Analysing the link between public transport use and airborne transmission:mobility and contagion in the London underground

Abstract Background The transmission of infectious diseases is dependent on the amount and nature of contacts between infectious and healthy individuals. Confined and crowded environments that people visit in their day-to-day life (such as town squares, business districts, transport hubs, etc) can act as hot-spots for spreading disease. In this study we explore the link between the use of public transport and the spread of airborne infections in urban environments. Methods We study a large number of journeys on the London Underground, which is known to be particularly crowded at certain times. We use publically available Oyster card data (the electronic ticket used for public transport in Greater London), to infer passengers’ routes on the underground network. In order to estimate the spread of a generic airborne disease in each station, we use and extend an analytical microscopic model that was initially designed to study people moving in a corridor. Results Comparing our results with influenza-like illnesses (ILI) data collected by Public Health England (PHE) in London boroughs, shows a correlation between the use of public transport and the spread of ILI. Specifically, we show that passengers departing from boroughs with higher ILI rates have higher number of contacts when travelling on the underground. Moreover, by comparing our results with other demographic key factors, we are able to discuss the role that the Underground plays in the spread of airborne infections in the English capital. Conclusions Our study suggests a link between public transport use and infectious diseases transmission and encourages further research into that area. Results could be used to inform the development of non-pharmacological interventions that can act on preventing instead of curing infections and are, potentially, more cost-effective

National tuberculosis spending efficiency and its associated factors in 121 low-income and middle-income countries, 2010-19: a data envelopment and stochastic frontier analysis

BACKGROUND: Maximising the efficiency of national tuberculosis programmes is key to improving service coverage, outcomes, and progress towards End TB targets. We aimed to determine the overall efficiency of tuberculosis spending and investigate associated factors in 121 low-income and middle-income countries between 2010 and 2019. METHODS: In this data envelopment and stochastic frontier analysis, we used data from the WHO Global TB report series on tuberculosis spending as the input and treatment coverage as the output to estimate tuberculosis spending efficiency. We investigated associations between 25 independent variables and overall efficiency. FINDINGS: We estimated global tuberculosis spending efficiency to be between 73·8% (95% CI 71·2-76·3) and 87·7% (84·9-90·6) in 2019, depending on the analytical method used. This estimate suggests that existing global tuberculosis treatment coverage could be increased by between 12·3% (95% CI 9·4-15·1) and 26·2% (23·7-28·8) for the same amount of spending. Efficiency has improved over the study period, mainly since 2015, but a substantial difference of 70·7-72·1 percentage points between the most and least efficient countries still exists. We found a consistent significant association between efficiency and current health expenditure as a share of gross domestic product, out-of-pocket spending on health, and some Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) indicators such as universal health coverage. INTERPRETATION: To improve efficiency, treatment coverage will need to be increased, particularly in the least efficient contexts where this might require additional spending. However, progress towards global End TB targets is slow even in the most efficient countries. Variables associated with TB spending efficiency suggest efficiency is complimented by commitments to improving health-care access that is free at the point of use and wider progress towards the SDGs. These findings support calls for additional investment in tuberculosis care. FUNDING: None

Tackling TB in migrants arriving at Europe's southern border.

Over a quarter of the individuals diagnosed with tuberculosis [TB] in the European Union region are born outside of the area and the proportion has been increasing steadily. Italy is a low TB incidence country with over 50% of TB cases in the foreign-born population primarily due to the high numbers of migrants entering the country via land or sea. As a case study to evaluate the value of screening in newly arrived migrants, the EDETECT-TB project in Italy implemented and evaluated active TB screening in the migrant population at first reception centres to ensure early diagnosis to avoid further spread. Based on a cost-effectiveness analysis from a program provider perspective, a decision tree model allowed the assessment of the value for money of case finding by estimating the cost per case of active TB detected compared with the status quo of no screening. The analysis confirmed that early case detection is a cost-effective intervention in areas with migrants arriving from high TB risk settings. Targeted post-arrival early screening of high TB risk vulnerable new entrants to Italy has a potential role in reducing the spread of TB among migrants

National tuberculosis spending efficiency and its associated factors in 121 low-income and middle-income countries, 2010-19: a data envelopment and stochastic frontier analysis.

BACKGROUND: Maximising the efficiency of national tuberculosis programmes is key to improving service coverage, outcomes, and progress towards End TB targets. We aimed to determine the overall efficiency of tuberculosis spending and investigate associated factors in 121 low-income and middle-income countries between 2010 and 2019. METHODS: In this data envelopment and stochastic frontier analysis, we used data from the WHO Global TB report series on tuberculosis spending as the input and treatment coverage as the output to estimate tuberculosis spending efficiency. We investigated associations between 25 independent variables and overall efficiency. FINDINGS: We estimated global tuberculosis spending efficiency to be between 73·8% (95% CI 71·2-76·3) and 87·7% (84·9-90·6) in 2019, depending on the analytical method used. This estimate suggests that existing global tuberculosis treatment coverage could be increased by between 12·3% (95% CI 9·4-15·1) and 26·2% (23·7-28·8) for the same amount of spending. Efficiency has improved over the study period, mainly since 2015, but a substantial difference of 70·7-72·1 percentage points between the most and least efficient countries still exists. We found a consistent significant association between efficiency and current health expenditure as a share of gross domestic product, out-of-pocket spending on health, and some Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) indicators such as universal health coverage. INTERPRETATION: To improve efficiency, treatment coverage will need to be increased, particularly in the least efficient contexts where this might require additional spending. However, progress towards global End TB targets is slow even in the most efficient countries. Variables associated with TB spending efficiency suggest efficiency is complimented by commitments to improving health-care access that is free at the point of use and wider progress towards the SDGs. These findings support calls for additional investment in tuberculosis care. FUNDING: None

Shaping care home COVID-19 testing policy: a protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial of asymptomatic testing compared with standard care in care home staff (VIVALDI-CT)

INTRODUCTION: Care home residents have experienced significant morbidity, mortality and disruption following outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2. Regular SARS-CoV-2 testing of care home staff was introduced to reduce transmission of infection, but it is unclear whether this remains beneficial. This trial aims to investigate whether use of regular asymptomatic staff testing, alongside funding to reimburse sick pay for those who test positive and meet costs of employing agency staff, is a feasible and effective strategy to reduce COVID-19 impact in care homes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The VIVALDI-Clinical Trial is a multicentre, open-label, cluster randomised controlled, phase III/IV superiority trial in up to 280 residential and/or nursing homes in England providing care to adults aged >65 years. All regular and agency staff will be enrolled, excepting those who opt out. Homes will be randomised to the intervention arm (twice weekly asymptomatic staff testing for SARS-CoV-2) or the control arm (current national testing guidance). Staff who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 will self-isolate and receive sick pay. Care providers will be reimbursed for costs associated with employing temporary staff to backfill for absence arising directly from the trial.The trial will be delivered by a multidisciplinary research team through a series of five work packages.The primary outcome is the incidence of COVID-19-related hospital admissions in residents. Secondary outcomes include the number and duration of outbreaks and home closures. Health economic and modelling analyses will investigate the cost-effectiveness and cost consequences of the testing intervention. A process evaluation using qualitative interviews will be conducted to understand intervention roll out and identify areas for optimisation to inform future intervention scale-up, should the testing approach prove effective and cost-effective. Stakeholder engagement will be undertaken to enable the sector to plan for results and their implications and to coproduce recommendations on the use of testing for policy-makers. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the London-Bromley Research Ethics Committee (reference number 22/LO/0846) and the Health Research Authority (22/CAG/0165). The results of the trial will be disseminated regardless of the direction of effect. The publication of the results will comply with a trial-specific publication policy and will include submission to open access journals. A lay summary of the results will also be produced to disseminate the results to participants. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN13296529

Public health benefits of shifting from inpatient to outpatient TB care in Eastern Europe: optimising TB investments in Belarus, the Republic of Moldova, and Romania

Background: High rates of drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR TB) continue to threaten public health, especially in Eastern Europe. Costs for treating DR TB are substantially higher than treating drug-susceptible TB, and higher yet if DR TB services are delivered in hospital. Therefore, countries are encouraged to transition from inpatient to ambulatory-focused TB care, which has been shown to have non-inferior health outcomes. / Methods: Allocative efficiency analyses were conducted for three countries in Eastern Europe, Belarus, the Republic of Moldova, and Romania to minimise a combination of active TB cases, prevalence of active TB, and TB-related deaths by 2035. These mathematical optimisations were carried out using Optima TB, a dynamical compartmental model of TB transmission. The focus of this study was to project the health and financial gains that could be realised if TB service delivery shifted from hospital to ambulatory-based care. / Findings: These analyses show that transitioning from inpatient to ambulatory TB care could reduce treatment costs by 5%−31% or almost 35 million US dollars across these three countries without affecting the quality of care. Improved TB outcomes could be achieved without additional spending by reinvesting these potential savings in cost-effective prevention and diagnosis interventions. / Conclusions: National governments should examine barriers delaying the adoption of outpatient DR TB care and consider the lost opportunities caused by delays in switching to more efficient and effective treatment modes

Public health benefits of shifting from hospital-focused to ambulatory TB care in Eastern Europe: Optimising TB investments in Belarus, the Republic of Moldova, and Romania

High rates of drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB) continue to threaten public health, especially in Eastern Europe. Costs for treating DR-TB are substantially higher than treating drug-susceptible TB, and higher yet if DR-TB services are delivered in hospital. The WHO recommends that multidrug-resistant (MDR) TB be treated using mainly ambulatory care, shown to have non-inferior health outcomes, however, there has been a delay to transition away from hospital-focused MDR-TB care in certain Eastern European countries. Allocative efficiency analyses were conducted for three countries in Eastern Europe, Belarus, the Republic of Moldova, and Romania, to minimise a combination of TB incidence, prevalence, and mortality by 2035. A primary focus of these studies was to determine the health benefits and financial savings that could be realised if DR-TB service delivery shifted from hospital-focused to ambulatory care. Here we provide a comprehensive assessment of findings from these studies to demonstrate the collective benefit of transitioning from hospital-focused to ambulatory TB care, and to address common regional considerations. We highlight that transitioning from hospital-focused to ambulatory TB care could reduce treatment costs by 20% in Romania, 24% in Moldova, and by as much as 40% in Belarus or almost 35 million US dollars across these three countries by 2035 without affecting quality of care. Improved TB outcomes could be achieved, however, without additional spending by reinvesting these savings in higher-impact TB diagnosis and more efficacious DR-TB treatment regimens. We found commonalities in the large portion of TB cases treated in hospital across these three regional countries, and similar obstacles to transitioning to ambulatory care. National governments in the Eastern European region should examine barriers delaying adoption of ambulatory DR-TB care and consider lost opportunities caused by delays in switching to more efficient treatment modes

Shaping care home COVID-19 testing policy: a protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial of asymptomatic testing compared with standard care in care home staff (VIVALDI-CT)

INTRODUCTION: Care home residents have experienced significant morbidity, mortality and disruption following outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2. Regular SARS-CoV-2 testing of care home staff was introduced to reduce transmission of infection, but it is unclear whether this remains beneficial. This trial aims to investigate whether use of regular asymptomatic staff testing, alongside funding to reimburse sick pay for those who test positive and meet costs of employing agency staff, is a feasible and effective strategy to reduce COVID-19 impact in care homes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The VIVALDI-Clinical Trial is a multicentre, open-label, cluster randomised controlled, phase III/IV superiority trial in up to 280 residential and/or nursing homes in England providing care to adults aged >65 years. All regular and agency staff will be enrolled, excepting those who opt out. Homes will be randomised to the intervention arm (twice weekly asymptomatic staff testing for SARS-CoV-2) or the control arm (current national testing guidance). Staff who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 will self-isolate and receive sick pay. Care providers will be reimbursed for costs associated with employing temporary staff to backfill for absence arising directly from the trial.The trial will be delivered by a multidisciplinary research team through a series of five work packages.The primary outcome is the incidence of COVID-19-related hospital admissions in residents. Secondary outcomes include the number and duration of outbreaks and home closures. Health economic and modelling analyses will investigate the cost-effectiveness and cost consequences of the testing intervention. A process evaluation using qualitative interviews will be conducted to understand intervention roll out and identify areas for optimisation to inform future intervention scale-up, should the testing approach prove effective and cost-effective. Stakeholder engagement will be undertaken to enable the sector to plan for results and their implications and to coproduce recommendations on the use of testing for policy-makers. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the London-Bromley Research Ethics Committee (reference number 22/LO/0846) and the Health Research Authority (22/CAG/0165). The results of the trial will be disseminated regardless of the direction of effect. The publication of the results will comply with a trial-specific publication policy and will include submission to open access journals. A lay summary of the results will also be produced to disseminate the results to participants. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN13296529

VIVALDI ASCOT and Ethnography Study : protocol for a mixed-methods longitudinal study to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 and other respiratory infection outbreaks on care home residents’ quality of life and psychosocial well-being

Introduction Older adults in care homes experienced some of the highest rates of mortality from SARS-CoV-2 globally and were subjected to strict and lengthy non-pharmaceutical interventions, which severely impacted their daily lives. The VIVALDI ASCOT and Ethnography Study aims to assess the impact of respiratory outbreaks on care home residents’ quality of life, psychological well-being, loneliness, functional ability and use of space. This study is linked to the VIVALDI-CT, a randomised controlled trial of staff’s asymptomatic testing and sickness payment support in care homes (ISRCTN13296529). Methods and analysis This is a mixed-methods, longitudinal study of care home residents (65+) in Southeast England. Group 1—exposed includes residents from care homes with a recent COVID-19 or other respiratory infection outbreak. Group 2—non-exposed includes residents from care homes without a recent outbreak. The study has two components: (a) a mixed-methods longitudinal face-to-face interviews with 100 residents (n=50 from group 1 and n=50 from group 2) to assess the impact of outbreaks on residents’ quality of life, psychological well-being, loneliness, functional ability and use of space at time 1 (study baseline) and time 2 (at 3–4 weeks after the first visit); (b) ethnographic observations in communal spaces of up to 10 care homes to understand how outbreaks and related restrictions to the use of space and social activities impact residents’ well-being. The study will interview only care home residents who have the mental capacity to consent. Data will be compared and integrated to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the impact of outbreaks on residents’ quality of life and well-being. Ethics and dissemination The VIVALDI ASCOT and Ethnography Study obtained ethical approval from the Health Research Authority (HRA) Social Care REC (24/IEC08/0001). Only residents with the capacity to consent will be included in the study. Findings will be published in scientific journals

Shaping care home COVID-19 testing policy : a protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial of asymptomatic testing compared with standard care in care home staff (VIVALDI-CT)

Introduction Care home residents have experienced significant morbidity, mortality and disruption following outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2. Regular SARS-CoV-2 testing of care home staff was introduced to reduce transmission of infection, but it is unclear whether this remains beneficial. This trial aims to investigate whether use of regular asymptomatic staff testing, alongside funding to reimburse sick pay for those who test positive and meet costs of employing agency staff, is a feasible and effective strategy to reduce COVID-19 impact in care homes. Methods and analysis The VIVALDI-Clinical Trial is a multicentre, open-label, cluster randomised controlled, phase III/IV superiority trial in up to 280 residential and/or nursing homes in England providing care to adults aged >65 years. All regular and agency staff will be enrolled, excepting those who opt out. Homes will be randomised to the intervention arm (twice weekly asymptomatic staff testing for SARS-CoV-2) or the control arm (current national testing guidance). Staff who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 will self-isolate and receive sick pay. Care providers will be reimbursed for costs associated with employing temporary staff to backfill for absence arising directly from the trial. The trial will be delivered by a multidisciplinary research team through a series of five work packages. The primary outcome is the incidence of COVID-19-related hospital admissions in residents. Secondary outcomes include the number and duration of outbreaks and home closures. Health economic and modelling analyses will investigate the cost-effectiveness and cost consequences of the testing intervention. A process evaluation using qualitative interviews will be conducted to understand intervention roll out and identify areas for optimisation to inform future intervention scale-up, should the testing approach prove effective and cost-effective. Stakeholder engagement will be undertaken to enable the sector to plan for results and their implications and to coproduce recommendations on the use of testing for policy-makers. Ethics and dissemination The study has been approved by the London—Bromley Research Ethics Committee (reference number 22/LO/0846) and the Health Research Authority (22/CAG/0165). The results of the trial will be disseminated regardless of the direction of effect. The publication of the results will comply with a trial-specific publication policy and will include submission to open access journals. A lay summary of the results will also be produced to disseminate the results to participants