Interventions for preventing or controlling health care-associated infection among health care workers or patients within primary care facilities: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: This review aimed to synthesize the evidence on infection prevention and control interventions for the prevention of health care-associated infection among health care workers or patients within primary care facilities. METHODS: PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were searched for quantitative studies published between 2011 and 2022. Study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment using Cochrane and Joanna Briggs tools, were conducted by independent review with additional sensitivity checking performed on study selection. RESULTS: Four studies were included. A randomized trial and a cross-sectional survey, respectively, found no statistical difference in laboratory-confirmed influenza in health care workers wearing N95 versus medical masks (P = .18) and a significant inverse association between the implementation of tuberculosis control measures and tuberculosis incidence (P = .02). For the prevention of surgical site infections following minor surgery, randomized trials found nonsterile gloves (8.7%; 95% confidence interval, 4.9%-12.6%) to be noninferior to sterile gloves (9.3%; 95% confidence interval, 7.4%-11.1%) and no significant difference between prophylactic antibiotics compared to placebo (P = .064). All studies had a high risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence for infection prevention and control interventions for the prevention of health care-associated infection in primary care is very limited and insufficient to make practice recommendations. Nevertheless, the findings highlight the need for future research.

Pre-existing neurological conditions and COVID-19 co-infection: Data from systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and scoping reviews.

BACKGROUND: Pre-existing neurological diseases have been identified as risk factors for severe COVID-19 infection and death. There is a lack of comprehensive literature review assessing the relationship between pre-existing neurological conditions and COVID-19 outcomes. Identification of high risk groups is critical for optimal treatment and care. METHODS: A literature review was conducted for systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and scoping reviews published between January 1, 2020 and January 1, 2023. Literature assessing individuals with pre-existing neurological diseases and COVID-19 infection was included. Information regarding infection severity was extracted, and potential limitations were identified. RESULTS: Thirty-nine articles met inclusion criteria, with data assessing >3 million patients from 51 countries. 26/51 (50.9%) of countries analyzed were classified as high income, while the remaining represented middle-low income countries (25/51; 49.0%). A majority of evidence focused on the impact of cerebrovascular disease (17/39; 43.5%) and dementia (5/39; 12.8%) on COVID-19 severity and mortality. 92.3% of the articles (36/39) suggested a significant association between neurological conditions and increased risk of severe COVID-19 and mortality. Cerebrovascular disease, dementia, Parkinson's disease, and epilepsy were associated with increased COVID severity and mortality. CONCLUSION: Pre-existing neurological diseases including cerebrovascular disease, Alzheimer's disease and other dementias, epilepsy, and Parkinson's disease are significant risk factors for severity of COVID-19 infection and mortality in the acute infectious period. Given that 61.5% (24/39) of the current evidence only includes data from 2020, further updated literature is crucial to identify the relationship between chronic neurological conditions and clinical characteristics of COVID-19 variants.

Severity and outcomes of Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 compared to Delta variant and severity of Omicron sublineages: a systematic review and metanalysis.

OBJECTIVES: To compare severity and clinical outcomes from Omicron as compared with the Delta variant and to compare outcomes between Omicron sublineages. METHODS: We searched the WHO COVID-19 Research database for studies that compared clinical outcomes for patients with Omicron variant and the Delta variant, and separately Omicron sublineages BA.1 and BA.2. A random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool estimates of relative risk (RR) between variants and sublineages. Heterogeneity between studies was assessed using the I2 index. Risk of bias was assessed using the tool developed by the Clinical Advances through Research and Information Translation team. RESULTS: Our search identified 1494 studies and 42 met the inclusion criteria. Eleven studies were published as preprints. Of the 42 studies, 29 adjusted for vaccination status; 12 had no adjustment; and for 1, the adjustment was unclear. Three of the included studies compared the sublineages of Omicron BA.1 versus BA.2. As compared with Delta, individuals infected with Omicron had 61% lower risk of death (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.46) and 56% lower risk of hospitalisation (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.56). Omicron was similarly associated with lower risk of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, oxygen therapy, and non-invasive and invasive ventilation. The pooled risk ratio for the outcome of hospitalisation when comparing sublineages BA.1 versus BA.2 was 0.55 (95% 0.23 to 1.30). DISCUSSION: Omicron variant was associated with lower risk of hospitalisation, ICU admission, oxygen therapy, ventilation and death as compared with Delta. There was no difference in the risk of hospitalisation between Omicron sublineages BA.1 and BA.2. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022310880.

Safety and effectiveness of vaccines against COVID-19 in children aged 5-11 years: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: To date, more than 761 million confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections have been recorded globally, and more than half of all children are estimated to be seropositive. Despite high SARS-CoV-2 infection incidences, the rate of severe COVID-19 in children is low. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy or effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines approved in the EU for children aged 5-11 years. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we included studies of any design identified through searching the COVID-19 L·OVE (living overview of evidence) platform up to Jan 23, 2023. We included studies with participants aged 5-11 years, with any COVID-19 vaccine approved by the European Medicines Agency-ie, mRNA vaccines BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech), BNT162b2 Bivalent (against original strain and omicron [BA.4 or BA.5]), mRNA-1273 (Moderna), or mRNA-1273.214 (against original strain and omicron BA.1). Efficacy and effectiveness outcomes were SARS-CoV-2 infection (PCR-confirmed or antigen-test confirmed), symptomatic COVID-19, hospital admission due to COVID-19, COVID-19-related mortality, multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), and long-term effects of COVID-19 (long COVID or post-COVID-19 condition as defined by study investigators or per WHO definition). Safety outcomes of interest were serious adverse events, adverse events of special interest (eg, myocarditis), solicited local and systemic events, and unsolicited adverse events. We assessed risk of bias and rated the certainty of evidence (CoE) using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. This study was prospectively registered with PROSPERO, CRD42022306822. FINDINGS: Of 5272 screened records, we included 51 (1·0%) studies (n=17 [33%] in quantitative synthesis). Vaccine effectiveness after two doses against omicron infections was 41·6% (95% CI 28·1-52·6; eight non-randomised studies of interventions [NRSIs]; CoE low), 36·2% (21·5-48·2; six NRSIs; CoE low) against symptomatic COVID-19, 75·3% (68·0-81·0; six NRSIs; CoE moderate) against COVID-19-related hospitalisations, and 78% (48-90, one NRSI; CoE very low) against MIS-C. Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-related mortality was not estimable. Crude event rates for deaths in unvaccinated children were less than one case per 100 000 children, and no events were reported for vaccinated children (four NRSIs; CoE low). No study on vaccine effectiveness against long-term effects was identified. Vaccine effectiveness after three doses was 55% (50-60; one NRSI; CoE moderate) against omicron infections, and 61% (55-67; one NRSI; CoE moderate) against symptomatic COVID-19. No study reported vaccine efficacy or effectiveness against hospitalisation following a third dose. Safety data suggested no increased risk of serious adverse events (risk ratio [RR] 0·83 [95% CI 0·21-3·33]; two randomised controlled trials; CoE low), with approximately 0·23-1·2 events per 100 000 administered vaccines reported in real-life observations. Evidence on the risk of myocarditis was uncertain (RR 4·6 [0·1-156·1]; one NRSI; CoE low), with 0·13-1·04 observed events per 100 000 administered vaccines. The risk of solicited local reactions was 2·07 (1·80-2·39; two RCTs; CoE moderate) after one dose and 2·06 (1·70-2·49; two RCTs; CoE moderate) after two doses. The risk of solicited systemic reactions was 1·09 (1·04-1·16; two RCTs; CoE moderate) after one dose and 1·49 (1·34-1·65; two RCTs; CoE moderate) after two doses. The risk of unsolicited adverse events after two doses (RR 1·21 [1·07-1·38]; CoE moderate) was higher among mRNA-vaccinated compared with unvaccinated children. INTERPRETATION: In children aged 5-11 years, mRNA vaccines are moderately effective against infections with the omicron variant, but probably protect well against COVID-19 hospitalisations. Vaccines were reactogenic but probably safe. Findings of this systematic review can serve as a basis for public health policy and individual decision making on COVID-19 vaccination in children aged 5-11 years. FUNDING: German Federal Joint Committee.

The effect of a multimodal dementia prevention program involving community-dwelling elderly.

BACKGROUND: With the rapid increase in the average age of society, the number of people with dementia has increased in Japan. Thus, the need to prevent dementia is greater, and prevention programs have been implemented throughout Japan. This study aims to evaluate both the short-term and the long-term effects of a dementia prevention program on physical and cognitive function in community-dwelling elderly. METHODS: Cognitive and physical assessments were carried out at baseline for a sample including 57 elderly participants. The participants underwent an intensive training program lasting for 2 h per week for 10 days. After the last period of training, the assessment performed was reapplied. The outcome measures used to establish effectiveness were a Mini-Mental State Examination, Five Cognitive Tests, a Cognitive Function Instrument, a Timed Up & Go Test, a grip strength evaluation, a Geriatric Depression Scale, an EQ-5D and a Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly. Participants were then divided randomly into two groups: a booster group and a non-booster group. The booster group received booster training every 3 months after the intensive training period, whereas the non-booster group did not. Both groups were monitored every 6 months for approximately two and a half years after baseline assessment. RESULTS: The Mini-Mental State Examination, the subtests of the Five Cognitive Tests (attention, memory, language and reasoning) and the Timed Up & Go Test revealed a significant improvement after intensive training. For most of the outcome measures, the booster training showed no additional significant improvements. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, intensive training had a short-term positive effect. Although the effect of the booster training was not clear, the functions of the elderly participants were found to be maintained during a follow-up assessment. The study findings recommend conducting intensive training for the community-dwelling elderly without follow-up training.

Kobe project for the exploration of newer strategies to reduce the social burden of dementia: a study protocol of cohort and intervention studies.

INTRODUCTION: This research project addresses the lack of screening tools for the early detection of high-risk individuals for long-term care, through four individual studies.Study 1 investigates the predictive ability of the 'Kihon Check List', study 2 the 'Cognitive Function instrument' and EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) and study 3 the 'Cognitive Function instrument' and EQ-5D as well as the 'Frail Kenshin' health check-up, for incident long-term care certification over a follow-up period of up to 4 years. This is the first large prospective study to evaluate the predictive ability of these tools for the outcome measure long-term care certification. The last subsection of this project study four aims to explore a mixed methods intervention for delaying the need for long-term care. This section is purely exploratory, looking for clues for further studies. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Baseline data have been collected through local government programs, as well as through postal self-reported questionnaires. The primary outcome variable for all studies is long-term care certification data. Statistical analysis will be carried out using Kaplan-Meier, Multiple Cox regression as well as logistic regression. CONCLUSION: This project hopes to identify tools effective in predicting long-term care need. This will enable identification of citizens that are of higher risk for long-term care in the near future. This subset of high-risk individuals can in the future be addressed for extra support/intervention. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: All studies have been approved by respective institutional ethical committees and the WHO ethical committee ERC.0002899. In addition, all studies conform to the provisions of the Declaration of Helsinki and are conducted in accordance with Japan's 'Ethical Guidelines for Medical and Health Research Involving Human Subjects'. All findings will be disseminated at conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000023283.

Assessing long-term care risk in older individuals with possible cognitive decline: A large population-based study using the Kihon Checklist.

AIM: The present population-based study investigated the predictive ability of the Kihon Checklist (a self-reported frailty questionnaire) and the cognitive domain therein for incident long-term care need certification. This is the first large population-based study to investigate an association between the Kihon Checklist and the outcome measure, long-term care need certification. METHODS: The study population consisted of community-dwelling citizens aged >65 years who responded to the Kihon Checklist in Kobe City. The Kihon Checklist is a simple 26-item questionnaire to identify frail citizens, including three items (Q18-20) on subjective cognitive function (the cognitive domain). RESULTS: A total of 182 099 citizens were included for statistical analysis. The overall incidence of long-term care need certification was 1.6%, 3.5% and 5.4% at 1, 2 and 3 years. Associations were found between the Kihon Checklist questions and long-term care need certification. Furthermore, each unfavorable answer on the cognitive domain was associated with the risk for long-term care need (HR 1.493 for Q18, 1.285 for Q19, 1.321 for Q20, all P < 0.0001), independent of age, sex and other items on the Kihon Checklist. Also, after 3 years, as the number of unfavorable answers to the cognitive domain increased from 0 to 1, 2 and 3, the incidence of long-term care need certification progressively increased from 3.5% to 6.4%, 12.6% and 29.6%. CONCLUSIONS: The Kihon Checklist, especially the cognitive domain therein, appears to be predictive of long-term care need in community-dwelling citizens, suggesting the potential utility of the questionnaire for early detection of high-risk individuals. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2019; 19: 598-603.