Barriers to healthcare access and experiences of stigma: Findings from a coproduced Long Covid case-finding study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Long Covid is often stigmatised, particularly in people who are disadvantaged within society. This may prevent them from seeking help and could lead to widening health inequalities. This coproduced study with a Community Advisory Board (CAB) of people with Long Covid aimed to understand healthcare and wider barriers and stigma experienced by people with probable Long Covid. METHODS: An active case finding approach was employed to find adults with probable, but not yet clinically diagnosed, Long Covid in two localities in London (Camden and Merton) and Derbyshire, England. Interviews explored the barriers to care and the stigma faced by participants and were analysed thematically. This study forms part of the STIMULATE-ICP Collaboration. FINDINGS: Twenty-three interviews were completed. Participants reported limited awareness of what Long Covid is and the available pathways to management. There was considerable self-doubt among participants, sometimes reinforced by interactions with healthcare professionals (HCPs). Participants questioned their deservedness in seeking healthcare support for their symptoms. Hesitancy to engage with healthcare services was motivated by fear of needing more investigation and concerns regarding judgement about the ability to carry out caregiving responsibilities. It was also motivated by the complexity of the clinical presentation and fear of all symptoms being attributed to poor mental health. Participants also reported trying to avoid overburdening the health system. These difficulties were compounded by experiences of stigma and discrimination. The emerging themes reaffirmed a framework of epistemic injustice in relation to Long Covid, where creating, interpreting and conveying knowledge has varied credibility based on the teller's identity characteristics and/or the level of their interpretive resources. CONCLUSION: We have codeveloped recommendations based on the findings. These include early signposting to services, dedicating protected time to listening to people with Long Covid, providing a holistic approach in care pathways, and working to mitigate stigma. Regardless of the diagnosis, people experiencing new symptoms must be encouraged to seek timely medical help. Clear public health messaging is needed among communities already disadvantaged by epistemic injustice to raise awareness of Long Covid, and to share stories that encourage seeking care and to illustrate the adverse effects of stigma. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This study was coproduced with a CAB made up of 23 members including HCPs, people with lived experience of Long Covid and other stakeholders.

Long Covid active case finding study protocol: A co-produced community-based pilot within the STIMULATE-ICP study (Symptoms, Trajectory, Inequalities and Management: Understanding Long-COVID to Address and Transform Existing Integrated Care Pathways).

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Long Covid is a significant public health concern with potentially negative implications for health inequalities. We know that those who are already socially disadvantaged in society are more exposed to COVID-19, experience the worst health outcomes and are more likely to suffer economically. We also know that these groups are more likely to experience stigma and have negative healthcare experiences even before the pandemic. However, little is known about disadvantaged groups' experiences of Long Covid, and preliminary evidence suggests they may be under-represented in those who access formal care. We will conduct a pilot study in a defined geographical area in London, United Kingdom to test the feasibility of a community-based approach of identifying Long Covid cases that have not been clinically diagnosed and have not been referred to Long Covid specialist services. We will explore the barriers to accessing recognition, care, and support, as well as experiences of stigma and perceived discrimination. METHODS: This protocol and study materials were co-produced with a Community Advisory Board (CAB) made up primarily of people living with Long Covid. Working with voluntary organisations, a study leaflet will be distributed in the local community to highlight Long Covid symptoms and invite those experiencing them to participate in the study if they are not formally diagnosed. Potential participants will be assessed according to the study's inclusion criteria and offered the opportunity to participate if they fit them. Awareness of Long Covid and associated symptoms, experiences of trying to access care, as well as stigma and discrimination will be explored through qualitative interviews with participants. Upon completion of the interviews, participants will be offered a referral to the local social prescribing team to receive support that is personalised to them potentially including, but not restricted to, liaising with their primary care provider and the regional Long Covid clinic.

STIMULATE-ICP: A pragmatic, multi-centre, cluster randomised trial of an integrated care pathway with a nested, Phase III, open label, adaptive platform randomised drug trial in individuals with Long COVID: A structured protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Long COVID (LC), the persistent symptoms ≥12 weeks following acute COVID-19, presents major threats to individual and public health across countries, affecting over 1.5 million people in the UK alone. Evidence-based interventions are urgently required and an integrated care pathway approach in pragmatic trials, which include investigations, treatments and rehabilitation for LC, could provide scalable and generalisable solutions at pace. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a pragmatic, multi-centre, cluster-randomised clinical trial of two components of an integrated care pathway (Coverscan™, a multi-organ MRI, and Living with COVID Recovery™, a digitally enabled rehabilitation platform) with a nested, Phase III, open label, platform randomised drug trial in individuals with LC. Cluster randomisation is at level of primary care networks so that integrated care pathway interventions are delivered as "standard of care" in that area. The drug trial randomisation is at individual level and initial arms are rivaroxaban, colchicine, famotidine/loratadine, compared with no drugs, with potential to add in further drug arms. The trial is being carried out in 6-10 LC clinics in the UK and is evaluating the effectiveness of a pathway of care for adults with LC in reducing fatigue and other physical, psychological and functional outcomes at 3 months. The trial also includes an economic evaluation which will be described separately. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol was reviewed by South Central-Berkshire Research Ethics Committee (reference: 21/SC/0416). All participating sites obtained local approvals prior to recruitment. Coverscan™ has UK certification (UKCA 752965). All participants will provide written consent to take part in the trial. The first participant was recruited in July 2022 and interim/final results will be disseminated in 2023, in a plan co-developed with public and patient representatives. The results will be presented at national and international conferences, published in peer reviewed medical journals, and shared via media (mainstream and social) and patient support organisations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN10665760.

STIMULATE-ICP-Delphi (Symptoms, Trajectory, Inequalities and Management: Understanding Long-COVID to Address and Transform Existing Integrated Care Pathways Delphi): Study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: As mortality rates from COVID-19 disease fall, the high prevalence of long-term sequelae (Long COVID) is becoming increasingly widespread, challenging healthcare systems globally. Traditional pathways of care for Long Term Conditions (LTCs) have tended to be managed by disease-specific specialties, an approach that has been ineffective in delivering care for patients with multi-morbidity. The multi-system nature of Long COVID and its impact on physical and psychological health demands a more effective model of holistic, integrated care. The evolution of integrated care systems (ICSs) in the UK presents an important opportunity to explore areas of mutual benefit to LTC, multi-morbidity and Long COVID care. There may be benefits in comparing and contrasting ICPs for Long COVID with ICPs for other LTCs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study aims to evaluate health services requirements for ICPs for Long COVID and their applicability to other LTCs including multi-morbidity and the overlap with medically not yet explained symptoms (MNYES). The study will follow a Delphi design and involve an expert panel of stakeholders including people with lived experience, as well as clinicians with expertise in Long COVID and other LTCs. Study processes will include expert panel and moderator panel meetings, surveys, and interviews. The Delphi process is part of the overall STIMULATE-ICP programme, aimed at improving integrated care for people with Long COVID. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for this Delphi study has been obtained (Research Governance Board of the University of York) as have approvals for the other STIMULATE-ICP studies. Study outcomes are likely to inform policy for ICPs across LTCs. Results will be disseminated through scientific publication, conference presentation and communications with patients and stakeholders involved in care of other LTCs and Long COVID. REGISTRATION: Researchregistry: https://www.researchregistry.com/browse-the-registry#home/registrationdetails/6246bfeeeaaed6001f08dadc/.

STIMULATE-ICP-CAREINEQUAL (Symptoms, Trajectory, Inequalities and Management: Understanding Long-COVID to Address and Transform Existing Integrated Care Pathways) study protocol: Defining usual care and examining inequalities in Long Covid support.

INTRODUCTION: Individuals with Long Covid represent a new and growing patient population. In England, fewer than 90 Long Covid clinics deliver assessment and treatment informed by NICE guidelines. However, a paucity of clinical trials or longitudinal cohort studies means that the epidemiology, clinical trajectory, healthcare utilisation and effectiveness of current Long Covid care are poorly documented, and that neither evidence-based treatments nor rehabilitation strategies exist. In addition, and in part due to pre-pandemic health inequalities, access to referral and care varies, and patient experience of the Long Covid care pathways can be poor. In a mixed methods study, we therefore aim to: (1) describe the usual healthcare, outcomes and resource utilisation of individuals with Long Covid; (2) assess the extent of inequalities in access to Long Covid care, and specifically to understand Long Covid patients' experiences of stigma and discrimination. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A mixed methods study will address our aims. Qualitative data collection from patients and health professionals will be achieved through surveys, interviews and focus group discussions, to understand their experience and document the function of clinics. A patient cohort study will provide an understanding of outcomes and costs of care. Accessible data will be further analysed to understand the nature of Long Covid, and the care received. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from South Central-Berkshire Research Ethics Committee (reference 303958). The dissemination plan will be decided by the patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) group members and study Co-Is, but will target 1) policy makers, and those responsible for commissioning and delivering Long Covid services, 2) patients and the public, and 3) academics.

World Heart Federation Roadmap on Atrial Fibrillation - A 2020 Update.

The World Heart Federation (WHF) commenced a Roadmap initiative in 2015 to reduce the global burden of cardiovascular disease and resultant burgeoning of healthcare costs. Roadmaps provide a blueprint for implementation of priority solutions for the principal cardiovascular diseases leading to death and disability. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is one of these conditions and is an increasing problem due to ageing of the world's population and an increase in cardiovascular risk factors that predispose to AF. The goal of the AF roadmap was to provide guidance on priority interventions that are feasible in multiple countries, and to identify roadblocks and potential strategies to overcome them. Since publication of the AF Roadmap in 2017, there have been many technological advances including devices and artificial intelligence for identification and prediction of unknown AF, better methods to achieve rhythm control, and widespread uptake of smartphones and apps that could facilitate new approaches to healthcare delivery and increasing community AF awareness. In addition, the World Health Organisation added the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) to the Essential Medicines List, making it possible to increase advocacy for their widespread adoption as therapy to prevent stroke. These advances motivated the WHF to commission a 2020 AF Roadmap update. Three years after the original Roadmap publication, the identified barriers and solutions were judged still relevant, and progress has been slow. This 2020 Roadmap update reviews the significant changes since 2017 and identifies priority areas for achieving the goals of reducing death and disability related to AF, particularly targeted at low-middle income countries. These include advocacy to increase appreciation of the scope of the problem; plugging gaps in guideline management and prevention through physician education, increasing patient health literacy, and novel ways to increase access to integrated healthcare including mHealth and digital transformations; and greater emphasis on achieving practical solutions to national and regional entrenched barriers. Despite the advances reviewed in this update, the task will not be easy, but the health rewards of implementing solutions that are both innovative and practical will be great.

Monitoring indirect impact of COVID-19 pandemic on services for cardiovascular diseases in the UK.

OBJECTIVE: To monitor hospital activity for presentation, diagnosis and treatment of cardiovascular diseases during the COVID-19) pandemic to inform on indirect effects. METHODS: Retrospective serial cross-sectional study in nine UK hospitals using hospital activity data from 28 October 2019 (pre-COVID-19) to 10 May 2020 (pre-easing of lockdown) and for the same weeks during 2018-2019. We analysed aggregate data for selected cardiovascular diseases before and during the epidemic. We produced an online visualisation tool to enable near real-time monitoring of trends. RESULTS: Across nine hospitals, total admissions and emergency department (ED) attendances decreased after lockdown (23 March 2020) by 57.9% (57.1%-58.6%) and 52.9% (52.2%-53.5%), respectively, compared with the previous year. Activity for cardiac, cerebrovascular and other vascular conditions started to decline 1-2 weeks before lockdown and fell by 31%-88% after lockdown, with the greatest reductions observed for coronary artery bypass grafts, carotid endarterectomy, aortic aneurysm repair and peripheral arterial disease procedures. Compared with before the first UK COVID-19 (31 January 2020), activity declined across diseases and specialties between the first case and lockdown (total ED attendances relative reduction (RR) 0.94, 0.93-0.95; total hospital admissions RR 0.96, 0.95-0.97) and after lockdown (attendances RR 0.63, 0.62-0.64; admissions RR 0.59, 0.57-0.60). There was limited recovery towards usual levels of some activities from mid-April 2020. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial reductions in total and cardiovascular activities are likely to contribute to a major burden of indirect effects of the pandemic, suggesting they should be monitored and mitigated urgently.

Clinical Pharmacy Intervention for Persons Experiencing Homelessness: Evaluation of Patient Perspectives in Service Design and Development.

Persons experiencing homelessness have a high prevalence of severe mental health problems, alcohol dependence, substance misuse and infectious hepatitis C, and face up to twelve times higher mortality rates compared to the general population. They also face barriers to accessing healthcare. However, clinical pharmacy services are currently not available to homeless populations in England. The aim of this study was to conduct public involvement sessions with persons experiencing homelessness with a view to inform the design of patient-centred clinical pharmacy healthcare services. Qualitative methodology was used, using a focus group with homeless persons from emergency shelters and one to one engagement with those sleeping rough, using a topic guide. A total of nine homeless persons took part-seven males and two females. The participants of the sessions said that patient-centred clinical pharmacy services delivered for homeless persons would address many of their unmet needs around access to medicines, their understanding of prescribed medicines and holistic management of their health. The service would be able to make a positive impact on their health outcomes by screening for health conditions, facilitating better integration across services, referral and liaison with other services, and minimising misuse of prescribed medicines. The findings of this study will be used to inform the development, implementation and evaluation of a patient-centred clinical pharmacy service tailored to meet the specific needs of the homeless population.

Exploring the Barriers to and Facilitators of Using Evidence-Based Drugs in the Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Diseases: Findings From a Multistakeholder, Qualitative Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Health-system barriers and facilitators associated with cardiovascular medication adherence have seldom been studied, particularly in low- and middle-income countries where uptake rates are poorest. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to explore the major obstacles and facilitators to the use of evidence-supported medications for secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease using qualitative analysis in 2 diverse countries across multiple levels of their health care systems. METHODS: A qualitative descriptive study approach was implemented in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, and Delhi, India. A purposeful sample (n = 69) of 23 patients, 10 physicians, 2 nurse practitioners, 5 Department of Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha, and Homoeopathy physicians, 11 pharmacists, 3 nurses, 4 hospital administrators, 1 social worker, 3 nongovernmental organization workers, 2 pharmaceutical company representatives, and 5 policy makers participated in interviews in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada (n = 21), and Delhi, India (n = 48). All interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed followed by directed content analysis to summarize and categorize the interviews. RESULTS: Themes that emerged across the stakeholder groups included: medication counseling; monitoring adherence; medication availability; medication affordability and drug coverage; time restrictions; and task shifting. The depth of verbal medication counseling provided varied substantially between countries, with prescribers in India unable to convey relevant information about drug treatments due to time constraint and high patient load. Canadian patients reported drug affordability as a common issue and very few patients were familiar with government subsidized drug programs. In India, patients purchased medications out-of-pocket from private, community pharmacies to avoid long commutes, lost wages, and unavailability of medications from hospitals formularies. Task shifting medication-refilling and titration to nonphysician health workers was accepted and supported by physicians in Canada but not in India, where many of the physicians considered a high level of clinical expertise a precondition to carry out these tasks skillfully. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings reveal context-specific, health system factors that affect the patient's choice or ability to initiate and/or continue cardiovascular medication. Strategies to optimize cardiovascular drug use should be targeted and relevant to the health care system.

Pre and post-operative treatments for prevention of atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery.

Post-operative atrial fibrillation (AF) occurs in up to 40% of cardiac surgery patients and represents the most common post-operative arrhythmic complication. Post-operative AF is associated with impaired cardiac hemodynamics, increased incidence of serious complications (e.g. heart failure, stroke), prolonged hospitalization and increased healthcare costs. Therefore, treatment of post-operative AF would decrease health-care costs during hospitalization and improve the prognosis of patients following cardiovascular surgery. Current consensus guidelines recommend ß-blockers, amiodarone and sotalol for post-operative AF prophylaxis. However, new pharmacological agents have been associated with a reduction in post-operative AF frequency, including inhibition of the renin angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) using angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), statins, antioxidant agents, magnesium supplementation and antiarrhythmic drugs. The aim of this review is to analyse and determine the efficiency of existing therapies in the reduction of post-operative AF development.

Net clinical benefit of new oral anticoagulants (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban) versus no treatment in a 'real world' atrial fibrillation population: a modelling analysis based on a nationwide cohort study.

The concept of net clinical benefit has been used to quantify the balance between risk of ischaemic stroke (IS) and risk of intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) with the use oral anticoagulant therapy (OAC) in the setting of non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF), and has shown that patients at highest risk of stroke and thromboembolism gain the greatest benefit from OAC with warfarin. There are no data for the new OACs, that is, dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban, as yet. We calculated the net clinical benefit balancing IS against ICH using data from the Danish National Patient Registry on patients with non-valvular AF between 1997-2008, for dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban on the basis of recent clinical trial outcome data for these new OACs. In patients with CHADS(2)=0 but at high bleeding risk, apixaban and dabigatran 110 mg bid had a positive net clinical benefit. At CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc=1, apixaban and both doses of dabigatran (110 mg and 150 mg bid) had a positive net clinical benefit. In patients with CHADS(2) score≥1 or CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc≥2, the three new OACs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban) appear superior to warfarin for net clinical benefit, regardless of risk of bleeding. When risk of bleeding and stroke are both high, all three new drugs appear to have a greater net clinical benefit than warfarin. In the absence of head-to-head trials for these new OACs, our analysis may help inform decision making processes when all these new OACs become available to clinicians for stroke prevention in AF. Using 'real world' data, our modelling analysis has shown that when the risk of bleeding and stroke are both high, all three new drugs appear to have a greater net clinical benefit compared to warfarin.