Redeployment Experiences of Healthcare Workers in the UK during COVID-19: data from the nationwide UK-REACH study (preprint)

Background Increasing demands of COVID-19 on the healthcare system necessitated redeployment of HCWs outside their routine specialties. Previous studies, highlighting ethnic and occupational inequalities in redeployment, are limited by small cohorts with limited ethnic diversity. Aims To assess how ethnicity, migration status, and occupation are associated with HCWs redeployment experiences during COVID-19 in a nationwide ethnically diverse sample. Methods We conducted 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. We used logistic regression to examine associations of ethnicity, migration status, and occupation with redeployment experiences of HCWs, including provision of training and supervision, patient contact during redeployment and interaction with COVID-19 patients. 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 to 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 to 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 to 0.88, p=0.005) and Black HCWs (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.14 to 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 to 1.66, p=0.009) and Asian HCWs (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.14 to 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 inequities in healthcare. For future emergencies, redeployment should be contingent upon risk assessments, accompanied by training and supervision tailored to individual HCWs experience and skillset.

Association Between COVID-19 Vaccination and Abortion: A Cross-Sectional Study in Jeddah.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials for COVID-19 vaccines initially excluded pregnant women. However, observational studies revealed a relative safety of the vaccine during pregnancy therefore association between different types of COVID-19 vaccination and the risk of abortion must be studied.  Objectives: The objective is to explore the possible association between abortion and different types of COVID-19 vaccination in Jeddah. METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional study done in three private general hospitals in Jeddah using electronic medical records and phone interviews of pregnant women who were admitted with abortion. Women were then interviewed for their vaccination data (type, dose) and their current pregnancy outcome (aborted or not). RESULTS: Medical records of 214 women diagnosed with abortion were included; 13.1% of them managed to continue their pregnancy. Vaccinated women (86%) had significantly earlier gestational age (p=0.031), higher hypertension (<0.001), and lower positive consanguinity (<0.001) compared to non-vaccinated women. The type (p=0.636) and number (p=0.331) of vaccination did not differ significantly among vaccinated women with and without abortion. Significant predictors of abortion were age>35 years (OR: 3.1, 95% CI: 1.34-6.97, p=0.008), diabetes (OR: 0.09, 95% CI: 0.01-0.89, p=0.040), and positive consanguinity (OR: 0.12, 95% CI: 0.02-0.63, p=0.012). However, spontaneous abortion did not have an increased odds of exposure to COVID-19 vaccines (OR: 1.07, 95% CI: 0.21-5.49, p=0.937). CONCLUSION:  COVID-19 vaccination is not associated with an increased risk of abortion in women vaccinated during their first or second trimesters. Further clinical trials are needed to support the evidence of the safety of early vaccination of pregnant women.

Mapping the output of the global literature on the links between gut microbiota and COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The term "human microbiota" refers to populations of microorganisms that live harmoniously in co-existence with humans. They contribute significantly to the host's immunological response when confronted with a respiratory viral infection. However, little is known about the relationship between the human microbiome and COVID-19. Therefore, our objective is to perform a bibliometric analysis to explore the overall structure and hotspots of research activity on the links between microbiota and COVID-19 at the global level. METHODS: The research literature on the microbiota and COVID-19 published between 2020 and 2022 was obtained from the Scopus database. Bibliometric analysis and network visualization were performed with VOSviewer. RESULTS: Of the 701 publications selected, the USA contributed the most (n = 157, 22.40%), followed by China (n = 118, 16.83%) and Italy (n = 82, 11.70%). Hotspots in this field were "COVID-19 is associated with an altered upper respiratory tract microbiome," "the effect of antibiotics on the gut microbiome," as well as "patient nutrition and probiotic therapy in COVID-19." CONCLUSIONS: The links between microbiota and COVID-19 remain an urgent concern at present, and the use of probiotics or/and antibiotics during the pandemic needs to be further improved. This landscape analysis of the links between the microbiota and COVID-19 will provide a basis for future research.

The Development of a Student Organization that SupportsMinorities in Computing (Experience)

This paper discusses the recognized need for an organization focused on serving students from underrepresented populations in the computing field at Texas A&M University, describing the formation of the Aggie Hispanics in Computing group. In 2016, the combined undergraduate and graduate Hispanic enrollment in computer science and computer engineering at Texas A&M University initially sat at 17.9% and then decreased to approximately 11.76% in 2021, with undergraduate Hispanic enrollment in computing reduced from almost 22% to under 15% in that same time frame. This significant shift in Hispanic student representation spurred the development of the Aggie Hispanics In Computing (AHIC) student organization to create a computing community that provides support around the shared experiences of being part of a minority group in an even less diverse discipline. The university, overall, was recently recognized as a Hispanic-Serving Institution, but the College of Engineering remains a predominately-white institution. This new organization is not the only Hispanic-serving organization at Texas A&M University;rather, it was designed to focus particularly on serving Hispanic students in the computer science and computer engineering disciplines at Texas A&M University. The organization was founded during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Since then, AHIC has grown significantly in membership, financial support, and activities to increase the representation of Hispanic students within the computing disciplines at Texas A&M University. The organization has grown from 6 to over 50 members from various majors in the past year alone. AHIC has also received financial support from a multitude of companies, such as General Motors and Chevron. AHIC's overall goal is to create a supportive community for minorities in computing fields. This community has grown through hosting events that provide information and resources about professional career opportunities, technical workshops, mentoring programs, and participation in research groups. AHIC has also initiated several long-term initiatives, such as peer-teaching for introductory computer science courses. AHIC's promotion of career-guidance events (where company representatives and alumni provide advice for currently enrolled students) proved to be an effective strategy for recruiting members. The organization has also hosted seminars and workshops educating first-year students on new computing skills and the opportunities that a computer science and computer engineering degree can provide. © American Society for Engineering Education, 2022.

Safety and Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines: Results from a Cross-Sectional Survey among Staff, Workers and Students at an Egyptian University.

Mass vaccination is the most effective strategy against the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, concerns about the vaccine's safety and effectiveness remain a huge obstacle to vaccine acceptance. The aim of the present study was to explore different COVID-19 vaccine outcomes, including the development of adverse events and/or COVID-19 infection following COVID-19 vaccination. A cross-sectional study was conducted by distributing an online survey targeting staff and students at the British university in Egypt. A total of 637 participants fully completed the survey. Of these, 609 (95.6%) participants received the COVID-19 vaccine. Only 12.6% of the total vaccinated participants reported COVID-19 infection after vaccination. Of these, only 2.8% reported having severe symptoms while 9.9% reported having no or mild symptoms. The most common side effects reported after the first vs. second dose were headache (36.3% vs. 14.6%), tiredness and fatigue (26.9% vs. 10.7), and fever (25.6% vs. 6.7%). In conclusion, the present study explored different COVID-19 vaccine outcomes where the overall incidence of side effects is higher after the first dose than after the second dose. There is a relationship between COVID-19 vaccines' side effects and gastrointestinal disorders, gender, and the type of COVID-19 vaccine. Post-vaccination symptoms were more frequently reported in women compared to men and more frequent with viral vector vaccines compared to other types. The effectiveness of different types of COVID-19 vaccines was confirmed by the lower incidence rate of post-vaccination COVID-19 infection.

Demographic Characteristics and Status of Vaccinated Individuals with a History of COVID-19 Infection Pre- or Post-Vaccination: A Descriptive Study of a Nationally Representative Sample in Saudi Arabia.

BACKGROUND: Saudi Arabia expedited the approval of some COVID-19 vaccines and launched mass vaccination campaigns. The aim of this study was to describe the demographics of vaccinated COVID-19 cases and compare the mortality rates of COVID-19 cases who were infected post-vaccination in Saudi Arabia. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study. We retrieved data for COVID-19 cases who were infected pre- or post-vaccination and had received at least one injection of the Oxford-AstraZeneca or Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine from 4 December 2020 to 15 October 2021. RESULTS: The number of patients who were infected and had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine was 281,744. Approximately 45% of subjects were infected post-vaccination, and 75% of subjects had received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. Only 0.342% of the patients who were infected post-vaccination died, and 447 patients were admitted to ICUs. Most of the patients who were infected with COVID-19 post-vaccination and were admitted to ICUs (69.84%) had received only one dose of the vaccine (p < 0.0001). The mean time to infection for patients who had received one and two doses of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine were 27 and 8 days longer than their counterparts who had received one and two doses of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, respectively. No difference in the odds of mortality between the Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines was found (OR = 1.121, 95% CI = [0.907-1.386], p-value = 0.291). Patients who had received two doses of the vaccine had significantly lower odds of mortality compared to those who had received one dose (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Vaccines are vital in combating the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of this study show no difference between the Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines in the rate of mortality. However, the number of vaccine doses was significantly associated with a lower risk of mortality. Future studies should examine the effectiveness of different COVID-19 vaccines using real-world data and more robust designs.

SARS-CoV-2, surgeons and surgical masks.

The exact risk association of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) for surgeons is not quantified which may be affected by their risk of exposure and individual factors. The objective of this review is to quantify the risk of COVID-19 among surgeons, and explore whether facemask can minimise the risk of COVID-19 among surgeons. A systematised review was carried out by searching MEDLINE to locate items on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 or COVID-19 in relation to health care workers (HCWs) especially those work in surgical specialities including surgical nurses and intensivists. Additionally, systematic reviews that assessed the effectiveness of facemask against viral respiratory infections, including COVID-19, among HCWs were identified. Data from identified articles were abstracted, synthesised and summarised. Fourteen primary studies that provided data on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection or experience among surgeons and 11 systematic reviews that provided evidence of the effectiveness of facemask (and other personal protective equipment) were summarised. Although the risk of COVID-19 could not be quantified precisely among surgeons, about 14% of HCWs including surgeons had COVID-19, there could be variations depending on settings. Facemask was found to be somewhat protective against COVID-19, but the HCWs' compliance was highly variable ranging from zero to 100%. Echoing surgical societies' guidelines we continue to recommend facemask use among surgeons to prevent COVID-19.