Prophylactic Treatment of COVID-19 in Care Homes Trial (PROTECT-CH)

BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with significant mortality and morbidity in care homes. Novel or repurposed antiviral drugs may reduce infection and disease severity through reducing viral replication and inflammation. ObjectiveTo compare the safety and efficacy of antiviral agents (ciclesonide, niclosamide) for preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 severity in care home residents. DesignCluster-randomised open-label blinded endpoint platform clinical trial testing antiviral agents in a post-exposure prophylaxis paradigm. SettingCare homes across all four United Kingdom member countries. ParticipantsCare home residents 65 years of age or older. InterventionsCare homes were to be allocated at random by computer to 42 days of antiviral agent plus standard care versus standard of care and followed for 60 days after randomisation. Main outcome measuresThe primary four-level ordered categorical outcome with participants classified according to the most serious of all-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalisation, SARS-CoV-2 infection and no infection. Analysis using ordinal logistic regression was by intention to treat. Other outcomes included the components of the primary outcome and transmission. ResultsDelays in contracting between NIHR and the manufacturers of potential antiviral agents significantly delayed any potential start date. Having set up the trial (protocol, approvals, insurance, website, database, routine data algorithms, training materials), the trial was stopped in September 2021 prior to contracting of care homes and general practitioners in view of the success of vaccination in care homes with significantly reduced infections, hospitalisations and deaths. As a result, the sample size target (based on COVID-19 rates and deaths occurring in February-June 2020) became unfeasible. LimitationsCare home residents were not approached about the trial and so were not consented and did not receive treatment. Hence, the feasibility of screening, consent, treatment and data acquisition, and potential benefit of post exposure prophylaxis were never tested. Further, contracting between the University of Nottingham and the PIs, GPs and care homes was not completed, so the feasibility of contracting with all the different groups at the scale needed was not tested. ConclusionsThe role of post exposure prophylaxis of COVID-19 in care home residents was not tested because of changes in COVID-19 incidence, prevalence and virulence as a consequence of the vaccination programme that rendered the study unfeasible. Significant progress was made in describing and developing the infrastructure necessary for a large scale Clinical Trial of Investigational Medicinal Products in care homes in all four UK nations. Future workThe role of post-exposure prophylaxis of COVID-19 in care home residents remains to be defined. Significant logistical barriers to conducting research in care homes during a pandemic need to be removed before such studies are possible in the required short timescale.

Prospective examination of mental health in university students during the COVID-19 pandemic

BackgroundThe impact of changing social restrictions on the mental health of students during the COVID-19 pandemic warrants exploration. AimsTo prospectively examine changes to university students mental health during the pandemic. MethodsStudents completed repeated online surveys at three time points (October 2020 (baseline), February 2021, March 2021) to explore relationships between demographic and psychological factors (loneliness and positive mood) and mental health outcomes (depression, anxiety, and stress). ResultsA total of 893 students participated. Depression and anxiety levels were higher at all timepoints than pre-pandemic normative data (p<.001). Scores on all mental health measures were highest in February, with depression and anxiety remaining significantly higher in March than baseline. Female students and those with previous mental health disorders were at greatest risk of poor mental health outcomes. Lower positive mood and greater loneliness at baseline were associated with greater depression and anxiety at follow-ups. Baseline positive mood predicted improvement of depression and anxiety at follow-ups. ConclusionDepression and anxiety were significantly higher than pre-pandemic norms, with female students and those with previous mental health difficulties being at greatest risk. Given these elevated rates, universities should ensure adequate support is available to meet potentially increased demand for services.

Fatal COVID-19 outcomes are associated with an antibody response targeting epitopes shared with endemic coronaviruses

It is unclear whether prior endemic coronavirus infections affect COVID-19 severity. Here, we show that in cases of fatal COVID-19, antibody responses to the SARS-COV-2 spike are directed against epitopes shared with endemic beta-coronaviruses in the S2 subunit of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. This immune response is associated with the compromised production of a de novo SARS-CoV-2 spike response among individuals with fatal COVID-19 outcomes.

The impact of real-time whole genome sequencing in controlling healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

BackgroundNosocomial infections have posed a significant problem during the COVID-19 pandemic, affecting bed capacity and patient flow in hospitals. Effective infection control measures and identifying areas of highest risk is required to reduce the risk of spread to patients who are admitted with other illnesses. This is the first pandemic where whole genome sequencing (WGS) has been readily available. We demonstrate how WGS can be deployed to help identify and control outbreaks. Aims & MethodsSwabs performed on patients to detect SARS-CoV-2 underwent RT-PCR on one of multiple different platforms available at Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust. Positive samples underwent WGS on the GridION platform using the ARTIC amplicon sequencing protocol at the University of Nottingham. ResultsPhylogenetic analysis from WGS and epidemiological data was used to identify an initial transmission that occurred in the admissions ward. It also showed high prevalence of asymptomatic staff infection with genetically identical viral sequences which may have contributed to the propagation of the outbreak. Actions were taken to help reduce the risk of nosocomial transmission by the introduction of rapid point of care testing in the admissions ward and introduction of portable HEPA14 filters. WGS was also used in two instances to exclude an outbreak by discerning that the phylotypes were not identical, saving time and resources. ConclusionsIn conjunction with accurate epidemiological data, timely WGS can identify high risk areas of nosocomial transmission, which would benefit from implementation of appropriate control measures. Conversely, WGS can disprove nosocomial transmission, validating existing control measures and maintaining clinical service, even where epidemiological data is suggestive of an outbreak.

Understanding and Addressing Vaccine Hesitancy in the Context of COVID-19: Development of a Digital intervention

BackgroundSevere Acute Respiratory Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was identified in late 2019, spreading to over 200 countries and resulting in almost two million deaths worldwide. The emergence of safe and effective vaccines provides a route out of the pandemic, with vaccination uptake of 75-90% needed to achieve population protection. Vaccine hesitancy is problematic for vaccine rollout; global reports suggest only 73% of the population may agree to being vaccinated. As a result, there is an urgent need to develop equitable and accessible interventions to address vaccine hesitancy at the population level. MethodWe report the development of a scalable digital intervention seeking to address COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and enhance uptake of COVID-19 vaccines. Guided by motivational interviewing (MI) principles, the intervention includes a series of therapeutic dialogues addressing 10 key concerns of vaccine hesitant individuals. Development of the intervention occurred linearly across four stages. During stage 1, we identified common reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy through analysis of existing survey data, a rapid systematic literature review, and public engagement workshops. Stage 2 comprised qualitative interviews with medical, immunological, and public health experts. Rapid content and thematic analysis of the data provided evidence-based responses to common vaccine concerns. Stage 3 involved the development of therapeutic dialogues through workshops with psychological and digital behaviour change experts. Dialogues were developed to address concerns using MI principles, including embracing resistance and supporting self-efficacy. Finally, stage 4 involved digitisation of the dialogues and pilot testing with members of the public. DiscussionThe digital intervention provides an evidence-based approach to addressing vaccine hesitancy through MI principles. The dialogues are user-selected, allowing exploration of relevant issues associated with hesitancy in a non-judgmental context. The text-based content and digital format allow for rapid modification to changing information and scalability for wider dissemination.

SARS-CoV-2 transmission from the healthcare setting into the home: a prospective longitudinal cohort study

ObjectiveTo assess the incidence of symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity in healthcare workers and subsequent transmission to their close contacts within their household. To assess changes in immunoglobulin (Ig) and neutralising antibodies (nAbs) in exposed participants. SettingTwo acute National Health Service (NHS) hospitals within the East Midlands region of England. BackgroundThe UK has been one of the most severely affected countries during the COVID-19 pandemic. Transmission from healthcare workers to the wider community is a potential major vector for spread of SARS-CoV-2 which is not well described in the current literature. MethodsHealthcare workers (HCW) were recruited from two Hospitals within the East Midlands of England and underwent serial blood sampling for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (both nucleocapsid and spike protein for IgG, IgM and IgA) between 20 April and 30 July 2020, with the presence of neutralising antibodies (nAbs) assessed for positive participants. Cohabitees of the volunteers were invited to attend testing in July -August 2020 and underwent identical serological testing as the HCWs. Results633 healthcare professionals were recruited. 178 household contacts of 137 professionals volunteered for the study. 18% of healthcare professionals (115 out of 633) tested as seropositive during the study period, compared to an estimated seroprevalence of 7% within the general population. The rate of symptomatic COVID-19 was 27.5% compared to an asymptomatic rate of 15.1%. Rates of positivity declined across the study period for all immunoglobulins (overall positivity from 16.7% to 6.9%). 7.2% of the cohabitees tested as seropositive. 58 cohabitees lived with a serologically positive HCW; this group had a seropositive rate of 15.5%, compared to 2.5% of cohabitees without a seropositive HCW, a six-fold increase in risk (Odds ratio 7.16 95% CI 1.86 to 27.59), p = 0.0025). Given the observed decay rates and data from Public Health England, we estimate that the proportion of seropositive cohabitees living with a seropositive HCW at the height of the first wave could have been as high as 44%. 110 out of 115 (95.7%) HCWs and 12 out of 13 (92.3%) cohabitees who tested positive developed detectable nAbs. 56.5% (65 out of 115) of SARS-CoV-2 positive HCWs developed a neutralising titre with an IC50[≥]1/300; no cohabitee achieved this level.. ConclusionsTransmission of SARS-CoV-2 between healthcare professionals and their home contacts appears to be a significant factor of viral transmission, but, even accounting for the decline in seropositivity over time, less than 44% of adult cohabitees of seropositive healthcare workers became seropositive. Routine screening and priority vaccination of both healthcare professionals and their close contacts should be implemented to reduce viral transmission from hospitals to the community. SUMMARY BOXESO_ST_ABSSection 1: What is already known on this topicC_ST_ABSO_LIHealthcare workers (HCWs) have increased rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with the general population due, at least in part, to high levels of occupational exposure. C_LIO_LIIgA, IgM and IgG are detectable for most patients after 11 days post SARS-CoV-2 infection but all decline in the weeks following SAR-CoV-2 exposure. C_LIO_LIRates of transmission to healthcare workers, and therefore subsequent transmission to their close contacts, may be reduced with effective PPE. C_LI Section 2: What this study addsO_LIThe amount of neutralising antibodies formed may be dependent on IgG response as it is much lower among seropositive cohabitees than seropositive healthcare workers. C_LIO_LINHS Healthcare workers had a far greater seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to the general population. C_LIO_LICohabitees of positive healthcare workers have a 6-fold increased risk of developing serological evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to the general population. C_LIO_LIDespite this increased risk, transmission at home is less than 50% even from highly exposed healthcare workers, but remains an important potential vector of transmission from hospitals to the wider community. C_LI Research into contextO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSWe searched PubMed for articles published between January 1 2020 and January 27, 2021 with the terms "Covid-19", "healthcare workers", and "transmission" "home {NOT nursing} or household". We did not restrict our search by language or type of publication. We identified 38 studies of which only one assessed the prevalence among HCW households using Canadian national databases. Our PubMed search yielded only one serological study within the German Healthcare system, which suggested very low transmission from healthcare workers to their close cohabitees. Added value of this studyTo our knowledge, this is the largest longitudinal serological cohort study assessing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection from the UK healthcare environment to the home (n = 633 healthcare workers, 178 cohabitees). Our findings showed that serological evidence within the HCW was high with 18% of healthcare professionals (115 out of 633) tested as seropositive during the study period, compared to an estimated seroprevalence of 7% within the general population. A cohabitee of a seropositive HCW had a six-fold increase of being seropositive themselves compared to a baseline rate of 2.5%. Despite this increased risk, transmission at home is less than 50% even from highly exposed healthcare workers, but remains an important potential vector of transmission from hospitals to the wider community. Rates of positivity declined across the study period for all immunoglobulins (overall positivity from 16.7% to 6.9%). Given the observed decay rates and data from Public Health England, we estimate that the proportion of seropositive cohabitees living with a seropositive HCW at the height of the first wave could have been as high as 44%. Implications of all available evidenceUnderstanding the transmission during the first wave from the healthcare setting into the home and the extent of such transmissions is essential to understand containment strategies of novel SARS-CoV-2 variants or to understand viral transmission of future respiratory viruses. NHS workers appeared to be at an increased risk of contracting of SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to the HCWs of other nations; we hypothesise that this may be related to a scarcity of appropriate personal protective equipment during the initial wave of SARS-CoV-2. Healthcare workers (HCWs) have increased rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with the general population. An infected HCW, whether symptomatic or not, appears to be a significant bridge for transmission of SARS-CoV-2 to their close home contacts.

Experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic: cross-sectional analysis of risk perceptions and mental health in a student cohort

ObjectiveThis study examined the COVID-19 risk perceptions and mental health of university students on returning to campus in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. MethodsAn online survey was completed during the first four weeks of the academic year (October 2020) by 897 university students. The survey included demographics and measures of experiences of COVID-19 testing, self-isolation, shielding, perceived risk, mental health and indices capturing related psychological responses to the pandemic. ResultsWe observed higher levels of depression and anxiety, but not stress, in students compared with pre- pandemic normative data, but lower than levels reported earlier in the pandemic in other similar cohorts. Depression, anxiety and stress were independently associated with greater loneliness and reduced positive mood. Greater worry about COVID-19 was also independently associated with anxiety and stress. Female students and those with pre-existing mental health disorders were at greatest risk of poor mental health outcomes. ConclusionAlthough students perceived themselves at only moderate risk of COVID-19, the prevalence of depression and anxiety among university students should remain a concern. Universities should provide adequate support for students mental health during term-time. Interventions to reduced loneliness and worry, and improve mood, may benefit students overall mental well-being.