Faster detection of asymptomatic COVID-19 cases among care home staff in England through the combination of SARS-CoV-2 testing technologies.

To detect SARS-CoV-2 amongst asymptomatic care home staff in England, a dual-technology weekly testing regime was introduced on 23 December 2020. A lateral flow device (LFD) and quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) test were taken on the same day (day 0) and a midweek LFD test was taken three to four days later. We evaluated the effectiveness of using dual-technology to detect SARS-CoV-2 between December 2020 to April 2021. Viral concentrations derived from qRT-PCR were used to determine the probable stage of infection and likely level of infectiousness. Day 0 PCR detected 1,493 cases of COVID-19, of which 53% were in the early stages of infection with little to no risk of transmission. Day 0 LFD detected 83% of cases that were highly likely to be infectious. On average, LFD results were received 46.3 h earlier than PCR, enabling removal of likely infectious staff from the workplace quicker than by weekly PCR alone. Demonstrating the rapidity of LFDs to detect highly infectious cases could be combined with the ability of PCR to detect cases in the very early stages of infection. In practice, asymptomatic care home staff were removed from the workplace earlier, breaking potential chains of transmission.

Chronic hepatitis C elimination prison initiative: HCV-intensive test and treat, a whole prisoner population HCV test-and-treat program in England.

Background and Aim: Prison residents are at high risk for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. HCV test-and-treat initiatives within prisons provide an opportunity to engage with prison residents and achieve HCV micro-elimination. The aim of the prison HCV-intensive test and treat initiative was to screen over 95% of all prison residents for HCV infection within a defined number of days determined by the size of the prison population and to initiate treatment within 7-14 days of a positive HCV RNA diagnosis. Methods: An HCV-intensive test and treat toolkit was developed based on learnings from pilot HCV-intensive test and treat events. From January 2020 to September 2021, 13 HCV-intensive test and treat events took place at prisons in England selected based on high levels of reception blood-borne virus testing and good access to peers from The Hepatitis C Trust. Results: Among a total of 8487 residents, 8139 (95.9%) underwent testing for HCV. Across the 13 prisons included, HCV antibody and RNA prevalence was 8.2% and 1.5%, respectively. The treatment initiation rate among HCV RNA-positive individuals (n = 124) was 79.0%. Conclusion: The HCV-intensive test and treat initiative presented here provides a feasible and rapid test-and-treat process to achieve HCV elimination within individual prisons. The HCV-intensive test and treat toolkit can be adapted for rapid HCV testing and treatment events at other prisons in the United Kingdom and worldwide.

Testing for COVID-19 during an outbreak within a large UK prison: an evaluation of mass testing to inform outbreak control.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this paper was to describe the results of mass asymptomatic testing for COVID-19 in a male prison in England following the declaration of an outbreak. It provides novel data on the implementation of a mass testing regime within a prison during the pandemic. METHODS: The paper is an observational evaluation of the mass testing conducted for 6 months following the declaration of a COVID-19 outbreak within a prison. It investigated the incidence of positive cases in both staff and residents using polymerase chain reaction testing. RESULTS: Data from October 2020 until March 2021 was included. A total of 2170 tests were performed by 851 residents and 182 staff members; uptake was 48.3% for people living in prison and 30.4% for staff. Overall test positivity was 11.6% (14.3% for residents, 3.0% for staff), with around one-quarter of these reporting symptoms. The prison wing handling new admissions reported the second-lowest positivity rate (9.4%) of the eight wings. CONCLUSION: Mass testing for COVID-19 over a short space of time can lead to rapid identification of additional cases, particularly asymptomatic cases. Testing that relies on residents and staff reporting symptoms will underestimate the true extent of transmission and will likely lead to a prolonged outbreak.

Implementation of novel and conventional outbreak control measures in managing COVID-19 outbreaks in a large UK prison.

BACKGROUND: Outbreak control measures during COVID-19 outbreaks in a large UK prison consisted of standard (e.g., self-isolation) and novel measures, including establishment of: (i) reverse cohorting units for accommodating new prison admissions; (ii) protective isolation unit for isolating symptomatic prisoners, and (iii) a shielding unit to protect medically vulnerable prisoners. METHODS: Single-centre prospective longitudinal study (outbreak control study), implementing novel and traditional outbreak control measures to prevent a SARS-COV-2 outbreak. The prison held 977 prisoners and employed 910 staff at that start of the outbreak. RESULTS: 120 probable and 25 confirmed cases among prisoners and staff were recorded between March and June 2020 during the first outbreak. Over 50% of initial cases among prisoners were on the two wings associated with the index case. During the second outbreak, 182 confirmed cases were recorded after probable reintroduction from a staff member. Widespread testing identified 145 asymptomatic prisoners, 16.9% of the total prisoner cases. The cohorting units prevented re-infection from new prison admissions and the shielding unit had no COVID-19 infections linked to either outbreak. CONCLUSIONS: Identifying and isolating infected prisoners, cohorting new admissions and shielding vulnerable individuals helped prevent uncontrollable spread of SARS-COV-2. These novel and cost-effective approaches can be implemented in correctional facilities globally.

Determining the Prevalence and Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Prisons in England: Protocol for a Repeated Panel Survey and Enhanced Outbreak Study.

BACKGROUND: There are over 80,000 people imprisoned in England and Wales in 117 prisons. The management of the COVID-19 pandemic presents particular challenges in this setting where confined, crowded, and poorly ventilated conditions facilitate the rapid spread of infectious diseases. OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 in Prison Study aims to examine the epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 in prisons in England in order to inform public health policy and practice during the pandemic and recovery. The primary objective is to estimate the proportion of positive tests of SARS-CoV-2 infection among residents and staff within selected prisons. The secondary objectives include estimating the incidence rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection and examining how the proportion of positive tests and the incidence rate vary among individual, institutional, and system level factors. METHODS: Phase 1 comprises a repeated panel survey of prison residents and staff in a representative sample of 28 prisons across England. All residents and staff in the study prisons are eligible for inclusion. Participants will be tested for SARS-CoV-2 using a nasopharyngeal swab twice (6 weeks apart). Staff will also be tested for antibodies to SARS-CoV-2. Phase 2 focuses on SARS-CoV-2 infection in prisons with recognized COVID-19 outbreaks. Any prison in England will be eligible to participate if an outbreak is declared. In 3 outbreak prisons, all participating staff and residents will be tested for SARS-CoV-2 antigens at the following 3 timepoints: as soon as possible after the outbreak is declared (day 0), 7 days later (day 7), and at day 28. They will be swabbed twice (a nasal swab for lateral flow device testing and a nasopharyngeal swab for polymerase chain reaction testing). Testing will be done by external contractors. Data will also be collected on individual, prison level, and community factors. Data will be stored and handled at the University of Southampton and Public Health England. Summary statistics will summarize the prison and participant characteristics. For the primary objective, simple proportions of individuals testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 and incidence rates will be calculated. Linear regression will examine the individual, institutional, system, and community factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection within prisons. RESULTS: The UK Government's Department for Health and Social Care funds the study. Data collection started on July 20, 2020, and will end on May 31, 2021. As of May 2021, we had enrolled 4192 staff members and 6496 imprisoned people in the study. Data analysis has started, and we expect to publish the initial findings in summer/autumn 2021. The main ethical consideration is the inclusion of prisoners, who are vulnerable participants. CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide unique data to inform the public health management of SARS-CoV-2 in prisons. Its findings will be of relevance to health policy makers and practitioners working in prisons. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/30749.

Leaving no one behind in prison: improving the health of people in prison as a key contributor to meeting the Sustainable Development Goals 2030.

Worldwide, approximately 11 million people are currently being held in prison, a number that has steadily grown since the turn of the 21st century. The prison population is more likely to suffer from physical and mental ailments both during and prior to their imprisonment due to poverty, social exclusion and chaotic lifestyles. Recognition of people in prison is noticeably absent from the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), despite the goals' ethos of 'leaving no one behind'.We present the first analysis of how improving the health of people in prison can contribute to achieving 15 SDGs. Relevant indicators are proposed to fulfil these goals while meeting the existing international prison health standards. We also assess the political, economic and social challenges, alongside the unparalleled COVID-19 pandemic that can thwart the realisation of the SDGs. To reach the 'furthest behind first', prison health must be at the forefront of the SDGs.

Time out of cell and time in purposeful activity and adverse mental health outcomes amongst people in prison: a literature review.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to synthesise the available peer-reviewed literature on the impact of time out of cell (TOOC) and time in purposeful activity (TIPA) on adverse mental outcomes amongst people in prison. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: The outcomes of interest of this literature review were mental health, suicide, deliberate self-harm (DSH) and violence. Exposures of interest were TOOC, TIPA or a partial or indirect measure of either. In total, 14 studies were included. An abbreviated review methodology was used because of time constraints. FINDINGS: There was consistent evidence of an association between lower TOOC and TIPA and worse mental health and higher suicide risk. Limited evidence suggests a link between TOOC and DSH. No evidence was identified regarding the relationship between TOOC/TIPA and violence. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: A lack of longitudinal studies prevents conclusions regarding causality. Significant heterogeneity of mental health outcomes limits the comparability of studies. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: These findings highlight the importance of considering the impact of TOOC and TIPA on adverse mental outcomes for prisoners when designing prison regimes, including during urgent adaptation of such regimes in response to Covid-19. They are likely to be of interest to practitioners and policymakers concerned with prison regime design. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: This paper is the first to synthesise the existing literature on the impact of TOOC and TIPA on mental health outcomes.

New approaches to controlling an outbreak of chickenpox in a large immigration detention setting in England: the role of serological testing and mathematical modelling.

Chickenpox is caused by varicella-zoster-virus (VZV) and is highly contagious. Immigration detention settings are a high-risk environment for primary VZV transmission, with large, rapidly-changing populations in close quarters, and higher susceptibility among non-UK-born individuals. During outbreaks, operational challenges occur in detention settings because of high-turnover and the potential need to implement population movement restriction for prolonged periods. Between December 2017 and February 2018, four cases of chickenpox were notified amongst 799 detainees in an immigration removal centre (IRC). Microbiological investigations included case confirmation by vesicular fluid polymerase chain reaction, and VZV serology for susceptibility testing. Control measures involved movement restrictions, isolation of cases, quarantining and cohorting of non-immune contacts and extending VZV immunity testing to the wider detainee population to support outbreak management. Immunity was tested for 301/532 (57%) detainees, of whom 24 (8%) were non-immune. The level of non-immunity was lower than expected based on the existing literature on VZV seroprevalence in detained populations in England. Serology results identified non-immune contacts who could be cohorted and, due to the lack of isolation capacity, allowed the placement of cases with immune detainees. The widespread immunity testing of all detainees was proving challenging to sustain because it required significant resources and was having a severe impact on operational capacity and the ability to maintain core business activities at the IRC. Therefore, mathematical modelling was used to assess the impact of scaling back mass immunity testing. Modelling demonstrated that interrupting testing posed a risk of one additional case compared to continuing with testing. As such, the decision was made to stop testing, and the outbreak was successfully controlled without excessive strain on resources. Operational challenges generated learning for future outbreaks, with implications for a local and national policy on IRC staff occupational health requirements, and proposed reception screening of detainees for VZV immunity.

Vaccinations in prison settings: A systematic review to assess the situation in EU/EEA countries and in other high income countries.

INTRODUCTION: In 2016, more than 600,000 persons were being held in EU/EEA correctional facilities on a given day. People in prison may be at risk of vaccine-preventable diseases. While vaccination recommendations for people in prison exist, little is known on coverage and implementation options. METHODS: We performed a systematic review on existing evidence on vaccination in prison settings in the EU/EEA. We searched peer-reviewed and grey literature following international methodology and reporting standards, to gather records published between 1980 and 2016 in all languages. We analysed quantitative (acceptance, uptake, cost-effectiveness) and qualitative (barriers) outcomes. RESULTS: Out of 7041 identified records, 19 full-text articles were included from peer-reviewed literature and two from grey literature. Of these, 18 reported on hepatitis A and/or B virus (HAV/HBV), two on influenza and one on MMR vaccination. Two studies on HAV vaccine reported varying acceptance (5-91%) and uptake rates (62.9-70.5%). Seven studies reported on HBV vaccination. A comparative study showed a significantly higher uptake of the third HBV vaccine dose with the very rapid (63%) compared to the standard schedule (20%). HBV vaccination was generally well accepted (54-100%), whereas uptake was variable (dose 1:23-100%, dose 2:48-92%, dose 3:19-80%). One study on the combined HAV/HBV vaccine reported an acceptance rate of 34%, and declining uptake following dose 1. One study on influenza vaccine showed an uptake of 42-46%, while another reported a MMR vaccine acceptance of 80% and an uptake of 74%. Overall, main reasons for non-vaccination included release from/or transfer between prisons, and refusal. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review highlighted important knowledge gaps and operational challenges for vaccination in prison settings. Vaccination is an effective measure that warrants comprehensive and tailored implementation to reduce the preventable disease burden, avoid risks of large outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases, and contribute to health equity for people in prison.

Challenges and opportunities for the management of infectious diseases in Europes' prisons: evidence-based guidance.

People in prison have multiple complex health and social care needs. These are likely to be the result of a combination of overlapping, and sometimes interlinked, risk factors for infection, ill-health, and incarceration, such as problem drug use. Incarceration can represent a unique opportunity to make high-quality health care available to people in prison and to target socially deprived groups who are often medically underserved when living in the community they originate from. In recent years, international and European institutions have increasingly acknowledged the importance of treating prison health as an inseparable component of public health. However, numerous challenges hamper the successful implementation of such a concept, including the need for evidence-based decision making, intersectoral partnerships, and better monitoring systems. New initiatives are ongoing in the EU that might contribute to bring about positive changes, such as the publication of the first evidence-based public health guidance on prevention and control of communicable diseases in prison settings.

The prevalence of non-communicable disease in older people in prison: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: people in prison often experience poor health. Those aged 50 and over are the fastest growing age-group in prison and present particular challenges to criminal justice systems around the world. Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) account for two-thirds of deaths globally and no estimate of the prevalence of NCDs in this vulnerable population exists. METHODS: we searched PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE and Global Health databases to identify original research papers that met our pre-defined inclusion criteria. No date or language restrictions were applied. Two authors undertook full-text screening as well as quality assessment and data extraction for all included studies. A random effects model was used to calculate pooled prevalence of any disease that was reported in two or more articles. RESULTS: the initial search identified 2,712 articles. 119 underwent full-text screening with 26 meeting the inclusion criteria. This provided prevalence data on 28 NCDs in 93,862 individuals from prisons in 11 countries. Pooled prevalence for the most significant NCDs was a follows; cancer 8% (95% CI 6-10%), cardiovascular disease 38% (95% CI 33-42%), hypertension 39% (95% CI 32-47%), diabetes 14% (95% CI 12-16%), COPD prevalence estimates ranged from 4% to 18%. Heterogeneity across studies was high. CONCLUSIONS: those in prison over 50 years of age experience a high burden of NCDs which is often higher than younger prison and age-matched community peers. This health inequality is influenced by lifestyle, environmental and societal factors. Prison services should be adapted to serve the needs of this growing population.

Developing gender-specific evidence-based standards to improve the health and wellbeing of women in prison in England: a literature review and modified eDelphi survey.

PURPOSE: There are significant health inequalities experienced by women in prison. They face distinct challenges and have particular and complex needs, specifically with regard to their physical and mental health. The purpose of this paper is to describe the approach taken to develop a set of health and wellbeing standards for the women's prison estate in England, which can be applied elsewhere. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: A structured literature review of standard healthcare databases and grey literature was used to inform development of suggested standards. A multidisciplinary expert panel provided consensus on the standards through an online survey and women with a history of contact with the criminal justice system were consulted through consensus groups. FINDINGS: A total of 549 papers were included in the final review. From this, 127 standards were identified for inclusion in the Delphi process. Consensus was achieved on all standards; this, combined with the analysis of qualitative feedback provided by both the survey and the consensus groups, resulted in the development of 6 overarching principles and 122 standards, across ten topic areas. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: These standards are the most extensive that are known to exist for health and wellbeing of women in prison and the first to be developed in England. The process used ensures the standards have high validity, acceptability and feasibility and can be used to support those developing similar methodologies. There are few papers which document the development of standards to improve health and to the authors knowledge, only one other paper has been published detailing the development of health standards in prison settings specifically.

Words matter: a call for humanizing and respectful language to describe people who experience incarceration.

BACKGROUND: Words matter when describing people involved in the criminal justice system because language can have a significant impact upon health, wellbeing, and access to health information and services. However, terminology used in policies, programs, and research publications is often derogatory, stigmatizing, and dehumanizing. DISCUSSION: In response, health experts from Europe, the United States, and Australia recommend that healthcare professionals, researchers, and policy makers working with people in detention follow key principles that foster constructive and humanizing language. These principles include: engage people and respect their preferences; use stigma-free and accurate language; prioritize individuals over their characteristics; and cultivate self-awareness. The article offers examples of problematic terms to be avoided because they do not convey respect for incarcerated people and propose preferred wording which requires contextualization to local language, culture, and environment. CONCLUSION: The use of respectful and appropriate language is a cornerstone of reducing harm and suffering when working with people involved in the criminal justice system; the use of stigmatizing and dehumanizing language must therefore come to an end.

A systematic review on models of care effectiveness and barriers to Hepatitis C treatment in prison settings in the EU/EEA.

Hepatitis C prevalence in prison populations is much higher than in the community. Effective hepatitis C treatment within this population does not only have a direct individual health benefit, but may lead to substantial community dividend. We reviewed available evidence on hepatitis C treatment in prison settings, with a focus on the European Union/European Economic Area. A systematic review of the literature (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library) was performed and complemented with searches for conference abstracts and grey literature. Thirty-four publications were included reporting on the effectiveness, acceptability and economic aspects of hepatitis C virus treatment models of care to achieve treatment completion and sustained viral response in prison settings. Available evidence shows that hepatitis C treatment in prison settings is feasible and the introduction of direct-acting antivirals will most likely result in increased treatment completion and better clinical outcomes for the prison population, given the caveats of affordability and the need for increased funding for prison health, with the resulting benefits accruing mostly in the community.

Active Case Finding for Communicable Diseases in Prison Settings: Increasing Testing Coverage and Uptake Among the Prison Population in the European Union/European Economic Area.

Prison populations are disproportionally affected by communicable diseases when compared with the general community because of a complex mix of socioeconomic determinants and environmental factors. Tailored and adequate health care provision in prisons has the potential to reach vulnerable and underserved groups and address their complex needs. We investigated the available evidence on modalities and effectiveness of active case-finding interventions in prisons by searching PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for records on prison and active case finding with no language limit. Conference abstracts and unpublished research reports also were retrieved. We analyzed the findings by testing modality, outcomes, and study quality. The included 90 records-63 peer-reviewed, 26 from gray literature, and 1 systematic review-reported variously on viral hepatitis, human immunodeficiency virus, sexually transmitted infections, and tuberculosis. No records were retrieved for other communicable diseases. Provider-initiated opt-in testing was the most frequently investigated modality. Testing at entry and provider-initiated testing were reported to result in comparatively higher uptake ranges. However, no comparative studies were identified that reported statistically significant differences between testing modalities. Positivity rates among tested inmates ranged broadly but were generally high for all diseases. The evidence on active case finding in correctional facilities is limited, heterogeneous, and of low quality, making it challenging to draw conclusions on the effect of different testing modalities. Scale-up of provider-initiated testing in European correctional facilities could substantially reduce the undiagnosed fraction and, hence, prevent additional disease transmission in both prison settings and the community at large.

Improving health in prisons - from evidence to policy to implementation - experiences from the UK.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to understand the components of a high-quality prison healthcare system and the impact, ten-years on, of the transfer of accountability in England, from a justice ministry to a health ministry. Design/methodology/approach A rapid the evidence review was undertaken, which included a review of 82 papers and qualitative interviews with key informants. The concepts and themes identified were summarised and analysed through a framework analysis, designed to improve population outcomes and address health inequalities. The use of a rapid evidence assessment, rather than a systematic review methodology, the use of abstracts (rather than full-text articles) to extract the data, and limiting the search strategy to articles published in the English language only might mean that some relevant research papers and themes were not identified. The need for the evidence to be produced within a limited time frame and with limited resources determined these pragmatic approaches. Findings The review found that English prison healthcare has undergone "transformation" during this period, leading to increased quality of care through organisational engagement, professionalisation of the healthcare workforce, transparency, use of evidence-based guidance and responsiveness of services. The review also highlighted that there is still room for improvement, for example, relating to the prison regime and the lack of focus on early/preventive interventions, as well as specific challenges from limited resources. Research limitations/implications Time and resource constraints meant a rapid evidence review of papers in the English language was undertaken, rather than a systematic review. This might mean relevant papers have been missed. The review also only covered small number of countries, which may limit the transferability of findings. The lack of qualitative data necessitated the use of quantitative data gathered from key informants. However, this enabled a good understanding of current practice. Practical implications The review findings support the World Health Organisation position on the value of integrated prison and public health systems in improving quality of healthcare. It also recommends future policy needs to take account of the "whole prison approach" recognising that healthcare in prisons cannot operate in isolation from the prison regime or the community. Originality/value This is unique research which has great value in supporting prison reform in England. It will also be of interest internationally due to the paucity of data in the published peer-reviewed literature on the impact of commissioning models on healthcare or health outcomes.

An audit of tuberculosis health services in prisons and immigration removal centres.

Background: Tuberculosis (TB) is the second leading cause of death worldwide due to a single infectious agent. Rates of active TB in places of prescribed detention (PPD), which include Prisons, Young Offender Institutions and Immigration Removal Centres, are high compared with the general population. PPD therefore present an opportunity to develop targeted health programmes for TB control. This audit aims to assess current service provisions and identify barriers to achieving best practice standards in PPD across London. Methods: Twelve healthcare teams within PPD commissioned by NHS England (London Region) were included in the audit. Services were evaluated against the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence standards for TB best practice. Results: None of the health providers with a digital X-ray machine were conducting active case finding in new prisoners and no health providers routinely conduct Latent TB infection testing and preventative treatment. Barriers to implementing standards include the lack of staff skills and staff skills mix, structural and technical barriers, and demands of custodial and health services. Conclusions: This audit restates the importance of national public health TB strategies to consider healthcare provisions across PPD.