Screening for Hepatitis C Virus Reinfection Using a Behaviour-Based Risk Score among Men Who Have Sex with Men with HIV:Results from a Case–Control Diagnostic Validation Study

We assessed the predictive capacity of the HCV-MOSAIC risk score, originally developed for primary early HCV infection, as a screening tool for HCV reinfection in 103 men who have sex with men (MSM) with HIV using data from the MOSAIC cohort, including MSM with HIV/HCV-coinfection who became reinfected (cases, n = 27) or not (controls, n = 76) during follow-up. The overall predictive capacity of the score was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve. The effects of covariates on the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were assessed using parametric ROC regression. The score cut-off validated for primary early infection (≥2.0) was used, from which the sensitivity and specificity were calculated. The AUROC was 0.74 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.63–0.84). Group sex significantly increased the predictive capacity. Using the validated cut-off, sensitivity was 70.4% (95%CI = 49.8–86.2%) and specificity was 59.2% (95%CI: 47.3–70.4%). External validation from a cohort of 25 cases and 111 controls, all MSM with HIV, resulted in a sensitivity of 44.0% (95%CI = 24.4–65.1) and specificity of 71.2% (95%CI = 61.8–79.4). The HCV-MOSAIC risk score may be useful for identifying individuals at risk of HCV reinfection. In sexual health or HIV-care settings, this score could help guide HCV-RNA testing in MSM with a prior HCV infection.</p

Incidence, nature and causes of avoidable significant harm in primary care in England:retrospective case note review

Objective To estimate the incidence of avoidable significant harm in primary care in England; describe and classify the associated patient safety incidents and generate suggestions to mitigate risks of ameliorable factors contributing to the incidents. Design Retrospective case note review. Patients with significant health problems were identified and clinical judgements were made on avoidability and severity of harm. Factors contributing to avoidable harm were identified and recorded. Setting Primary care. Participants Thirteen general practitioners (GPs) undertook a retrospective case note review of a sample of 14 407 primary care patients registered with 12 randomly selected general practices from three regions in England (total list size: 92 255 patients). Main outcome measures The incidence of significant harm considered at least ‘probably avoidable’ and the nature of the safety incidents. Results The rate of significant harm considered at least probably avoidable was 35.6 (95% CI 23.3 to 48.0) per 100 000 patient-years (57.9, 95% CI 42.2 to 73.7, per 100 000 based on a sensitivity analysis). Overall, 74 cases of avoidable harm were detected, involving 72 patients. Three types of incident accounted for more than 90% of the problems: problems with diagnosis accounted for 45/74 (60.8%) primary incidents, followed by medication-related problems (n=19, 25.7%) and delayed referrals (n=8, 10.8%). In 59 (79.7%) cases, the significant harm could have been identified sooner (n=48) or prevented (n=11) if the GP had taken actions aligned with evidence-based guidelines. Conclusion There is likely to be a substantial burden of avoidable significant harm attributable to primary care in England with diagnostic error accounting for most harms. Based on the contributory factors we found, improvements could be made through more effective implementation of existing information technology, enhanced team coordination and communication, and greater personal and informational continuity of care

Sexual and drug use risk behaviour trajectories among people treated for recent HCV infection: the REACT study.

INTRODUCTION Exploration of sexual and drug use behaviours following treatment for recent hepatitis C virus (HCV) is limited. This analysis modelled behavioural trajectories following treatment for recent HCV and assessed reinfection. METHODS Participants treated for recent HCV in an international trial (enrolled 2017-2019) were followed at 3-monthly intervals for up to 2 years to assess longitudinal behaviours. Population-averaged changes were assessed using generalized estimating equations. Distinct behavioural trajectories were identified using group-based trajectory modelling. HCV reinfection incidence was calculated using person-years (PY) of observation. RESULTS During the follow-up of 212 participants (84% gay and bisexual men [GBM]; 69% HIV; 26% current injecting drug use [IDU]), behavioural trajectories for IDU and stimulant use (past month) did not change. However, population-averaged decreases in the likelihood of daily IDU (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.83; 95% CI 0.72, 0.95) and opioid use (AOR 0.84; 95% CI 0.75, 0.93) were observed. Among GBM, behavioural trajectories for chemsex did not change. Population-averaged decreases in condomless anal intercourse with casual male partners (CAI-CMP) (AOR 0.95; 95% CI 0.90, 0.99) and group-sex (AOR 0.86; 95% CI 0.80, 0.93) were observed, but masked distinct trajectories. While a proportion had a decreased probability of CAI-CMP (23%) and group-sex (59%) post-treatment, a substantial proportion retained a high probability of these behaviours. High HCV reinfection incidence was observed for the sustained high probability IDU (33.0/100 PY; 95% CI 17.7, 61.3) and chemsex (23.3/100 PY; 95% CI 14.5, 37.5) trajectories. CONCLUSIONS Limited sexual and drug use behavioural change was observed following treatment for recent HCV, supporting access to surveillance and (re)treatment

Understanding the epidemiology of avoidable significant harm in primary care:Protocol for a retrospective cross-sectional study

Introduction: Most patient safety research has focused on specialist-care settings where there is an appreciation of the frequency and causes of medical errors, and the resulting burden of adverse events. There have, however, been few large-scale robust studies that have investigated the extent and severity of avoidable harm in primary care. To address this, we will conduct a 12-month retrospective cross-sectional study involving case note review of primary care patients. Methods and Analysis: We will conduct electronic searches of general practice (GP) clinical computer systems to identify patients with avoidable significant harm. Up to sixteen general practices from three areas of England (East Midlands, London and the North West) will be recruited based on practice size, to obtain a sample of around 100,000 patients. Our investigations will include an ‘enhanced sample’ of patients with the highest risk of avoidable significant harm. We will estimate the incidence of avoidable significant harm and express this as ‘per 100,000 patients per year’. Univariate and multivariate analysis will be conducted to identify the factors associated with avoidable significant harm. Ethics/Dissemination: The decision regarding participation by general practices in the study is entirely voluntary; the consent to participate may be withdrawn at any time. We will not seek individual patient consent for the retrospective case note review, but if patients respond to publicity about the project and say they do not wish their records to be included we will follow these instructions. We will produce a report for the Department of Health’s Policy Research Programme and several high-quality peer-reviewed publications in scientific journals. The study has been granted a favourable opinion by the East Midlands Nottingham 2 Research Ethics Committee (reference 15/EM/0411) and Confidentiality Advisory Group approval for access to medical records without consent under section 251 of the NHS Act 2006 (reference 15/CAG/0182)

A multicenter mortality prediction model for patients receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation*

Significant deficiencies exist in the communication of prognosis for patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation after acute illness, in part because of clinician uncertainty about long-term outcomes. We sought to refine a mortality prediction model for patients requiring prolonged ventilation using a multicentered study design

Long Covid in adults discharged from UK hospitals after Covid-19 : a prospective, multicentre cohort study using the ISARIC WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol

Funding: This work is supported by grants from: the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) [award CO-CIN-01], the Medical Research Council [grant MC_PC_19059], the Imperial Biomedical Research Centre (NIHR Imperial BRC, grant P45058), the Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Respiratory Infections at Imperial College London and NIHR HPRU in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections at University of Liverpool, both in partnership with Public Health England, [NIHR award 200907], Wellcome Trust and Department for International Development [215091/Z/18/Z], and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1209135], and Liverpool Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre (Grant Reference: C18616/A25153), NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Imperial College London [IS-BRC-1215-20013], EU Platform for European Preparedness Against (Re-) emerging Epidemics 1 [FP7 project 602525] and NIHR Clinical Research Network for providing infrastructure support for this research. LT is a Wellcome Trust clinical career development fellow, supported by grant number 205228/Z/16/Z. This research was funded in part, by the Wellcome Trust. PJMO is supported by a NIHR Senior Investigator Award [award 201385].Background : This study sought to establish the long-term effects of Covid-19 following hospitalisation. Methods : 327 hospitalised participants, with SARS-CoV-2 infection were recruited into a prospective multicentre cohort study at least 3 months post-discharge. The primary outcome was self-reported recovery at least ninety days after initial Covid-19 symptom onset. Secondary outcomes included new symptoms, disability (Washington group short scale), breathlessness (MRC Dyspnoea scale) and quality of life (EQ5D-5L). Findings : 55% of participants reported not feeling fully recovered. 93% reported persistent symptoms, with fatigue the most common (83%), followed by breathlessness (54%). 47% reported an increase in MRC dyspnoea scale of at least one grade. New or worse disability was reported by 24% of participants. The EQ5D-5L summary index was significantly worse following acute illness (median difference 0.1 points on a scale of 0 to 1, IQR: -0.2 to 0.0). Females under the age of 50 years were five times less likely to report feeling recovered (adjusted OR 5.09, 95% CI 1.64 to 15.74), were more likely to have greater disability (adjusted OR 4.22, 95% CI 1.12 to 15.94), twice as likely to report worse fatigue (adjusted OR 2.06, 95% CI 0.81 to 3.31) and seven times more likely to become more breathless (adjusted OR 7.15, 95% CI 2.24 to 22.83) than men of the same age. Interpretation : Survivors of Covid-19 experienced long-term symptoms, new disability, increased breathlessness, and reduced quality of life. These findings were present in young, previously healthy working age adults, and were most common in younger females.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

What is the recovery rate and risk of long-term consequences following a diagnosis of COVID-19?:A harmonised, global longitudinal observational study protocol

Introduction: Very little is known about possible clinical sequelae that may persist after resolution of acute COVID-19. A recent longitudinal cohort from Italy including 143 patients followed up after hospitalisation with COVID-19 reported that 87% had at least one ongoing symptom at 60-day follow-up. Early indications suggest that patients with COVID-19 may need even more psychological support than typical intensive care unit patients. The assessment of risk factors for longer term consequences requires a longitudinal study linked to data on pre-existing conditions and care received during the acute phase of illness. The primary aim of this study is to characterise physical and psychosocial sequelae in patients post-COVID-19 hospital discharge. Methods and analysis: This is an international open-access prospective, observational multisite study. This protocol is linked with the International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC) and the WHO’s Clinical Characterisation Protocol, which includes patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 during hospitalisation. This protocol will follow-up a subset of patients with confirmed COVID-19 using standardised surveys to measure longer term physical and psychosocial sequelae. The data will be linked with the acute phase data. Statistical analyses will be undertaken to characterise groups most likely to be affected by sequelae of COVID-19. The open-access follow-up survey can be used as a data collection tool by other follow-up studies, to facilitate data harmonisation and to identify subsets of patients for further in-depth follow-up. The outcomes of this study will inform strategies to prevent long-term consequences; inform clinical management, interventional studies, rehabilitation and public health management to reduce overall morbidity; and improve long-term outcomes of COVID-19. Ethics and dissemination: The protocol and survey are open access to enable low-resourced sites to join the study to facilitate global standardised, longitudinal data collection. Ethical approval has been given by sites in Colombia, Ghana, Italy, Norway, Russia, the UK and South Africa. New sites are welcome to join this collaborative study at any time. Sites interested in adopting the protocol as it is or in an adapted version are responsible for ensuring that local sponsorship and ethical approvals in place as appropriate. The tools are available on the ISARIC website (www.isaric.org)

Towards comprehensive observing and modeling systems for monitoring and predicting regional to coastal sea level

A major challenge for managing impacts and implementing effective mitigation measures and adaptation strategies for coastal zones affected by future sea level (SL) rise is our limited capacity to predict SL change at the coast on relevant spatial and temporal scales. Predicting coastal SL requires the ability to monitor and simulate a multitude of physical processes affecting SL, from local effects of wind waves and river runoff to remote influences of the large-scale ocean circulation on the coast. Here we assess our current understanding of the causes of coastal SL variability on monthly to multi-decadal timescales, including geodetic, oceanographic and atmospheric aspects of the problem, and review available observing systems informing on coastal SL. We also review the ability of existing models and data assimilation systems to estimate coastal SL variations and of atmosphere-ocean global coupled models and related regional downscaling efforts to project future SL changes. We discuss (1) observational gaps and uncertainties, and priorities for the development of an optimal and integrated coastal SL observing system, (2) strategies for advancing model capabilities in forecasting short-term processes and projecting long-term changes affecting coastal SL, and (3) possible future developments of sea level services enabling better connection of scientists and user communities and facilitating assessment and decision making for adaptation to future coastal SL change.RP was funded by NASA grant NNH16CT00C. CD was supported by the Australian Research Council (FT130101532 and DP 160103130), the Scientific Committee on Oceanic Research (SCOR) Working Group 148, funded by national SCOR committees and a grant to SCOR from the U.S. National Science Foundation (Grant OCE-1546580), and the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO/International Oceanographic Data and Information Exchange (IOC/IODE) IQuOD Steering Group. SJ was supported by the Natural Environmental Research Council under Grant Agreement No. NE/P01517/1 and by the EPSRC NEWTON Fund Sustainable Deltas Programme, Grant Number EP/R024537/1. RvdW received funding from NWO, Grant 866.13.001. WH was supported by NASA (NNX17AI63G and NNX17AH25G). CL was supported by NASA Grant NNH16CT01C. This work is a contribution to the PIRATE project funded by CNES (to TP). PT was supported by the NOAA Research Global Ocean Monitoring and Observing Program through its sponsorship of UHSLC (NA16NMF4320058). JS was supported by EU contract 730030 (call H2020-EO-2016, “CEASELESS”). JW was supported by EU Horizon 2020 Grant 633211, Atlantos

A consensus statement on perinatal mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic and recommendations for post-pandemic recovery and re-build

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic posed a significant lifecourse rupture, not least to those who had specific physical vulnerabilities to the virus, but also to those who were suffering with mental ill health. Women and birthing people who were pregnant, experienced a perinatal bereavement, or were in the first post-partum year (i.e., perinatal) were exposed to a number of risk factors for mental ill health, including alterations to the way in which their perinatal care was delivered. Methods: A consensus statement was derived from a cross-disciplinary collaboration of experts, whereby evidence from collaborative work on perinatal mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic was synthesised, and priorities were established as recommendations for research, healthcare practice, and policy. Results: The synthesis of research focused on the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on perinatal health outcomes and care practices led to three immediate recommendations: what to retain, what to reinstate, and what to remove from perinatal mental healthcare provision. Longer-term recommendations for action were also made, categorised as follows: Equity and Relational Healthcare; Parity of Esteem in Mental and Physical Healthcare with an Emphasis on Specialist Perinatal Services; and Horizon Scanning for Perinatal Mental Health Research, Policy, & Practice. Discussion: The evidence base on the effect of the pandemic on perinatal mental health is growing. This consensus statement synthesises said evidence and makes recommendations for a post-pandemic recovery and re-build of perinatal mental health services and care provision

Objectively measured patterns of sedentary time and physical activity in young adults of the Raine study cohort

Background: To provide a detailed description of young adults' sedentary time and physical activity. Methods: 384 young women and 389 young men aged 22.1±0.6 years, all participants in the 22 year old follow-up of the Raine Study pregnancy cohort, wore Actigraph GT3X+ monitors on the hip for 24 h/day over a one-week period for at least one 'valid' day (=10 h of waking wear time). Each minute epoch was classified as sedentary, light, moderate or vigorous intensity using 100 count and Freedson cut-points. Mixed models assessed hourly and daily variation; t-tests assessed gender differences. Results: The average (mean±SD) waking wear time was 15.0±1.6 h/day, of which 61.4±10.1 % was spent sedentary, 34.6±9.1 % in light-, 3.7±5.3 % in moderate- and, 0.3±0.6 % in vigorous-intensity activity. Average time spent in moderate to vigorous activity (MVPA) was 36.2±27.5 min/day. Relative to men, women had higher sedentary time, but also higher vigorous activity time. The 'usual' bout duration of sedentary time was 11.8±4.5 min in women and 11.7±5.2 min in men. By contrast, other activities were accumulated in shorter bout durations. There was large variation by hour of the day and by day of the week in both sedentary time and MVPA. Evenings and Sundays through Wednesdays tended to be particularly sedentary and/or inactive. Conclusion: For these young adults, much of the waking day was spent sedentary and many participants were physically inactive (low levels of MVPA). We provide novel evidence on the time for which activities were performed and on the time periods when young adults were more sedentary and/or less active. With high sedentary time and low MVPA, young adults may be at risk for the life-course sequelae of these behaviours