Screening of healthcare workers for SARS-CoV-2 highlights the role of asymptomatic carriage in COVID-19 transmission

Funder: Addenbrooke's Charitable Trust, Cambridge University Hospitals; FundRef: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100002927Significant differences exist in the availability of healthcare worker (HCW) SARS-CoV-2 testing between countries, and existing programmes focus on screening symptomatic rather than asymptomatic staff. Over a 3 week period (April 2020), 1032 asymptomatic HCWs were screened for SARS-CoV-2 in a large UK teaching hospital. Symptomatic staff and symptomatic household contacts were additionally tested. Real-time RT-PCR was used to detect viral RNA from a throat+nose self-swab. 3% of HCWs in the asymptomatic screening group tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. 17/30 (57%) were truly asymptomatic/pauci-symptomatic. 12/30 (40%) had experienced symptoms compatible with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)>7 days prior to testing, most self-isolating, returning well. Clusters of HCW infection were discovered on two independent wards. Viral genome sequencing showed that the majority of HCWs had the dominant lineage B∙1. Our data demonstrates the utility of comprehensive screening of HCWs with minimal or no symptoms. This approach will be critical for protecting patients and hospital staff

Genomic Dissection of Bipolar Disorder and Schizophrenia, Including 28 Subphenotypes

publisher: Elsevier articletitle: Genomic Dissection of Bipolar Disorder and Schizophrenia, Including 28 Subphenotypes journaltitle: Cell articlelink: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2018.05.046 content_type: article copyright: © 2018 Elsevier Inc

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Challenges in chronic illness management : a qualitative study of Australian pharmacists' perspectives

Objective: To explore pharmacists' views on managing patients with chronic illness; to understand the incentives and barriers they perceive and the solutions they propose to overcome these barriers. Setting: Hospital pharmacists, with experience in managing people with chronic illnesses, working in western Sydney, Australia, were interviewed during June and July 2008. Method: A qualitative study involving group and individual interviews using a semi-structured interview guide. Results: Hospital pharmacists identified lack of communication between different healthcare providers and with patients as a contributing factor to lack of continuity of care and this was perceived as a major barrier in managing patients with chronic illnesses. Pharmacists were also concerned about the effects of medication costs, and poor patient knowledge regarding their disease and medications, and the effects on adherence. Suggested solutions included taking a teamwork approach in the management of chronic illness and providing more information to patients to improve adherence. Conclusion: The identified incentives and barriers have provided valuable information on what pharmacists face in managing patients with chronic illness. Most of the solutions suggested by them have been tested and proven unsuccessful. Develop successful health policy to address the identified barriers remains a challenge.6 page(s

Blood glucose monitoring in type 2 diabetes – Nepalese patients’ opinions and experiences

Background: Blood glucose monitoring forms a vital component of diabetes care. Monitoring conducted at home using glucometers, and in laboratories by professionals, are two common methods of blood glucose monitoring in clinical practice. Objective: To investigate Nepalese patients’ perceptions and practices of blood glucose monitoring in diabetes. Methods: In-depth interviews were conducted with 48 Nepalese participants with type 2 diabetes in Sydney and Kathmandu. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed. Results: In Australia, most participants perceived home monitoring as useful; and both home and laboratory monitoring were conducted at fairly regular intervals. In Nepal, only a small number conducted home monitoring and the laboratory method formed the primary method of day-to-day monitoring. The laboratory method was preferred due to easy access to laboratories, lack of faith in glucometers and perceptions that home monitoring is costlier. However, overall monitoring was irregular in Nepal. In addition to the healthcare system which enabled cheaper self-monitoring in Australia, Nepalese in Australia also tended to have a better understanding about the purpose of home monitoring. Conclusions: This study has highlighted the disparity in perceptions and practices related to blood glucose monitoring. Understanding the importance of blood glucose monitoring and access to affordable resources are critical facilitators for conducting regular monitoring. Both patient and health-system factors play a key role in ensuring continued diabetes monitoring and management

Blood glucose monitoring in type 2 diabetes – Nepalese patients’ opinions and experiences

Background: Blood glucose monitoring forms a vital component of diabetes care. Monitoring conducted at home using glucometers, and in laboratories by professionals, are two common methods of blood glucose monitoring in clinical practice. Objective: To investigate Nepalese patients’ perceptions and practices of blood glucose monitoring in diabetes. Methods: In-depth interviews were conducted with 48 Nepalese participants with type 2 diabetes in Sydney and Kathmandu. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed. Results: In Australia, most participants perceived home monitoring as useful; and both home and laboratory monitoring were conducted at fairly regular intervals. In Nepal, only a small number conducted home monitoring and the laboratory method formed the primary method of day-to-day monitoring. The laboratory method was preferred due to easy access to laboratories, lack of faith in glucometers and perceptions that home monitoring is costlier. However, overall monitoring was irregular in Nepal. In addition to the healthcare system which enabled cheaper self-monitoring in Australia, Nepalese in Australia also tended to have a better understanding about the purpose of home monitoring. Conclusions: This study has highlighted the disparity in perceptions and practices related to blood glucose monitoring. Understanding the importance of blood glucose monitoring and access to affordable resources are critical facilitators for conducting regular monitoring. Both patient and health-system factors play a key role in ensuring continued diabetes monitoring and management

Diabetes-Related Healthcare Services in Nepal—A Qualitative Exploration of Healthcare Professionals’ Opinions

Healthcare professionals’ level of engagement in diabetes care and their perceptions of challenges to effective diabetes care are key indicators impacting diabetes management. This study investigated diabetes-related healthcare services provided in Nepal, and explored healthcare professionals’ opinions of the barriers to, and strategies for, effective diabetes care. In-depth face-to-face interviews were conducted with thirty healthcare professionals providing healthcare or medication-related services to patients with type 2 diabetes within Kathmandu Valley. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed. Participants were physicians, dieticians, nurses and pharmacy staff. Diabetes care services varied between healthcare institutions, between healthcare professionals and between patients, with the overall patient-care model reported as sub-optimal. Diabetes related services were mostly limited to physician-patient consultations. Only a few hospitals or clinics provided additional diabetes education classes, and individual dietician or nurse consultations. Limited collaboration, large patient-load and workforce shortages (particularly lack of diabetes educators) were reported as major issues affecting diabetes care. Regulatory measures to address healthcare system barriers were identified as potential facilitators for effective diabetes management. Whilst the findings are specific to Nepal, there are lessons to be learnt for other healthcare settings as the fundamental barriers to optimal diabetes care appear to be similar worldwide