Weight change and risk of obesity-related complications: A retrospective population-based cohort study of a UK primary care database.

AIMS: To examine associations between weight loss/gain and risk of developing 13 obesity-related complications (ORCs), stratified by baseline body mass index (BMI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we included adults with obesity (>30 kg/m2 ) from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD database with weight change (-50% to +50%) between Years 1 and 4 (N = 418 774 [median follow-up: 7 years]). Associations between weight change, baseline BMI and risk of developing ORCs during follow-up were assessed using Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: The impact of weight change on ORCs was generally dependent on baseline BMI. Four clear patterns were seen across the 13 outcomes. Pattern 1 showed greatest weight loss benefit for people with low baseline BMI (type 2 diabetes, sleep apnoea, hypertension and dyslipidaemia); Pattern 2 showed most weight loss benefit at lower baseline BMI but no significant weight loss effect at higher baseline BMI (asthma, hip/knee osteoarthritis and polycystic ovary syndrome); Pattern 3 showed benefit in most cardiovascular diseases with weight loss (chronic kidney disease, heart failure, atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism), but no additional benefit with >10% weight loss; Pattern 4 showed no clear relationship between weight change and unstable angina/myocardial infarction and depression. We found similar but opposite patterns for weight gain. CONCLUSIONS: Weight loss benefit is dependent on weight loss magnitude and initial BMI, and weight gain is associated with a similar risk increase. Four patterns of association were identified between degree of weight change, baseline BMI and 13 ORCs.

Overcoming Therapeutic Inertia as the Achilles’ Heel for Improving Suboptimal Diabetes Care: An Integrative Review

The ultimate purpose of diabetes care is achieving the outcomes that patients regard as important throughout the life course. Despite advances in pharmaceuticals, nutraceuticals, psychoeducational programs, information technologies, and digital health, the levels of treatment target achievement in people with diabetes mellitus (DM) have remained suboptimal. This clinical care of people with DM is highly challenging, complex, costly, and confounded for patients, physicians, and healthcare systems. One key underlying problem is clinical inertia in general and therapeutic inertia (TI) in particular. TI refers to healthcare providers’ failure to modify therapy appropriately when treatment goals are not met. TI therefore relates to the prescribing decisions made by healthcare professionals, such as doctors, nurses, and pharmacists. The known causes of TI include factors at the level of the physician (50%), patient (30%), and health system (20%). Although TI is often multifactorial, the literature suggests that 28% of strategies are targeted at multiple levels of causes, 38% at the patient level, 26% at the healthcare professional level, and only 8% at the healthcare system level. The most effective interventions against TI are shorter intervals until revisit appointments and empowering nurses, diabetes educators, and pharmacists to review treatments and modify prescriptions.

Socioeconomic inequalities of Long COVID: findings from a population-based survey in the United Kingdom

ObjectiveTo estimate the risk of Long COVID by socioeconomic deprivation and to further examine the socioeconomic inequalities in Long COVID by sex and occupational groups. DesignWe analysed data from the COVID-19 Infection Survey conducted by the Office for National Statistics between 26/04/2020 and 31/01/2022. This is the largest and nationally representative survey of COVID-19 in the UK and provides uniquely rich, contemporaneous, and longitudinal data on occupation, health status, COVID-19 exposure, and Long COVID symptoms. SettingCommunity-based longitudinal survey of COVID-19 in the UK. ParticipantsWe included 201,799 participants in our analysis who were aged between 16 and 64 years and had a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main outcome measuresWe used multivariable logistic regression models to estimate the risk of Long COVID at least 4 weeks after acute SARS-CoV-2 infection by deciles of index of multiple deprivation (IMD) and adjusted for a range of demographic and spatiotemporal factors. We further examined the modifying effects of socioeconomic deprivation by sex and occupational groups. ResultsA total of 19,315 (9.6%) participants reported having Long COVID symptoms. Compared to the least deprived IMD decile, participants in the most deprived decile had a higher adjusted risk of Long COVID (11.4% vs 8.2%; adjusted OR: 1.45; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.33, 1.57). There were particularly significantly higher inequalities (most vs least deprived decile) of Long COVID in healthcare and patient facing roles (aOR: 1.76; 1.27, 2.44), and in the education sector (aOR: 1.62; 1.26, 2.08). The inequality of Long COVID was higher in females (aOR: 1.54; 1.38, 1.71) than males (OR: 1.32; 1.15, 1.51). ConclusionsParticipants living in the most socioeconomically deprived areas had a higher risk of Long COVID. The inequality gap was wider in females and certain public facing occupations (e.g., healthcare and education). These findings will help inform public health policies and interventions in adopting a social justice and health inequality lens.

Indirect effects of the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic on secondary care for cardiovascular disease in the UK: an electronic health record analysis across three countries.

BackgroundAlthough morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 have been widely reported, the indirect effects of the pandemic beyond 2020 on other major diseases and health service activity have not been well described. MethodsAnalyses used national administrative electronic hospital records in England, Scotland and Wales for 2016-2021. Admissions and procedures during the pandemic (2020-2021) related to six major cardiovascular conditions (acute coronary syndrome, heart failure, stroke/transient ischaemic attack, peripheral arterial disease, aortic aneurysm, and venous thromboembolism) were compared to the annual average in the pre-pandemic period (2016-2019). Differences were assessed by time period and urgency of care. ResultsIn 2020, there were 31,064 (-6%) fewer hospital admissions (14,506 [-4%] fewer emergencies, 16,560 [-23%] fewer elective admissions) compared to 2016-2019 for the six major cardiovascular diseases combined. The proportional reduction in admissions was similar in all three countries. Overall, hospital admissions returned to pre-pandemic levels in 2021. Elective admissions remained substantially below expected levels for almost all conditions in all three countries (-10,996 [-15%] fewer admissions). However, these reductions were offset by higher than expected total emergency admissions (+25,878 [+6%] higher admissions), notably for heart failure and stroke in England, and for venous thromboembolism in all three countries. Analyses for procedures showed similar temporal variations to admissions. ConclusionThis study highlights increasing emergency cardiovascular admissions as a result of the pandemic, in the context of a substantial and sustained reduction in elective admissions and procedures. This is likely to increase further the demands on cardiovascular services over the coming years. Key QuestionWhat is the impact in 2020 and 2021 of the COVID-19 pandemic on hospital admissions and procedures for six major cardiovascular diseases in England, Scotland and Wales? Key FindingIn 2020, there were 6% fewer hospital admissions (emergency: -4%, elective: -23%) compared to 2016-2019 for six major cardiovascular diseases, across three UK countries. Overall, admissions returned to pre-pandemic levels in 2021, but elective admissions remained below expected levels. Take-home MessageThere was increasing emergency cardiovascular admissions as a result of the pandemic, with substantial and sustained reduction in elective admissions and procedures. This is likely to increase further the demands on cardiovascular services over the coming years.

Vaccine effectiveness for preventing COVID-19 hospital admission during pregnancy: a population-based cohort study in England during the Alpha and Delta waves of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

ObjectiveTo estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) for preventing COVID-19 hospital admission in women first infected with SARS-CoV-2 during pregnancy, and assess how this compares to VE among women of reproductive age who were not pregnant when first infected. DesignPopulation-based cohort study using national, linked Census and administrative data. SettingEngland, United Kingdom, from 8th December 2020 to 31st August 2021. Participants815,4777 women aged 18 to 45 years (mean age, 30.4 years) who had documented evidence of a first SARS-CoV-2 infection in NHS Test and Trace data or Hospital Episode Statistics. Main outcome measuresA hospital inpatient episode where COVID-19 was recorded as the primary diagnosis. Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for calendar time of infection and sociodemographic factors related to vaccine uptake and risk of severe COVID-19, were used to estimate VE as the complement of the hazard ratio for COVID-19 hospital admission. ResultsCompared with unvaccinated pregnant women, the adjusted rate of COVID-19 hospital admission was 76% (95% confidence interval 69% to 82%) lower for single-vaccinated pregnant women and 83% (75% to 88%) lower for double-vaccinated pregnant women. These estimates were similar to those found for non-pregnant women: 79% (76% to 81%) for single-vaccinated and 82% (80% to 83%) for double-vaccinated. Among those vaccinated more than 90 days before infection, being double-vaccinated was associated with a greater reduction in risk than being single-vaccinated. ConclusionsCOVID-19 vaccination is associated with reduced rates of severe illness in pregnant women infected with SARS-CoV-2, and the reduction in risk is similar to that for non-pregnant women. Waning of vaccine effectiveness occurs more quickly after one dose of a vaccine than two doses. What is already known on this topicBeing pregnant is a risk factor for severe illness and mortality following infection with SARS-CoV-2. Existing evidence suggests that COVID-19 vaccines are effective for preventing severe outcomes in pregnant women. However, research directly comparing vaccine effectiveness between pregnant and non-pregnant women of reproductive age at the population level are lacking. What this study addsOur study provides real-world evidence that COVID-19 vaccination reduces the risk of hospital admission by a similar amount for both women infected with SARS-CoV-2 during pregnancy and women who were not pregnant when infected, during the Alpha and Delta dominant periods in England.

QCovid 4 - Predicting risk of death or hospitalisation from COVID-19 in adults testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection during the Omicron wave in England

ObjectivesTo (a) derive and validate risk prediction algorithms (QCovid4) to estimate risk of COVID-19 mortality and hospitalisation in UK adults with a SARS-CoV-2 positive test during the Omicron pandemic wave in England and (b) evaluate performance with earlier versions of algorithms developed in previous pandemic waves and the high-risk cohort identified by NHS Digital in England. DesignPopulation-based cohort study using the QResearch database linked to national data on COVID-19 vaccination, high risk patients prioritised for COVID-19 therapeutics, SARS-CoV-2 results, hospitalisation, cancer registry, systemic anticancer treatment, radiotherapy and the national death registry. Settings and study period1.3 million adults in the derivation cohort and 0.15 million adults in the validation cohort aged 18-100 years with a SARS-CoV-2 positive test between 11th December 2021 and 31st March 2022 with follow up to 30th June 2022. Main outcome measuresOur primary outcome was COVID-19 death. The secondary outcome of interest was COVID-19 hospital admission. Models fitted in the derivation cohort to derive risk equations using a range of predictor variables. Performance evaluated in a separate validation cohort. ResultsOf 1,297,984 people with a SARS-CoV-2 positive test in the derivation cohort, 18,756 (1.45%) had a COVID-19 related hospital admission and 3,878 (0.3%) had a COVID-19 death during follow-up. Of the 145,404 people in the validation cohort, there were 2,124 (1.46%) COVID-19 admissions and 461 (0.3%) COVID-19 deaths. The COVID-19 mortality rate in men increased with age and deprivation. In the QCovid4 model in men hazard ratios were highest for those with the following conditions (for 95% CI see Figure 1): kidney transplant (6.1-fold increase); Downs syndrome (4.9-fold); radiotherapy (3.1-fold); type 1 diabetes (3.4-fold); chemotherapy grade A (3.8-fold), grade B (5.8-fold); grade C (10.9-fold); solid organ transplant ever (2.4-fold); dementia (1.62-fold); Parkinsons disease (2.2-fold); liver cirrhosis (2.5-fold). Other conditions associated with increased COVID-19 mortality included learning disability, chronic kidney disease (stages 4 and 5), blood cancer, respiratory cancer, immunosuppressants, oral steroids, COPD, coronary heart disease, stroke, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, thromboembolism, rheumatoid/SLE, schizophrenia/bipolar disease sickle cell/HIV/SCID; type 2 diabetes. Results were similar in the model in women. O_FIG O_LINKSMALLFIG WIDTH=100 HEIGHT=200 SRC="FIGDIR/small/22278733v1_fig1.gif" ALT="Figure 1"> View larger version (35K): org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@4e93b7org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@c3e600org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@1311bd4org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@11a3246_HPS_FORMAT_FIGEXP M_FIG O_FLOATNOFigure 1C_FLOATNO QCOVID4 (mortality): Adjusted hazard ratios for COVID-19 death in men mutually adjusted and also adjusted for fractional polynomial terms for age and BMI C_FIG COVID-19 mortality risk was lower among those who had received COVID-19 vaccination compared with unvaccinated individuals with evidence of a dose response relationship. The reduced mortality rates associated with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection were similar in men (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.51 (95% CI 0.40, 0.64)) and women (adjusted HR 0.55 (95%CI 0.45, 0.67)). The QCOVID4 algorithm explained 76.6% (95%CI 74.4 to 78.8) of the variation in time to COVID-19 death (R2) in women. The D statistic was 3.70 (95%CI 3.48 to 3.93) and the Harrells C statistic was 0.965 (95%CI 0.951 to 0.978). The corresponding results for COVID-19 death in men were similar with R2 76.0% (95% 73.9 to 78.2); D statistic 3.65 (95%CI 3.43 to 3.86) and C statistic of 0.970 (95%CI 0.962 to 0.979). QCOVID4 discrimination for mortality was slightly higher than that for QCOVID1 and QCOVID2, but calibration was much improved. ConclusionThe QCovid4 risk algorithm modelled from data during the UKs Omicron wave now includes vaccination dose and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and predicts COVID-19 mortality among people with a positive test. It has excellent performance and could be used for targeting COVID-19 vaccination and therapeutics. Although large disparities in risks of severe COVID-19 outcomes among ethnic minority groups were observed during the early waves of the pandemic, these are much reduced now with no increased risk of mortality by ethnic group. What is knownO_LIThe QCOVID risk assessment algorithm for predicting risk of COVID-19 death or hospital admission based on individual characteristics has been used in England to identify people at high risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes, adding an additional 1.5 million people to the national shielded patient list in England and in the UK for prioritising people for COVID-19 vaccination. C_LIO_LIThere are ethnic disparities in severe COVID-19 outcomes which were most marked in the first pandemic wave in 2020. C_LIO_LICOVID-19 vaccinations and therapeutics (monoclonal antibodies and antivirals) are available but need to be targeted to those at highest risk of severe outcomes. C_LI What this study addsO_LIThe QCOVID4 risk algorithm using data from the Omicron wave now includes number of vaccination doses and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. It has excellent performance both for ranking individuals (discrimination) and predicting levels of absolute risk (calibration) and can be used for targeting COVID-19 vaccination and therapeutics as well as individualised risk assessment. C_LIO_LIQCOVID4 more accurately identifies individuals at highest levels of absolute risk for targeted interventions than the conditions-based approach adopted by NHS Digital based on relative risk of a list of medical conditions. C_LIO_LIAlthough large disparities in risks of severe COVID-19 outcomes among ethnic minority groups were observed during the early waves of the pandemic, these are much reduced now with no increased risk of mortality by ethnic group. C_LI

Non-pharmacological therapies for post-viral syndromes, including Long COVID: A systematic review

BackgroundPost-viral syndromes (PVS), including Long COVID, are symptoms sustained from weeks to years following an acute viral infection. Non-pharmacological treatments for these symptoms are poorly understood. This review summarises evidence for the effectiveness of non-pharmacological treatments for symptoms of PVS. It also summarises the symptoms and health impacts of PVS in individuals recruited to studies evaluating treatments. Methods and findingsWe conducted a systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions for PVS, as compared to either standard care, alternative non-pharmacological therapy, or placebo. The outcomes of interest were changes in symptoms, exercise capacity, quality of life (including mental health and wellbeing), and work capability. We searched five databases (Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, MedRxiv) for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published between 1st January 2001 to 29th October 2021. We anticipated that there would be few RCTs specifically pertaining to Long COVID, so we also included observational studies only if they assessed interventions in individuals where the viral pathogen was SARS-COV-2. Relevant outcome data were extracted, study quality appraised using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, and the findings were synthesised narratively. Quantitative synthesis was not planned due to substantial heterogeneity between the studies. Overall, five studies of five different interventions (Pilates, music therapy, telerehabilitation, resistance exercise, neuromodulation) met the inclusion criteria. Aside from music-based intervention, all other selected interventions demonstrated some support in the management of PVS in some patients. ConclusionsIn this study, we observed a lack of robust evidence evaluating non-pharmacological treatments for PVS, including Long COVID. Considering the prevalence of prolonged symptoms following acute viral infections, there is an urgent need for clinical trials evaluating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of non-pharmacological treatments for patients with PVS as well as what may work for certain sub-groups of patients with differential symptom presentation. RegistrationThe study protocol was registered with PROSPERO [CRD42021282074] in October 2021 and published in BMJ Open in 2022. Author summaryWhy was this study done? O_LIThe prevalence of Long COVID following exposure to SARS CoV-2 is substantial, and the current guidance provides few evidence-based treatment options for clinicians to suggest to their patients. C_LIO_LIDue to the similarities in presentation of other post-viral syndromes (PVS), and the lack of consensus in management approaches, there is a need to synthesise the available data on PVS to both support patients with PVS predating the pandemic, and those with Long COVID. C_LI What did the researchers do and find? O_LIThis is the first comprehensive systematic review of the effectiveness of non-pharmacological treatments for patients with PVS, including Long COVID. C_LIO_LIWe identified four non-pharmacological treatments (Pilates, telerehabilitation, resistance exercises and neuromodulation) which have shown promise in those who have experienced signs and symptoms related to PVS. C_LI What do these findings mean? O_LIIn this study, we identified few trials assessing the effectiveness of non-pharmacological therapies to support the management of symptoms of PVS. Considering the prevalence of PVS, including Long COVID, there is an urgent need for clinical trials evaluating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of non-pharmacological therapies to support these patients. C_LI

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

IntroductionAs 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 analysisThis 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 disseminationEthical 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. RegistrationResearchregistry: https://www.researchregistry.com/browse-the-registry#home/registrationdetails/6246bfeeeaaed6001f08dadc/.

Risk of death following SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 vaccination in young people in England: a self-controlled case series study

ObjectivesTo assess whether there is a change in the incidence of cardiac and all-cause death in young people following COVID-19 vaccination or SARS-CoV-2 infection in unvaccinated individuals. DesignSelf-controlled case series. SettingNational, linked electronic health record data in England. Study populationIndividuals aged 12-29 who had received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccination and died between 8 December 2020 and 2 February 2022 and registered by 16 February 2022 within 12 weeks of COVID-19 vaccination; Individuals aged 12-29 who died within 12 weeks of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. Main outcome measuresCardiac and all-cause deaths occurring within 12 weeks of vaccination or SARS-CoV-2 infection. ResultsCompared to the baseline period, there was no evidence of a change in the incidence of cardiac death in the six weeks after vaccination, whether for each of weeks 1 to 6 or the whole six-week period. There was a decrease in the risk of all-cause death in the first week after vaccination and no change in each of weeks 2 to 6 after vaccination or whole six-week period after vaccination. Subgroup analyses by sex, age, vaccine type, and last dose also showed no change in the risk of death in the first six weeks after vaccination. There was a large increase in the incidence of cardiac and all-cause death in the overall risk period after SARS-CoV-2 infection among the unvaccinated. ConclusionThere is no evidence of an association between COVID-19 vaccination and an increased risk of death in young people. By contrast, SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with substantially higher risk of cardiac related death and all-cause death. What is already known on this topicSeveral studies have highlighted the association between COVID-19 vaccination and the risk of myocarditis, myopericarditis, and other cardiac problems, especially in young people, but associated risk of mortality is unclear. Since younger people have lower risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation and mortality, the mortality risk associated with vaccination is potentially more important to them in balancing the risk and benefit of vaccination. What this study addsAlthough there is a risk of myocarditis or myopericarditis with COVID-19, there is no evidence of increased risk of cardiac or all-cause mortality following COVID-19 vaccination in young people aged 12 to 29. Given the increased risk of mortality following SARS-CoV-2 infection in this group, the risk-benefit analysis favours COVID-19 vaccination for this age group.

Risk of myocarditis and pericarditis following COVID-19 vaccination in England and Wales

We describe our analyses of data from over 49.7 million people in England, representing near-complete coverage of the relevant population, to assess the risk of myocarditis and pericarditis following BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 COVID-19 vaccination. A self-controlled case series (SCCS) design has previously reported increased risk of myocarditis after first ChAdOx1, BNT162b2, and mRNA-1273 dose and after second doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in England. Here, we use a cohort design to estimate hazard ratios for hospitalised or fatal myocarditis/pericarditis after first and second doses of BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 vaccinations. SCCS and cohort designs are subject to different assumptions and biases and therefore provide the opportunity for triangulation of evidence. In contrast to the findings from the SCCS approach previously reported for England, we found evidence for lower incidence of hospitalised or fatal myocarditis/pericarditis after first ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2 vaccination, as well as little evidence to suggest higher incidence of these events after second dose of either vaccination.

Disparities in SARS-CoV-2 case rates by ethnicity, religion, measures of socio-economic position, English proficiency, and self-reported disability: cohort study of 39 million people in England during the Alpha and Delta waves

ObjectiveTo examine socio-demographic disparities in SARS-CoV-2 case rates during the second (Alpha) and third (Delta) waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. DesignRetrospective, population-based cohort study. SettingResident population of England. Participants39,006,194 people aged 10 years and over who were enumerated at the 2011 Census, registered with the National Health Service (NHS) and alive on 1 September 2020. Main outcome measuresTesting positive for SARS-CoV-2 during the second wave (1 September 2020 to 22 May 2021) or third wave (23 May to 10 December 2021) of the pandemic. We calculated age-standardised case rates by socio-demographic characteristics and used logistic regression models to estimate adjusted odds ratios (ORs). ResultsDuring the study period, 5,767,584 individuals tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. In the second wave, the fully-adjusted odds of having a positive test, relative to the White British group, were highest for the Bangladeshi (OR: 1.88, 95% CI 1.86 to 1.90) and Pakistani (1.81, 1.79 to 1.82) ethnic groups. Relative to the Christian group, Muslim and Sikh religious groups had fully-adjusted ORs of 1.58 (1.57 to 1.59) and 1.74 (1.72 to 1.76), respectively. Greater area deprivation, disadvantaged socio-economic position, living in a care home and low English language proficiency were also associated with higher odds of having a positive test. However, the disparities between groups varied over time. Being Christian, White British, non-disabled, and from a more advantaged socio-economic position were all associated with increased odds of testing positive during the third wave. ConclusionThere are large socio-demographic disparities on SARS-CoV-2 cases which have varied between different waves of the pandemic. Research is now urgently needed to understand why these disparities exist to inform policy interventions in future waves or pandemics. What is already known on this topicPeople with pre-existing health conditions or disability, ethnic minority groups, the elderly, some religious groups, people with low socio-economic status, and those living in deprived areas have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic in terms of risk of infection and adverse outcomes. What this study addsUsing linked data on 39 million people in England, we found that during the second wave, COVID-19 case rates were highest among the Bangladeshi and Pakistani ethnic groups, the Muslim religious group, individuals from deprived areas and of low socio-economic position; during the third wave, being Christian, White British, non-disabled, and from a more advantaged socio-economic position were all associated with increased odds of receiving a positive test Adjusting for geographical factors, socio-demographic characteristics, and pre-pandemic health status explained some, but not all, of the excess risk When stratifying the dataset by broad age groups, the odds of receiving a positive test remained higher among the Bangladeshi and Pakistani ethnic groups aged 65 years and over during the third wave, which may partly explain the continued elevated mortality rates in these groups

Risk of COVID-19 related deaths for SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (B.1.1.529) compared with Delta (B.1.617.2)

ObjectiveTo assess the risk of death involving COVID-19 following infection from Omicron (B.1.1.539/BA.1) relative to Delta (B.1.617.2). DesignRetrospective cohort study. SettingEngland, UK, 1 December 2021 to 25 January 2022. Participants1,035,163 people aged 18-100 years who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in the national surveillance programme, and had an infection identified as either Omicron- or Delta compatible. Main outcome measuresDeath involving COVID-19 as identified from death certification records. The exposure of interest was the SARS-CoV-2 variant identified from NHS Test and Trace PCR positive tests taken in the community (pillar 2) and analysed by Lighthouse laboratories. Cause-specific Cox proportional hazard regression models were adjusted for sex, age, vaccination status, previous infection, calendar time, ethnicity, Index of Multiple Deprivation rank, household deprivation, university degree, keyworker status, country of birth, main language, region, disability, and comorbidities. Additionally, we tested for interactions between variant and sex, age, vaccination status and comorbidities. ResultsThe risk of death involving COVID-19 was 67% lower for Omicron compared to Delta and the reduction in the risk of death involving COVID-19 for Omicron compared to Delta was more pronounced in males than in females and in people under 70 years old than in people aged 70 years or over. Regardless of age, reduction of the risk of death from Omicron relative to Delta more was more pronounced in people who had received a booster than in those having received only two doses. ConclusionsOur results support early work showing the relative reduction in severity of Omicron compared to Delta in terms of hospitalisation and extends this research to assess COVID-19 mortality. Our work also highlights the importance of the vaccination booster campaign, where the reduction in risk of death involving COVID-19 is most pronounced in individuals who had received a booster. What is already known on this topicThe Omicron variant, which refers to the whole lineage (BA.1, BA.2, BA.3) had already been shown to be more transmissible than the Delta variant, but there is emerging evidence suggests that the risk of hospitalisation and risk of death within 28 days after a SARS-COV-2 test is lower. However, with a highly transmissible infection and high levels of population testing, definition of death within 28 days is more likely to be susceptible to misclassification bias due to asymptomatic or co-incidental infection. There is no study so far comparing the risk of COVID-19 death as identified from death certification records, with the cause of death assessed by the physician who attended the patient in the last illness. What this study addsUsing data from a large cohort of COVID-19 infections that occurred in December 2021, we examined the difference in the risk COVID-19 death, as identified from death certification records, between the Delta and Omicron BA.1 variant. Our study shows that risk of death involving COVID-19 was reduced by 67% following infection with the Omicron BA.1 variant relative to the Delta variant after adjusting for a wide range of potential confounders, including vaccination status and comorbidities. Importantly, we found that the relative risk of COVID-19 mortality following Omicron versus Delta infection varied by age and sex, with lower relative risk in younger individuals and for males than females. The reduction in risk of death involving COVID-19 was also most pronounced in individuals who had received a booster.

Risk of Long Covid in people infected with SARS-CoV-2 after two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine: community-based, matched cohort study

BackgroundIt is unclear whether receiving two COVID-19 vaccinations before SARS-CoV-2 infection reduces the risk of developing Long Covid symptoms. We examined whether the likelihood of symptoms 12 weeks after infection differed by vaccination status. MethodsWe included COVID-19 Infection Survey participants aged 18-69 years who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between 26 April 2020 and 30 November 2021; we excluded participants who, before their first test-confirmed infection, had suspected COVID-19 or Long Covid symptoms, or were single-vaccinated. Participants who were double-vaccinated [≥]14 days before infection were 1:1 propensity-score matched, based on socio-demographic characteristics and time from infection to follow-up for Long Covid, to those unvaccinated at time of infection. We estimated adjusted odds ratios (aOR) of Long Covid symptoms [≥]12 weeks post-infection, comparing double-vaccinated with unvaccinated (reference group) participants. ResultsThe study sample comprised 3,090 double-vaccinated participants (mean age 49 years, 54% female, 92% white, median follow-up from infection 96 days) and matched control participants. Long Covid symptoms were reported by 294 double-vaccinated participants (prevalence 9.5%) compared with 452 unvaccinated participants (14.6%), corresponding to an aOR for Long Covid symptoms of 0.59 (95% CI: 0.50 to 0.69). There was no evidence of heterogeneity by adenovirus vector versus messenger ribonucleic acid vaccines (p=0.25). ConclusionsCOVID-19 vaccination is associated with reduced risk of Long Covid, emphasising the need for public health initiatives to increase population-level vaccine uptake. Longer follow-up is needed, as is the assessment of further vaccine doses and the Omicron variant.

Ethnic differences in COVID-19 mortality in the second and third waves of the pandemic in England during the vaccine roll-out: a retrospective, population-based cohort study

ObjectivesTo assess whether ethnic differences in COVID-19 mortality in England have continued into the third wave and to what extent differences in vaccination rates contributed to excess COVID-19 mortality after accounting for other risk factors. DesignCohort study of 28.8 million adults using data from the Office for National Statistics Public Health Data Asset. SettingPeople living in private households or communal establishments in England. Participants28,816,020 adults (47% male) aged 30-100 years in 2020 (mean age = 56), who were present at the 2011 Census and alive on 8 December 2020. Main outcome measuresDeath involving COVID-19 during the second (8 December 2020 to 12 June 2021) and third wave (13 June 2021 to 1 December 2021) of the pandemic. We calculated hazard ratios (HRs) separately for males to females to summarise the association between ethnic group and death involving COVID-19 in each wave, sequentially adjusting for age, residence type, geographical factors, sociodemographic characteristics, pre-pandemic health, and vaccination status. ResultsAge-adjusted HRs of death involving COVID-19 were higher for most ethnic minority groups than the White British group during both waves, particularly for groups with lowest vaccination rates (Bangladeshi, Pakistani, Black African and Black Caribbean). In both waves, HRs were attenuated after adjusting for geographical factors, sociodemographic characteristics, and pre-pandemic health. Further adjusting for vaccination status substantially reduced residual HRs for Black African, Black Caribbean, and Pakistani groups in the third wave. The only groups where fully-adjusted HRs remained elevated were the Bangladeshi group (men: 2.19, 95% CI 1.72 to 2.78; women: 2.12, 95% CI 1.58 to 2.86) and men from the Pakistani group (1.24, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.46). ConclusionPublic health strategies to increase vaccination uptake in ethnic minority groups could reduce disparities in COVID-19 mortality that cannot be accounted for by pre-existing risk factors. What is already known on this topicEthnic minority groups in England have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic during the first and second waves. COVID-19 vaccination uptake is also lower among many ethnic minority groups, particularly Bangladeshi, Black African, Black Caribbean, and Pakistani groups. There is a paucity of research into whether ethnic disparities in COVID-19 mortality have continued into the third wave and the extent to which differences in vaccination uptake contribute to differences in COVID-19 mortality. What this study addsUsing linked data on 28.8 million adults in England, we find that rates of COVID-19 mortality have remained higher than the White British group for most ethnic minority groups during the vaccine roll-out, notably for the Bangladeshi, Black African, Black Caribbean, and Pakistani groups. After adjustment for geographical factors, sociodemographic characteristics, pre-pandemic health status, and vaccination status, the only groups with elevated rates of COVID-19 mortality during the third wave were the Bangladeshi group and men from the Pakistani group, suggesting that increasing vaccination uptake in ethnic minority groups could reduce ethnic disparities in COVID-19 mortality.

Device-assessed sleep and physical activity in individuals recovering from a hospital admission for COVID-19: a prospective, multicentre study

ObjectivesTo describe physical behaviours following hospital admission for COVID-19 including associations with acute illness severity and ongoing symptoms. Methods1077 patients with COVID-19 discharged from hospital between March and November 2020 were recruited. Using a 14-day wear protocol, wrist-worn accelerometers were sent to participants after a five-month follow-up assessment. Acute illness severity was assessed by the WHO clinical progression scale, and the severity of ongoing symptoms was assessed using four previously reported data-driven clinical recovery clusters. Two existing control populations of office workers and type 2 diabetes were comparators. ResultsValid accelerometer data from 253 women and 462 men were included. Women engaged in a mean{+/-}SD of 14.9{+/-}14.7 minutes/day of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), with 725.6{+/-}104.9 minutes/day spent inactive and 7.22{+/-}1.08 hours/day asleep. The values for men were 21.0{+/-}22.3 and 755.5{+/-}102.8 minutes/day and 6.94{+/-}1.14 hours/day, respectively. Over 60% of women and men did not have any days containing a 30-minute bout of MVPA. Variability in sleep timing was approximately 2 hours in men and women. More severe acute illness was associated with lower total activity and MVPA in recovery. The very severe recovery cluster was associated with fewer days/week containing continuous bouts of MVPA, longer sleep duration, and higher variability in sleep timing. Patients post-hospitalisation with COVID-19 had lower levels of physical activity, greater sleep variability, and lower sleep efficiency than a similarly aged cohort of office workers or those with type 2 diabetes. ConclusionsPhysical activity and regulating sleep patterns are potential treatable traits for COVID-19 recovery programmes.

Mental health in a diverse sample of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: cross-sectional analysis of the UK-REACH study

ObjectivesTo investigate how ethnicity and other sociodemographic, work, and physical health factors are related to mental health in UK healthcare and ancillary workers (HCWs), and how structural inequities in these factors may contribute to differences in mental health by ethnicity. DesignCross-sectional analysis of baseline data from the UK-REACH national cohort study SettingHCWs across UK healthcare settings. Participants11,695 HCWs working between December 2020-March 2021. Main outcome measuresAnxiety or depression symptoms (4-item Patient Health Questionnaire, cut-off >3), and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) symptoms (3-item civilian PTSD Checklist, cut-off >5). ResultsAsian, Black, Mixed/multiple and Other ethnic groups had greater odds of PTSD than the White ethnic group. Differences in anxiety/depression were less pronounced. Younger, female HCWs, and those who were not doctors had increased odds of symptoms of both PTSD and anxiety/depression. Ethnic minority HCWs were more likely to experience the following work factors that were also associated with mental ill-health: workplace discrimination, feeling insecure in raising workplace concerns, seeing more patients with COVID-19, reporting lack of access to personal protective equipment (PPE), and working longer hours and night shifts. Ethnic minority HCWs were also more likely to live in a deprived area and have experienced bereavement due to COVID-19. After adjusting for sociodemographic and work factors, ethnic differences in PTSD were less pronounced and ethnic minority HCWs had lower odds of anxiety/depression compared to White HCWs. ConclusionsEthnic minority HCWs were more likely to experience PTSD and disproportionately experienced work and sociodemographic factors associated with PTSD, anxiety and depression. These findings could help inform future work to develop workplace strategies to safeguard HCWs mental health. This will only be possible with adequate investment in staff recruitment and retention, alongside concerted efforts to address inequities due to structural discrimination. Summary boxO_ST_ABSWhat is already known on this topicC_ST_ABSO_LIThe pandemic is placing healthcare workers under immense pressure, and there is currently a mental health crisis amongst NHS staff C_LIO_LIEthnic inequities in health outcomes are driven by structural discrimination, which occurs inside and outside the workplace C_LIO_LIInvestigating ethnic inequities in the mental health of healthcare workers requires large diverse studies, of which few exist C_LI What this study addsO_LIIn UK-REACH (N=11,695), ethnic minority staff had higher odds of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder symptoms; we report many other factors associated with mental-ill health, including those experienced disproportionately by ethnic minority staff, such as workplace discrimination, contact with more patients with COVID-19, and bereavement due to COVID-19 C_LIO_LIThese findings underline the moral and practical need to care for staff mental health and wellbeing, which includes tackling structural inequities in the workplace; improving staff mental health may also reduce workforce understaffing due to absence and attrition C_LI

Cohort Profile: The United Kingdom Research study into Ethnicity And COVID-19 outcomes in Healthcare workers (UK-REACH)

Key Features of the UK-REACH Cohort (Profile in a nutshell) O_LIThe UK-REACH Cohort was established to understand why ethnic minority healthcare workers (HCWs) are at risk of poorer outcomes from COVID-19 when compared to their white ethnic counterparts in the United Kingdom (UK). Through study design, it contains a uniquely high percentage of participants from ethnic minority backgrounds about whom a wide range of qualitative and quantitative data has been collected. C_LIO_LIA total of 17891 HCWs aged 16-89 years (mean age: 44) have been recruited from across the UK via all major healthcare regulators, individual National Health Service (NHS) hospital trusts and UK HCW membership bodies who advertised the study to their registrants/staff to encourage participation in the study. C_LIO_LIData available include linked healthcare records for 25 years from the date of consent and consent to obtain genomic sequencing data collected via saliva. Online questionnaires include information on demographics, COVID-19 exposures at work and home, redeployment in the workforce due to COVID-19, mental health measures, workforce attrition, and opinions on COVID-19 vaccines, with baseline (n=15 119), 6 (n=5632) and 12-month follow-up data captured. C_LIO_LIRequest data access and collaborations by following documentation found at https://www.uk-reach.org/main/data_sharing. C_LI

Healthcare workers' views on mandatory SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in the United Kingdom: findings from the UK-REACH prospective longitudinal cohort study

BackgroundSeveral countries now have mandatory SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 vaccination for healthcare workers (HCWs) or the general population. HCWs views on this are largely unknown. MethodsWe administered an online questionnaire to 17891 United Kingdom (UK) HCWs in Spring 2021 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 dont get vaccinated against COVID-19?" using content analysis. We collapsed categories into a binary variable: favours mandatory vaccination or not and used logistic regression to calculate its demographic predictors, and occupational, health and attitudinal predictors adjusted for demographics. FindingsOf 5633 questionnaire respondents, 3235 answered the freetext question; 18% (n=578) of those favoured mandatory vaccination but the most frequent suggestion was education (32%, n=1047). Older HCWs, HCWs vaccinated against influenza (OR 1.48; 95%CI 1.10 - 1.99, vs none) and with more positive vaccination attitudes generally (OR 1.10; 95%CI 1.06 - 1.14) were more likely to favour mandatory vaccination (OR 1.26; 95%CI 1.17 - 1.37, per decade increase), whereas female HCWs (OR= 0.80, 95%CI 0.65 - 0.99, vs male), Black HCWs (OR= 0.48, 95%CI 0.26 - 0.87, vs White), those hesitant about COVID-19 vaccination (OR= 0.56; 95%CI 0.43 - 0.71, vs not hesitant), in an Allied Health Profession (OR 0.67; 95%CI 0.51 - 0.88, vs Medical), or who trusted their organisation (OR 0.78; 95%CI 0.63 - 0.96) were less likely to. InterpretationOnly 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. FundingMRC-UK Research and Innovation grant (MR/V027549/1) and the Department of Health and Social Care via the National Institute for Health Research.

The adverse impact of COVID-19 pandemic on cardiovascular disease prevention and management in England, Scotland and Wales: A population-scale descriptive analysis of trends in medication data

ObjectivesTo estimate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cardiovascular disease (CVD) and CVD management using routinely collected medication data as a proxy. DesignDescriptive and interrupted time series analysis using anonymised individual-level population-scale data for 1.32 billion records of dispensed CVD medications across 15.8 million individuals in England, Scotland and Wales. SettingCommunity dispensed CVD medications with 100% coverage from England, Scotland and Wales, plus primary care prescribed CVD medications from England (including 98% English general practices). Participants15.8 million individuals aged 18+ years alive on 1st April 2018 dispensed at least one CVD medicine in a year from England, Scotland and Wales. Main outcome measuresMonthly counts, percent annual change (1st April 2018 to 31st July 2021) and annual rates (1st March 2018 to 28th February 2021) of medicines dispensed by CVD/ CVD risk factor; prevalent and incident use. ResultsYear-on-year change in dispensed CVD medicines by month were observed, with notable uplifts ahead of the first (11.8% higher in March 2020) but not subsequent national lockdowns. Using hypertension as one example of the indirect impact of the pandemic, we observed 491,203 fewer individuals initiated antihypertensive treatment across England, Scotland and Wales during the period March 2020 to end May 2021 than would have been expected compared to 2019. We estimated that this missed antihypertension treatment could result in 13,659 additional CVD events should individuals remain untreated, including 2,281 additional myocardial infarctions (MIs) and 3,474 additional strokes. Incident use of lipid-lowering medicines decreased by an average 14,793 per month in early 2021 compared with the equivalent months prior to the pandemic in 2019. In contrast, the use of incident medicines to treat type-2 diabetes (T2DM) increased by approximately 1,642 patients per month. ConclusionsManagement of key CVD risk factors as proxied by incident use of CVD medicines has not returned to pre-pandemic levels in the UK. Novel methods to identify and treat individuals who have missed treatment are urgently required to avoid large numbers of additional future CVD events, further adding indirect cost of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Risk of myocarditis following sequential COVID-19 vaccinations by age and sex

In an updated self-controlled case series analysis of 42,200,614 people aged 13 years or more, we evaluate the association between COVID-19 vaccination and myocarditis, stratified by age and sex, including 10,978,507 people receiving a third vaccine dose. Myocarditis risk was increased during 1-28 days following a third dose of BNT162b2 (IRR 2.02, 95%CI 1.40, 2.91). Associations were strongest in males younger than 40 years for all vaccine types with an additional 3 (95%CI 1, 5) and 12 (95% CI 1,17) events per million estimated in the 1-28 days following a first dose of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, respectively; 14 (95%CI 8, 17), 12 (95%CI 1, 7) and 101 (95%CI 95, 104) additional events following a second dose of ChAdOx1, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, respectively; and 13 (95%CI 7, 15) additional events following a third dose of BNT162b2, compared with 7 (95%CI 2, 11) additional events following COVID-19 infection. An association between COVID-19 infection and myocarditis was observed in all ages for both sexes but was substantially higher in those older than 40 years. These findings have important implications for public health and vaccination policy. FundingHealth Data Research UK.