Distancing Measures and Challenges Discussed by COVID-19 Outbreak Teams of Dutch Nursing Homes:The COVID-19 MINUTES Study

The most severe COVID-19 infections and highest mortality rates are seen among long-term care residents. To reduce the risk of infection, physical distancing is important. This study investigates what physical distancing measures were discussed by COVID-19 outbreak teams of Dutch long-term care organizations and what challenges they encountered. The COVID-19 MINUTES study is a qualitative multi-center study (n = 41) that collected minutes of COVID-19 outbreak teams from March 2020 to October 2021. Textual units about distancing measures were selected and analyzed using manifest content analysis for the first wave: early March-early May 2020; the intermediate period of 2020: mid-May-mid-September 2020; and the second wave: late September 2020-mid-June 2021. During all periods, COVID-19 outbreak teams often discussed distancing visitors from residents. Moreover, during the first wave they often discussed isolation measures, during the intermediate period they often discussed distancing staff and volunteers from residents, and during both the intermediate period and the second wave they often discussed distancing among residents. During all periods, less often admission measures were discussed. Challenges persisted and included unrest among and conflicts between visitors and staff, visitors violating measures, resident non-adherence to measures, and staffing issues. The discussed distancing measures and corresponding challenges may guide local long-term care and (inter)national policymakers during the further course of the COVID-19 pandemic, outbreaks of other infectious diseases, and long-term care innovations

Renal replacement therapy in Europe : A summary of the 2011 ERA-EDTA Registry Annual Report

BackgroundThis article provides a summary of the 2011 ERA-EDTA Registry Annual Report (available at www.era-edta-reg.org).MethodsData on renal replacement therapy (RRT) for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) from national and regional renal registries in 30 countries in Europe and bordering the Mediterranean Sea were used. From 27 registries, individual patient data were received, whereas 17 registries contributed data in aggregated form. We present the incidence and prevalence of RRT, and renal transplant rates in 2011. In addition, survival probabilities and expected remaining lifetimes were calculated for those registries providing individual patient data.ResultsThe overall unadjusted incidence rate of RRT in 2011 among all registries reporting to the ERA-EDTA Registry was 117 per million population (pmp) (n = 71.631). Incidence rates varied from 24 pmp in Ukraine to 238 pmp in Turkey. The overall unadjusted prevalence of RRT for ESRD on 31 December 2011 was 692 pmp (n = 425 824). The highest prevalence was reported by Portugal (1662 pmp) and the lowest by Ukraine (131 pmp). Among all registries, a total of 22 814 renal transplantations were performed (37 pmp). The highest overall transplant rate was reported from Spain, Cantabria (81 pmp), whereas the highest rate of living donor transplants was reported from Turkey (39 pmp). For patients who started RRT between 2002 and 2006, the unadjusted 5-year patient survival on RRT was 46.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 46.6-47.0], and on dialysis 39.3% (95% CI 39.2-39.4). The unadjusted 5-year patient survival after the first renal transplantation performed between 2002 and 2006 was 86.7% (95% CI 86.2-87.2) for kidneys from deceased donors and 94.3% (95% CI 93.6-95.0) for kidneys from living donors.publishersversionPeer reviewe

Renal replacement therapy in Europe: a summary of the 2012 ERA-EDTA Registry Annual Report

BACKGROUND: This article summarizes the 2012 European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association Registry Annual Report (available at www.era-edta-reg.org) with a specific focus on older patients (defined as ≥65 years). METHODS: Data provided by 45 national or regional renal registries in 30 countries in Europe and bordering the Mediterranean Sea were used. Individual patient level data were received from 31 renal registries, whereas 14 renal registries contributed data in an aggregated form. The incidence, prevalence and survival probabilities of patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) receiving renal replacement therapy (RRT) and renal transplantation rates for 2012 are presented. RESULTS: In 2012, the overall unadjusted incidence rate of patients with ESRD receiving RRT was 109.6 per million population (pmp) (n = 69 035), ranging from 219.9 pmp in Portugal to 24.2 pmp in Montenegro. The proportion of incident patients ≥75 years varied from 15 to 44% between countries. The overall unadjusted prevalence on 31 December 2012 was 716.7 pmp (n = 451 270), ranging from 1670.2 pmp in Portugal to 146.7 pmp in the Ukraine. The proportion of prevalent patients ≥75 years varied from 11 to 32% between countries. The overall renal transplantation rate in 2012 was 28.3 pmp (n = 15 673), with the highest rate seen in the Spanish region of Catalonia. The proportion of patients ≥65 years receiving a transplant ranged from 0 to 35%. Five-year adjusted survival for all RRT patients was 59.7% (95% confidence interval, CI: 59.3-60.0) which fell to 39.3% (95% CI: 38.7-39.9) in patients 65-74 years and 21.3% (95% CI: 20.8-21.9) in patients ≥75 years

Synthesizing the scientific evidence to inform the development of the post-2020 Global Framework on Biodiversity

Fil: Díaz, Sandra. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba; Argentina.Fil: Broadgate, Wendy. Future Earth; Suecia.Fil: Declerck, Fabrice. Bioversity International; Italia.Fil: Dobrota, Susanna. Future Earth; Suecia.Fil: Krug, Cornelia. bioDISCOVERY; Suecia.Fil: Moersberg, Hannah. Future Earth; Francia.Fil: Obura, David. Coastal Oceans Research and Development – Indian Ocean; Kenya.Fil: Spehn, Eva. Forum Biodiversity; Suiza.Fil: Tewksbury, Joshua. Future Earth; Estados Unidos.Fil: Verburg, Peter. Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam; Países Bajos.Fil: Zafra Calvo, Noelia. Future Earth; Suecia.Fil: Bellon, Mauricio. Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad; México.Fil: Burgess, Neil. United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre; Reino Unido.Fil: Cariño, Joji. Forest Peoples Programme; Reino Unido.Fil: Castañeda Alvarez, Nora. Global Crop Diversity Trust; Alemania.Fil: Cavender-Bares, Jeannine. University of Minnesota; Estados Unidos.Fil: Chaplin Kramer, Rebecca. Stanford University; Estados Unidos.Fil: De Meester, Luc. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven; Bélgica.Fil: Dulloo, Ehsan. Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research; Francia.Fil: Fernández-Palacios, José María. Universidad de La Laguna; España.Fil: Garibaldi, Lucas A. Universidad Nacional de Río Negro. Instituto de Investigaciones en Recursos Naturales, Agroecología y Desarrollo Rural; Argentina.Fil: Garibaldi, Lucas A. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Investigaciones en Recursos Naturales, Agroecología y Desarrollo Rural; Argentina.Fil: Hill, Samantha. United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre; Reino Unido.Fil: Isbell, Forest. University of Minnesota; Estados Unidos.Fil: Leadley, Paul. Université Paris-Saclay; Francia.Fil: Liu, Jianguo. Michigan State University; Estados Unidos.Fil: Mace, Georgina M. University College London; Reino Unido.Fil: Maron, Martine. The University of Queensland; Australia.Fil: Martín-López, Berta. Leuphana University Lüneburg; Alemania.Fil: McGowan, Philip. University of Newcastle; Australia.Fil: Pereira, Henrique. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research; Alemania.Fil: Purvis, Andy. Imperial College London. Grand Challenges in Ecosystems and the Environment; Reino Unido.Fil: Reyes-García, Victoria. Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona; España.Fil: Rocha, Juan. Future Earth; Suecia.Fil: Rondinini, Carlo. Sapienza-Università di Roma; Italia.Fil: Shannon, Lynne. University of Cape Town; Sudáfrica.Fil: Shaw, Rebecca. World Wildlife Fund; Estados Unidos.Fil: Shin, Yunne Jai. University of Cape Town. Marine Research Institute. Department of Biological Sciences; Sudáfrica.Fil: Snelgrove, Paul. Memorial University of Newfoundland; Canadá.Fil: Strassburg, Bernardo. International Institute for Sustainability; Brasil.Fil: Subramanian, Suneetha.United Nations University; Japón.Fil: Visconti, Piero. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis; Austria.Fil: Watson, James. Wildlife Conservation Society; Estados Unidos.Fil: Zanne, Amy. The George Washington University; Estados Unidos.Fil: Bruford, Michael. Cardiff University; Gales.Fil: Colli, Licia. Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore; Italia.Fil: Azeredo de Dornelas, Maria. University of St Andrews; Escocia.Fil: Bascompte, Jordi. Universität Zürich; Suiza.Fil: Forest, Felix. Royal Botanic Gardens; Reino Unido.Fil: Hoban, Sean. The Morton Arboretum; Estados Unidos.Fil: Jones, Sarah. Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research; Francia.Fil: Jordano, Pedro. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas; España.Fil: Kassen, Rees. University of Ottawa; Canadá.Fil: Khoury, Colin. Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research; Francia.Fil: Laikre, Linda. Stockholms Universitet; Suecia.Fil: Maxted, Nigel. University of Birmingham; Reino Unido.Fil: Miloslavich, Patricia. Universidad Simón Bolívar; Venezuela.Fil: Moreno Mateos, David. Basque Centre for Climate Change; España.Fil: Ogden, Rob. The University of Edinburgh; Reino Unido.Fil: Segelbacher, Gernot. Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg; Alemania.Fil: Souffreau, Caroline. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven; Bélgica.Fil: Svenning, Jens Christian. Aarhus University; Dinamarca.Fil: Vázquez, Ella. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México; México.This report is the result of a meeting which aimed to offer scientific guidance to the development under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) of the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework focussing on its contribution to the 2030 Mission and 2050 Vision. We provide a synthesis of the scientific and technical justification, evidence base and feasibility for outcome-oriented goals on nature and its contributions to people, including biodiversity at different levels from genes to biomes. The report is structured to respond to the Zero Draft of the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework

Adaptive microevolutionary responses to simulated global warming in Simocephalus vetulus: a mesocosm study

Although several studies suggest the occurrence of microevolutionary responses that may allow local persistence of populations under global warming, rigorous experimental proof is lacking. Here, we combined the realism and rigid, replicated experimental design of a large-scale mesocosm study where populations of the zooplankter Simocephalus vetulus were exposed for 1 year to different global warming scenarios with a life table experiment under laboratory conditions at three temperatures that eliminated confounding, nongenetic factors. Our results provide solid proof for a rapid microevolutionary response to global warming in both survival and the subcomponents of individual performance (age at reproduction and number of offspring), which may allow populations of S. vetulus to persist locally under predicted scenarios of global warming. Such microevolutionary responses may buffer changes in community structure under global warming and help explain the outcome of previous mesocosm studies finding only marginal effects of global warming at the community level.status: publishe

Collateral damage: rapid exposure-induced evolution of pesticide resistance leads to increased susceptibility to parasites

Although natural populations may evolve resistance to anthropogenic stressors such as pollutants, this evolved resistance may carry costs. Using an experimental evolution approach, we exposed different Daphnia magna populations in outdoor containers to the carbamate pesticide carbaryl and control conditions, and assessed the resulting populations for both their resistance to carbaryl as well as their susceptibility to infection by the widespread bacterial microparasite Pasteuria ramosa. Our results show that carbaryl selection led to rapid evolution of carbaryl resistance with seemingly no cost when assessed in a benign environment. However, carbaryl-resistant populations were more susceptible to parasite infection than control populations. Exposure to both stressors reveals a synergistic effect on sterilization rate by P. ramosa, but this synergism did not evolve under pesticide selection. Assessing costs of rapid adaptive evolution to anthropogenic stress in a semi-natural context may be crucial to avoid too optimistic predictions for the fitness of the evolving populations.status: publishe

Thermal Genetic Adaptation in the Water Flea Daphnia and its Impact: An Evolving Metacommunity Approach

Genetic adaptation to temperature change can impact responses of populations and communities to global warming. Here we integrate previously published results on experimental evolution trials with follow-up experiments involving the water flea Daphnia as a model system. Our research shows (1) the capacity of natural populations of this species to genetically adapt to changes in temperature in a time span of months to years, (2) the context-dependence of these genetic changes, emphasizing the role of ecology and community composition on evolutionary responses to climatic change, and (3) the impact of micro-evolutionary changes on immigration success of preadapted genotypes. Our study involves (1) experimental evolution trials in the absence and presence of the community of competitors, predators, and parasites, (2) life-table and competition experiments to assess the fitness consequences of micro-evolution, and (3) competition experiments with putative immigrant genotypes. We use these observations as building blocks of an evolving metacommunity to understand biological responses to climatic change. This approach integrates both local and regional responses at both the population and community levels. Finally, we provide an outline of current gaps in knowledge and suggest fruitful avenues for future research.status: publishe

Strategies to Increase Willingness to Receive a COVID-19 Vaccine among Nursing Home Staff

Background: Nursing home (NH) staff and residents have been prioritized to receive COVID-19 vaccinations. However, NH staff have been hesitant. This study explored what strategies were used to overcome this hesitancy and which of these were found to be important by NH staff to increase their willingness to take a COVID-19 vaccine. Methods: This study employed a sequential exploratory qualitative design. The COVID-19 MINUTES study aimed to describe the challenges presented by, responses to, and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in NHs. The minutes of COVID-19 outbreak teams (COTs) in Dutch long-term care organizations (n = 41) were collected and coded using content analysis. Textual units from December 2020 to April 2021 that regarded strategies to increase staff’s vaccination willingness (n = 67) were selected. Subsequently, to validate these data, two panels of NH healthcare workers (HCWs) and policy workers (PWs) (n = 8) selected, discussed, and ranked the strategies that they found to be important using a modified nominal group technique. Results: The strategies described in the minutes included financial reimbursements, personal contact, story sharing, logistics support, role models, visual information, and written information. Except for financial reimbursement, all these strategies were considered important or very important by the panel participants. Some organizations combined multiple strategies. Conclusion: The strategies that were found important in combination may be used more broadly and should be developed further with the involvement of HCWs