%) compared with the general population. A mortality advantage was evident for refugees (SMR 0·50 [0·46-0·54]; I2=89·8%), but not for asylum seekers (1·05 [0·89-1·24]; I2=54·4%), although limited data was available on these groups. SMRs for all causes of death were lower in migrants compared with the general populations in the destination country across all 13 ICD-10 categories analysed, with the exception of infectious diseases and external causes. Heterogeneity was high across the majority of analyses. Point estimates of all-cause age-standardised mortality in migrants ranged from 420 to 874 per 100 000 population. INTERPRETATION: Our study showed that international migrants have a mortality advantage compared with general populations, and that this advantage persisted across the majority of ICD-10 disease categories. The mortality advantage identified will be representative of international migrants in high-income countries who are studying, working, or have joined family members in these countries. However, our results might not reflect the health outcomes of more marginalised groups in low-income and middle-income countries because little data were available for these groups, highlighting an important gap in existing research. Our results present an opportunity to reframe the public discourse on international migration and health in high-income countries. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust, National Institute for Health Research, Medical Research Council, Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, Department for International Development, Fogarty International Center, Grand Challenges Canada, International Development Research Centre Canada, Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research, National Cancer Institute, National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, National Institute of Mental Health, Swiss National Science Foundation, World Diabetes Foundation, UK National Institute for Health Research Imperial Biomedical Research Centre, Imperial College Healthcare Charity, and European Society for Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) Study Group Research Funding for the ESCMID Study Group for Infections in Travellers and Migrants.

Tuberculosis incidence among migrants according to migrant status: a cohort study, Denmark, 1993 to 2015.

BackgroundMigrants account for the majority of tuberculosis (TB) cases in low-incidence countries in western Europe. TB incidence among migrants might be influenced by patterns of migration, but this is not well understood.AimTo investigate differences in TB risk across migrant groups according to migrant status and region of origin.MethodsThis prospective cohort study included migrants ≥ 18 years of age who obtained residency in Denmark between 1 January 1993 and 31 December 2015, matched 1:6 to Danish-born individuals. Migrants were grouped according to legal status of residency and region of origin. Incidence rates (IR) and incidence rate ratios (IRR) were estimated by Poisson regression.ResultsThe cohort included 142,314 migrants. Migrants had significantly higher TB incidence (IR: 120/100,000 person-years (PY); 95% confidence interval (CI): 115-126) than Danish-born individuals (IR: 4/100,000 PY; 95% CI: 3-4). The IRR was significantly higher in all migrant groups compared with Danish-born (p < 0.01). A particularly higher risk was seen among family-reunified to refugees (IRR: 61.8; 95% CI: 52.7-72.4), quota refugees (IRR: 46.0; 95% CI: 36.6-57.6) and former asylum seekers (IRR: 45.3; 95% CI: 40.2-51.1), whereas lower risk was seen among family-reunified to Danish/Nordic citizens (IRR 15.8; 95% CI: 13.6-18.4) and family-reunified to immigrants (IRR: 16.9; 95% CI: 13.5-21.3).DiscussionAll migrants had higher TB risk compared with the Danish-born population. While screening programmes focus mostly on asylum seekers, other migrant groups with high risk of TB are missed. Awareness of TB risk in all high-risk groups should be strengthened and screening programmes should be optimised.

Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis treatment adherence in migrants: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) is a growing concern in meeting global targets for TB control. In high-income low-TB-incidence countries, a disproportionate number of MDR-TB cases occur in migrant (foreign-born) populations, with concerns about low adherence rates in these patients compared to the host non-migrant population. Tackling MDR-TB in this context may, therefore, require unique approaches. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify and synthesise data on MDR-TB treatment adherence in migrant patients to inform evidence-based strategies to improve care pathways and health outcomes in this group. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in line with PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO 42017070756). The databases Embase, MEDLINE, Global Health and PubMed were searched to 24 May 2017 for primary research reporting MDR-TB treatment adherence and outcomes in migrant populations, with no restrictions on dates or language. A meta-analysis was conducted using random-effects models. RESULTS: From 413 papers identified in the database search, 15 studies reporting on MDR-TB treatment outcomes for 258 migrants and 174 non-migrants were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. The estimated rate of adherence to MDR-TB treatment across migrant patients was 71% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 58-84%], with non-adherence reported among 20% (95% CI = 4-37%) of migrant patients. A key finding was that there were no differences in estimated rates of adherence [risk ratio (RR) = 1.05; 95% CI = 0.82-1.34] or non-adherence (RR = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.79-1.36) between migrants and non-migrants. CONCLUSIONS: MDR-TB treatment adherence rates among migrants in high-income low-TB-incidence countries are approaching global targets for treatment success (75%), and are comparable to rates in non-migrants. The findings highlight that only just over 70% of migrant and non-migrant patients adhere to MDR-TB treatment. The results point to the importance of increasing adherence in all patient groups, including migrants, with an emphasis on tailoring care based on social risk factors for poor adherence. We believe that MDR-TB treatment targets are not ambitious enough.

Divergent approaches in the vaccination of recently arrived migrants to Europe: a survey of national experts from 32 countries, 2017.

BackgroundMigrants within the European Union and European Economic Area (EU/EEA) may be underimmunised and lack documentation on previous vaccinations. We investigated approaches to vaccination in recently arrived adult and child migrants, and guideline availability and implementation. Methods: Between March and May 2017, a national vaccination expert from every EU/EEA country and Switzerland completed an electronic questionnaire. We used descriptive analyses to calculate percentages, and framework analysis to synthesise free-text responses. Results: We approached 32 countries (response rate 100%). Although 28 experts reported vaccination guidance at national level, specific guidelines for recently arrived migrants were only available in six countries and not consistently implemented. Twenty-three countries administered vaccinations during on-arrival health checks. Most experts recommended multiple vaccination opportunities be made available: at point of entry (n = 13) or at holding level (reception centres, migrant camps, detention centres) (n = 21). In 30 countries, child migrants without evidence of previous vaccination were re-vaccinated according to the national schedule. Diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus and polio vaccinations were given to migrant children in all countries, measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) in 31 countries, hepatitis B vaccination in 25. Low levels of catch-up vaccination were reported in adult migrants, with only 13 countries offering MMR and 10 countries charging fees. Conclusion: Existing guidance is often not migrant-specific and may not be applied in practice; clarification is needed on which vaccines should be given. Strategies are needed specifically for catch-up vaccination in adult migrants. Vaccinations should be offered in multiple settings, free of charge, with sufficient guidance and training provided to front-line healthcare professionals.

Psychosocial effects of an Ebola outbreak at individual, community and international levels.

The 2013-2016 Ebola outbreak in Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone was the worst in history with over 28,000 cases and 11,000 deaths. Here we examine the psychosocial consequences of the epidemic. Ebola is a traumatic illness both in terms of symptom severity and mortality rates. Those affected are likely to experience psychological effects due to the traumatic course of the infection, fear of death and experience of witnessing others dying. Survivors can also experience psychosocial consequences due to feelings of shame or guilt (e.g. from transmitting infection to others) and stigmatization or blame from their communities. At the community level, a cyclical pattern of fear occurs, with a loss of trust in health services and stigma, resulting in disruptions of community interactions and community break down. Health systems in affected countries were severely disrupted and overstretched by the outbreak and their capacities were significantly reduced as almost 900 health-care workers were infected with Ebola and more than 500 died. The outbreak resulted in an increased need for health services, reduced quality of life and economic productivity and social system break down. It is essential that the global response to the outbreak considers both acute and long-term psychosocial needs of individuals and communities. Response efforts should involve communities to address psychosocial need, to rebuild health systems and trust and to limit stigma. The severity of this epidemic and its long-lasting repercussions should spur investment in and development of health systems.

La flambée de maladie à virus Ebola qui a frappé la Guinée, le Libéria et la Sierra Leone en 2013-2016 a été la pire de toute l'histoire, avec plus de 28 000 cas et 11 000 décès. Dans ce dossier, nous examinons les conséquences psychosociales de cette flambée épidémique. La maladie à virus Ebola est une maladie traumatisante, compte tenu à la fois de la gravité de ses symptômes et des taux de mortalité qui y sont associés. Les personnes affectées sont susceptibles de développer des troubles psychologiques à cause de l'évolution traumatisante de l'infection, de la peur de mourir et du fait de voir d'autres personnes mourir autour d'eux. Les survivants peuvent aussi avoir des séquelles psychologiques liées à un sentiment de honte ou de culpabilité (pour avoir transmis l'infection à d'autres personnes, par exemple) ou à cause de leur stigmatisation ou de leur mise en accusation au sein de leur communauté. À l'échelle communautaire, un schéma cyclique de peur intervient, avec une perte de confiance envers les services de santé, et la stigmatisation des personnes affectées entraîne une rupture des interactions au sein de la communauté et une fracture de la communauté. Dans les pays touchés, les systèmes de santé ont été lourdement ébranlés et même dépassés par la flambée de la maladie. Leur capacité s'est considérablement réduite, près de 900 agents de santé ont été infectés et plus de 500 sont décédés. Cette flambée épidémique a majoré les besoins de services de santé, réduit la qualité de vie et la productivité économique et entraîné la fracture du système social. La réponse internationale doit absolument tenir compte aussi bien des besoins psychosociaux immédiats des individus et des communautés que de ceux à plus long terme. Il serait judicieux que les communautés soient intégrées dans les efforts de riposte pour répondre aux besoins psychosociaux, reconstruire les systèmes de santé, rétablir la confiance des populations et limiter les stigmatisations. La gravité de cette flambée épidémique ainsi que ses répercussions durables devraient inciter à investir dans les systèmes de santé et à les consolider.

El brote de Ebola en 2013 y 2016 en Guinea, Liberia y Sierra Leona fue el peor de la historia, con más de 28 000 casos y 11 000 muertes. En este artículo se examinan las consecuencias psicosociales de la epidemia. El Ebola es una enfermedad traumática, tanto por la gravedad de sus síntomas como por las tasas de mortalidad. Los afectados pueden sufrir efectos psicológicos dado el proceso traumático de la infección, temer a la muerte y ser testigos de la muerte de otros. Los supervivientes también pueden sufrir consecuencias psicosociales debido a los sentimientos de vergüenza y culpa (por ejemplo, por transmitir la infección a otros) y la estigmatización o reproche de sus comunidades. A nivel comunitario, se produce un patrón cíclico de temor que se traduce en la pérdida de la confianza en los servicios sanitarios, lo que da lugar a la interrupción de las interacciones de las comunidades y una ruptura de las mismas. Los sistemas sanitarios de los países afectados se vieron gravemente perjudicados y desbordados por el brote, y sus capacidades se redujeron significativamente, puesto que casi 900 trabajadores sanitarios fueron infectados por el virus del Ebola y más de 500 murieron. El brote provocó una mayor necesidad de servicios de salud, redujo la calidad de vida y la productividad económica y fracturó el sistema social. Es fundamental que la respuesta mundial al brote tenga en cuenta las profundas necesidades psicosociales a largo plazo, tanto para individuos como para comunidades. Las medidas de respuesta deberían comportar que las comunidades abordasen las necesidades psicosociales, reconstruyesen los sistemas sanitarios y la confianza y redujesen la estigmatización. La gravedad de esta epidemia y sus repercusiones a largo plazo deberían estimular la inversión y el desarrollo de los sistemas sanitarios.

Coping strategies used by migrant healthcare workers to support their mental health during COVID-19 in the United Kingdom: a qualitative analysis.

Background: The incidence of mental illness has risen since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The number of healthcare workers (HCWs) needing mental health support has increased significantly.Objective: This secondary analysis of qualitative data explored the coping strategies of migrant HCWs living in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our aim was to identify the coping strategies used by migrant HCWs, and how they could be explored post-pandemic as support mechanisms of an increasingly diverse workforce.Method: As part of the United Kingdom Research study into Ethnicity And COVID-19 outcomes among Healthcare workers (UK-REACH), we conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews and focus groups with clinical and non-clinical HCWs across the UK, on Microsoft Teams, from December 2020 to July 2021. We conducted a thematic analysis using Braun and Clarke's framework to explore the lived experiences of HCWs born overseas and living in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic. The key themes that emerged were described using Lazarus and Folkman's transactional model of stress and coping.Results: The emerging themes include stressors (situation triggering stress), appraisal (situation acknowledged as a source of stress), emotion-focused coping (family and social support and religious beliefs), problem-focused coping (engaging in self-care, seeking and receiving professional support), and coping strategy outcomes. The participants described the short-term benefit of the coping strategies as a shift in focus from COVID-19, which reduced their anxiety and stress levels. However, the long-term impact is unknown.Conclusion: We found that some migrant HCWs struggled with their mental health and used various coping strategies during the pandemic. With an increasingly diverse healthcare workforce, it will be beneficial to explore how coping strategies (family and social support networks, religion, self-care, and professional support) could be used in the future and how occupational policies and infrastructure can be adapted to support these communities.

Migrant (non-UK-born) HCWs used various coping strategies to sustain their mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic.The study conceptualized the coping mechanisms that enabled participants to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic crisis, using Lazarus and Folkman's transactional model of stress and coping.Future research should explore whether short-term gains due to coping during the pandemic were maintained in the long term.

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.

Antimicrobial resistance among migrants in Europe: a systematic review and meta-analysis - update from 2017 to 2023.

Background: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a critical global health concern. A previous systematic review showed that migrants in Europe are at increased risk of AMR. Since the COVID-19 pandemic there have been rapid changes in patterns of antibiotic use, AMR, and migration. We aimed to present an updated evidence synthesis on the current distribution of AMR among migrants in Europe. Methods: We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022343263). We searched databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed and Scopus) from 18 January 2017 until 18 January 2023 to identify primary data from observational studies reporting any laboratory-confirmed AMR among migrants in the European Economic Area (EEA) and European Union-15 (EU-15) countries using over 7 key search terms for migrants and over 70 terms for AMR and countries in Europe. Outcomes were infection with, or colonisation of AMR bacteria. Methodological quality was assessed using Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Observational Studies. We meta-analysed the pooled-prevalence of infection and/or colonisation of AMR organisms. Findings: Among 630 articles, 21 observational studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. The pooled prevalence for any detected AMR was 28.0% (95% CI 18.0%-41.0%, I 2  = 100%) compared to a 25.4% seen in the previous review; gram-negative bacteria 31.0% (95% CI 20.0%-44.0%, I 2  = 100%), and methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus 10.0% (95% CI 5.0%-16.0%, I 2  = 99%). Drug-resistant bacteria were more prevalent in community settings in large migrant populations (pooled prevalence: 41.0%, 95% CI 24.0%-60.0%, I 2  = 99%) than in hospitals (21.0%, 95% CI 12.0%-32.0%, I 2  = 99%). AMR estimates in 'other' migrants were 32.0%, (95% CI 12.0%-57.0%, I 2  = 100%) and 28.0% (95% CI 18.0%-38.0%, I 2 = 100%) in forced migrants. No firm evidence of AMR acquisition with arrival time or length of stay in the host country was found. Interpretation: Studies investigating AMR in migrants are highly heterogenous. However, since the COVID-19 pandemic, migrants may be at higher risk of acquiring resistant bacteria, particularly gram-negative bacteria, within community settings such as refugee camps and detention centres in Europe. Our study highlights the importance of infrastructure and hygiene measures within these settings, to mitigate transmission of resistant pathogens. Policy-makers should screen for AMR in migrants prior to departure from countries of origin, where feasible, and upon arrival to a new country to ensure optimal health screening, infection control and effective treatment. Funding: There was no funding source for this study.

Redeployment experiences of healthcare workers in the UK during COVID-19: a cross-sectional analysis from the nationwide UK-REACH study.

Objectives: To assess how ethnicity, migration status and occupation are associated with healthcare workers (HCW) redeployment experiences during COVID-19 in a nationwide ethnically diverse sample. Design: A cross-sectional analysis using data from the nationwide United Kingdom Research Study into Ethnicity And COVID-19 outcomes in Healthcare workers (UK-REACH) cohort study. Setting: Healthcare settings. Participants: Healthcare workers (HCW). Main Outcome Measures: Outcome measures included redeployment, provision of training and supervision during redeployment, change in patient contact and interaction with COVID-19 patients. Methods: We used logistic regression to examine associations of ethnicity, migration status, and occupation with redeployment experiences of HCWs. Results: Of the 10,889 HCWs included, 20.4% reported being redeployed during the first UK national lockdown in March 2020. Those in nursing roles (Odds Ratio (OR) 1.22, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.04-1.42, p = 0.009) (compared to medical roles) had higher likelihood of being redeployed as did migrants compared to those born in the UK (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.06-1.49, p = 0.01) (in a subcohort of HCWs on the agenda for change (AfC) pay scales). Asian HCWs were less likely to report receiving training (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.50-0.88, p = 0.005) and Black HCWs (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.14-3.57, p = 0.02) were more likely to report receiving supervision, compared to White colleagues. Finally, redeployed Black (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.07-1.66, p = 0.009) and Asian HCWs (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.14-1.48, p < 0.001) were more likely to report face-to-face interaction with COVID-19 patients than White HCWs. Conclusions: Our findings highlight disparities in HCWs' redeployment experiences by ethnicity, migration, and job role which are potentially related to structural inequalities in healthcare.