RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers' (HCW) well-being has a direct effect on patient care. However, little is known about the prevalence and patterns of long-term medical conditions in HCWs, especially those from ethnic minorities. This study evaluated the burden of multiple long-term conditions (MLTCs), i.e. the presence of two or more single long-term conditions (LTCs), among HCWs in the United Kingdom (UK) and variation by ethnicity and migration status. METHODS: We used baseline data from the UK-REACH cohort study collected December 2020-March 2021. We used multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for demographic, occupational and lifestyle factors to examine the relationship between self-reported LTCs/MLTCs and ethnicity, migration status and time since migration to the UK. RESULTS: Of 12,100 included HCWs, with a median age of 45 years (IQR: 34-54), 27% were overseas-born, and 30% were from non-White ethnic groups (19% Asian, 4% Black, 4% Mixed, 2% Other). The most common self-reported LTCs were anxiety (14.9%), asthma (12.2%), depression (10.7%), hypertension (8.7%) and diabetes (4.0%). Mental health conditions were more prevalent among UK-born than overseas-born HCWs for all ethnic groups (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) using White UK-born as the reference group each time: White overseas-born 0.77, 95%CI 0.66-0.95 for anxiety). Diabetes and hypertension were more common among Asian (e.g. Asian overseas, diabetes aOR 2.97, 95%CI 2.30-3.83) and Black (e.g. Black UK-born, hypertension aOR 1.77, 95%CI 1.05-2.99) groups than White UK-born. After adjustment for age, sex and deprivation, the odds of reporting MLTCs were lower in most ethnic minority groups and lowest for those born overseas, compared to White UK-born (e.g. White overseas-born, aOR 0.68, 95%CI 0.55-0.83; Asian overseas-born aOR 0.75, 95%CI 0.62-0.90; Black overseas-born aOR 0.52, 95%CI 0.36-0.74). The odds of MLTCs in overseas-born HCWs were equivalent to the UK-born population in those who had settled in the UK for ≥ 20 years (aOR 1.14, 95%CI 0.94-1.37). CONCLUSIONS: Among UK HCWs, the prevalence of common LTCs and odds of reporting MLTCs varied by ethnicity and migrant status. The lower odds of MLTCs in migrant HCWs reverted to the odds of MLTCs in UK-born HCWs over time. Further research on this population should include longitudinal studies with linkage to healthcare records. Interventions should be co-developed with HCWs from different ethnic and migrant groups focussed upon patterns of conditions prevalent in specific HCW subgroups to reduce the overall burden of LTCs/MLTCs.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus , Hipertensión , Humanos , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Etnicidad , Estudios de Cohortes , Grupos Minoritarios , Prevalencia , Reino Unido/epidemiología , Hipertensión/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Estudios Transversales , SARS-CoV-2 , Etnicidad , Grupos Minoritarios , Personal de Salud , Medición de Riesgo , Reino Unido/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
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).
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiología , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Estudios de Cohortes , Control de Enfermedades Transmisibles , Estudios Transversales , Etnicidad , Femenino , Personal de Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Grupos Minoritarios , Pandemias , Factores de Riesgo , SARS-CoV-2 , Reino Unido/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Gripe Humana , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Estudios Transversales , Personal de Salud , Humanos , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Estudios Longitudinales , SARS-CoV-2 , Reino Unido/epidemiología , VacunaciónRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Equipo de Protección Personal , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Estudios de Cohortes , Control de Enfermedades Transmisibles , Estudios Transversales , Personal de Salud , Humanos , Pandemias/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Reino Unido/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
Captive breeding is vital for primate conservation, with modern zoos serving a crucial role in breeding populations of threatened species and educating the general public. However, captive populations can experience welfare issues that may also undermine their reproductive success. To enhance the wellbeing of endangered zoo primates, we conducted a study to assess the effects of a new scent enrichment program on captive red-ruffed lemurs (Varecia rubra), black howler monkeys (Alouatta caraya), siamangs (Symphalangus syndactylus), lar gibbons (Hylobates lar) and orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus pygmaeus). We combined behavioral observations and fecal endocrinology analyses to evaluate the effects of a series of essential oils (benzoin, lavender, lemongrass) on five captive troops (N = 19) housed at Dudley Zoo & Castle and Twycross Zoo (UK). We recorded observations of natural species-specific and abnormal stress-related behaviors for 480 h using instantaneous scan sampling. We collected 189 fecal samples and measured the fecal cortisol concentrations using radioimmunoassay. We found a significant effect of the scent enrichment on behaviors, with red-ruffed lemurs and black howler monkeys reducing their social interactions, as well as red-ruffed lemurs and lar gibbons decreasing their stress-related behaviors after they were exposed to the series of essential oils. We also found that red-ruffed lemurs displayed a significant increase in fecal glucocorticoids following exposure to essential oils. Our contradictory findings suggest that the effects of this series of essential oils may change depending on the species-specific social lives and olfactory repertoires of primates. In conclusion, we cannot recommend using these essential oils widely with zoo primates without additional evaluation.
Asunto(s)
Lemuridae , Odorantes , Animales , Animales de Zoológico , Primates , OlfatoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Data handling in clinical bioinformatics is often inadequate. No freely available tools provide straightforward approaches for consistent, flexible metadata collection and linkage of related experimental data generated locally by vendor software. RESULTS: To address this problem, we created LabPipe, a flexible toolkit which is driven through a local client that runs alongside vendor software and connects to a light-weight server. The toolkit allows re-usable configurations to be defined for experiment metadata and local data collection, and handles metadata entry and linkage of data. LabPipe was piloted in a multi-site clinical breathomics study. CONCLUSIONS: LabPipe provided a consistent, controlled approach for handling metadata and experimental data collection, collation and linkage in the exemplar study and was flexible enough to deal effectively with different data handling challenges.
Asunto(s)
Biología Computacional/métodos , Metadatos , Análisis de Datos , Humanos , Programas InformáticosRESUMEN
Background: Few studies have compared SARS-CoV-2 vaccine immunogenicity by ethnic group. We sought to establish whether cellular and humoral immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination differ according to ethnicity in UK Healthcare workers (HCWs). Methods: In this cross-sectional analysis, we used baseline data from two immunological cohort studies conducted in HCWs in Leicester, UK. Blood samples were collected between March 3, and September 16, 2021. We excluded HCW who had not received two doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine at the time of sampling and those who had serological evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. Outcome measures were SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific total antibody titre, neutralising antibody titre and ELISpot count. We compared our outcome measures by ethnic group using univariable (t tests and rank-sum tests depending on distribution) and multivariable (linear regression for antibody titres and negative binomial regression for ELISpot counts) tests. Multivariable analyses were adjusted for age, sex, vaccine type, length of interval between vaccine doses and time between vaccine administration and sample collection and expressed as adjusted geometric mean ratios (aGMRs) or adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRRs). To assess differences in the early immune response to vaccination we also conducted analyses in a subcohort who provided samples between 14 and 50 days after their second dose of vaccine. Findings: The total number of HCWs in each analysis were 401 for anti-spike antibody titres, 345 for neutralising antibody titres and 191 for ELISpot. Overall, 25.4% (19.7% South Asian and 5.7% Black/Mixed/Other) were from ethnic minority groups. In analyses including the whole cohort, neutralising antibody titres were higher in South Asian HCWs than White HCWs (aGMR 1.47, 95% CI [1.06-2.06], P = 0.02) as were T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 S1 peptides (aIRR 1.75, 95% CI [1.05-2.89], P = 0.03). In a subcohort sampled between 14 and 50 days after second vaccine dose, SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific antibody and neutralising antibody geometric mean titre (GMT) was higher in South Asian HCWs compared to White HCWs (9616 binding antibody units (BAU)/ml, 95% CI [7178-12,852] vs 5888 BAU/ml [5023-6902], P = 0.008 and 2851 95% CI [1811-4487] vs 1199 [984-1462], P < 0.001 respectively), increments which persisted after adjustment (aGMR 1.26, 95% CI [1.01-1.58], P = 0.04 and aGMR 2.01, 95% CI [1.34-3.01], P = 0.001). SARS-CoV-2 ELISpot responses to S1 and whole spike peptides (S1 + S2 response) were higher in HCWs from South Asian ethnic groups than those from White groups (S1: aIRR 2.33, 95% CI [1.09-4.94], P = 0.03; spike: aIRR, 2.04, 95% CI [1.02-4.08]). Interpretation: This study provides evidence that, in an infection naïve cohort, humoral and cellular immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination are stronger in South Asian HCWs than White HCWs. These differences are most clearly seen in the early period following vaccination. Further research is required to understand the underlying mechanisms, whether differences persist with further exposure to vaccine or virus, and the potential impact on vaccine effectiveness. Funding: DIRECT and BELIEVE have received funding from UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) through the COVID-19 National Core Studies Immunity (NCSi) programme (MC_PC_20060).
RESUMEN
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% (nâ¯=â¯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%, nâ¯=â¯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 byâ¯NIHR Biomedical Research Centres.
RESUMEN
A major challenge for breath research is the lack of standardization in sampling and analysis. To address this, a test that utilizes a standardized intervention and a defined study protocol has been proposed to explore disparities in breath research across different analytical platforms and to provide benchmark values for comparison. Specifically, thePeppermint Experimentinvolves the targeted analysis in exhaled breath of volatile constituents of peppermint oil after ingestion of the encapsulated oil. Data from thePeppermint Experimentperformed by proton transfer reaction mass spectrometry (PTR-MS) and selected ion flow tube mass spectrometry (SIFT-MS) are presented and discussed herein, including the product ions associated with the key peppermint volatiles, namely limonene,α- andß-pinene, 1,8-cineole, menthol, menthone and menthofuran. The breath washout profiles of these compounds from 65 individuals were collected, comprising datasets from five PTR-MS and two SIFT-MS instruments. The washout profiles of these volatiles were evaluated by comparing the log-fold change over time of the product ion intensities associated with each volatile. Benchmark values were calculated from the lower 95% confidence interval of the linear time-to-washout regression analysis for all datasets combined. Benchmark washout values from PTR-MS analysis were 353 min for the sum of monoterpenes and 1,8-cineole (identical product ions), 173 min for menthol, 330 min for menthofuran, and 218 min for menthone; from SIFT-MS analysis values were 228 min for the sum of monoterpenes, 281 min for the sum of monoterpenes and 1,8-cineole, and 370 min for menthone plus 1,8-cineole. Large inter- and intra-dataset variations were observed, whereby the latter suggests that biological variability plays a key role in how the compounds are absorbed, metabolized and excreted from the body via breath. This variability seems large compared to the influence of sampling and analytical procedures, but further investigations are recommended to clarify the effects of these factors.
Asunto(s)
Mentha piperita , Protones , Benchmarking , Pruebas Respiratorias , Humanos , Espectrometría de MasasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In most countries, healthcare workers (HCWs) represent a priority group for vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) due to their elevated risk of COVID-19 and potential contribution to nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Concerns have been raised that HCWs from ethnic minority groups are more likely to be vaccine hesitant (defined by the World Health Organisation as refusing or delaying a vaccination) than those of White ethnicity, but there are limited data on SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy and its predictors in UK HCWs. METHODS: Nationwide prospective cohort study and qualitative study in a multi-ethnic cohort of clinical and non-clinical UK HCWs. We analysed ethnic differences in SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy adjusting for demographics, vaccine trust, and perceived risk of COVID-19. We explored reasons for hesitancy in qualitative data using a framework analysis. FINDINGS: 11,584 HCWs were included in the cohort analysis. 23% (2704) reported vaccine hesitancy. Compared to White British HCWs (21.3% hesitant), HCWs from Black Caribbean (54.2%), Mixed White and Black Caribbean (38.1%), Black African (34.4%), Chinese (33.1%), Pakistani (30.4%), and White Other (28.7%) ethnic groups were significantly more likely to be hesitant. In adjusted analysis, Black Caribbean (aOR 3.37, 95% CI 2.11 - 5.37), Black African (aOR 2.05, 95% CI 1.49 - 2.82), White Other ethnic groups (aOR 1.48, 95% CI 1.19 - 1.84) were significantly more likely to be hesitant. Other independent predictors of hesitancy were younger age, female sex, higher score on a COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs scale, lower trust in employer, lack of influenza vaccine uptake in the previous season, previous COVID-19, and pregnancy. Qualitative data from 99 participants identified the following contributors to hesitancy: lack of trust in government and employers, safety concerns due to the speed of vaccine development, lack of ethnic diversity in vaccine studies, and confusing and conflicting information. Participants felt uptake in ethnic minority communities might be improved through inclusive communication, involving HCWs in the vaccine rollout, and promoting vaccination through trusted networks. INTERPRETATION: Despite increased risk of COVID-19, HCWs from some ethnic minority groups are more likely to be vaccine hesitant than their White British colleagues. Strategies to build trust and dispel myths surrounding the COVID-19 vaccine in these communities are urgently required. Emphasis should be placed on the safety and benefit of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in pregnancy and in those with previous COVID-19. Public health communications should be inclusive, non-stigmatising and utilise trusted networks. FUNDING: UKRI-MRC and NIHR.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in significant morbidity and mortality and devastated economies globally. Among groups at increased risk are healthcare workers (HCWs) and ethnic minority groups. Emerging evidence suggests that HCWs from ethnic minority groups are at increased risk of adverse COVID-19-related outcomes. To date, there has been no large-scale analysis of these risks in UK HCWs or ancillary workers in healthcare settings, stratified by ethnicity or occupation, and adjusted for confounders. This paper reports the protocol for a prospective longitudinal questionnaire study of UK HCWs, as part of the UK-REACH programme (The United Kingdom Research study into Ethnicity And COVID-19 outcomes in Healthcare workers). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A baseline questionnaire will be administered to a national cohort of UK HCWs and ancillary workers in healthcare settings, and those registered with UK healthcare regulators, with follow-up questionnaires administered at 4 and 8 months. With consent, questionnaire data will be linked to health records with 25-year follow-up. Univariate associations between ethnicity and clinical COVID-19 outcomes, physical and mental health, and key confounders/explanatory variables will be tested. Multivariable analyses will test for associations between ethnicity and key outcomes adjusted for the confounder/explanatory variables. We will model changes over time by ethnic group, facilitating understanding of absolute and relative risks in different ethnic groups, and generalisability of findings. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study is approved by Health Research Authority (reference 20/HRA/4718), and carries minimal risk. We aim to manage the small risk of participant distress about questions on sensitive topics by clearly participant information that the questionnaire covers sensitive topics and there is no obligation to answer these or any other questions, and by providing support organisation links. Results will be disseminated with reports to Government and papers submitted to pre-print servers and peer reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN11811602; Pre-results.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Etnicidad , Atención a la Salud , Personal de Salud , Humanos , Estudios Longitudinales , Grupos Minoritarios , Pandemias , Estudios Prospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Reino UnidoRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Investigating acute multifactorial undifferentiated breathlessness and understanding the driving inflammatory processes can be technically challenging in both adults and children. Being able to validate noninvasive methods such as breath analysis would be a huge clinical advance. The ReCIVA® device allows breath samples to be collected directly onto sorbent tubes at the bedside for analysis of exhaled volatile organic compounds (eVOCs). We aimed to assess the feasibility of using this device in acutely breathless patients. METHODS: Adults hospitalised with acute breathlessness and children aged 5-16â years with acute asthma or chronic stable asthma, as well as healthy adult and child volunteers, were recruited. Breath samples were collected onto sorbent tubes using the ReCIVA® device and sent for analysis by means of two-dimensional gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GCxGC-MS). The NASA Task Load Index (NASA-TLX) was used to assess the perceived task workload of undertaking sampling from the patient's perspective. RESULTS: Data were available for 65 adults and 61 children recruited. In total, 98.4% of adults and 75.4% of children were able to provide the full target breath sample using the ReCIVA® device. NASA-TLX measurements were available in the adult population with mean values of 3.37 for effort, 2.34 for frustration, 3.8 for mental demand, 2.8 for performance, 3.9 for physical demand and 2.8 for temporal demand. DISCUSSION: This feasibility study demonstrates it is possible and acceptable to collect breath samples from both adults and children at the bedside for breathomics analysis using the ReCIVA® device.
RESUMEN
Precision medicine has spurred new innovations in molecular pathology leading to recent advances in the analysis of exhaled breath as a non-invasive diagnostic tool. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) detected in exhaled breath have the potential to reveal a wealth of chemical and metabolomic information. This study describes the development of a method for the analysis of breath, based on automated thermal desorption (TD) combined with flow modulated comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography (GC×GC) with dual flame ionisation and quadrupole mass spectrometric detection (FID and qMS). The constrained optimisation and analytical protocol was designed to meet the practical demands of a large-scale multi-site clinical study, while maintaining analytical rigour to produce high fidelity data. The results demonstrate a comprehensive method optimisation for the collection and analysis of breath VOCs by GC×GC, integral to the standardisation and integration of breath analysis within large clinical studies.
Asunto(s)
Pruebas Respiratorias/métodos , Estudios Clínicos como Asunto/métodos , Ionización de Llama , Cromatografía de Gases y Espectrometría de Masas , Compuestos Orgánicos Volátiles/análisis , Humanos , Estándares de ReferenciaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Patients presenting with acute undifferentiated breathlessness are commonly encountered in admissions units across the UK. Existing blood biomarkers have clinical utility in distinguishing patients with single organ pathologies but have poor discriminatory power in multifactorial presentations. Evaluation of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in exhaled breath offers the potential to develop biomarkers of disease states that underpin acute cardiorespiratory breathlessness, owing to their proximity to the cardiorespiratory system. To date, there has been no systematic evaluation of VOC in acute cardiorespiratory breathlessness. The proposed study will seek to use both offline and online VOC technologies to evaluate the predictive value of VOC in identifying common conditions that present with acute cardiorespiratory breathlessness. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A prospective real-world observational study carried out across three acute admissions units within Leicestershire. Participants with self-reported acute breathlessness, with a confirmed primary diagnosis of either acute heart failure, community-acquired pneumonia and acute exacerbation of asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease will be recruited within 24 hours of admission. Additionally, school-age children admitted with severe asthma will be evaluated. All participants will undergo breath sampling on admission and on recovery following discharge. A range of online technologies including: proton transfer reaction mass spectrometry, gas chromatography ion mobility spectrometry, atmospheric pressure chemical ionisation-mass spectrometry and offline technologies including gas chromatography mass spectroscopy and comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography-mass spectrometry will be used for VOC discovery and replication. For offline technologies, a standardised CE-marked breath sampling device (ReCIVA) will be used. All recruited participants will be characterised using existing blood biomarkers including C reactive protein, brain-derived natriuretic peptide, troponin-I and blood eosinophil levels and further evaluated using a range of standardised questionnaires, lung function testing, sputum cell counts and other diagnostic tests pertinent to acute disease. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The National Research Ethics Service Committee East Midlands has approved the study protocol (REC number: 16/LO/1747). Integrated Research Approval System (IRAS) 198921. Findings will be presented at academic conferences and published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. Dissemination will be facilitated via a partnership with the East Midlands Academic Health Sciences Network and via interaction with all UK-funded Medical Research Council and Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council molecular pathology nodes. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03672994.