Research priorities for homecare for older people: a multi-stakeholder consultation.

Homecare is generally understood to refer to services that support people to continue living in their own homes. Older people are the primary users and many countries report an increase in the number using homecare services and greater spending on such provision, driven in part by investment in ‘ageing in place’ policies. Despite this, and reflecting social care more generally, homecare is relatively under-researched. However, in the UK at least, there is growing interest and investment in social care research. In order that this investment is not wasted, it is essential that research addresses what stakeholders identify as research priorities. This study reports work undertaken in the UK during 2021/22 to identify research priorities for homecare for older people, and a broad scoping of existing evidence. A two-stage consultation process was used. First, topic areas for research were identified through consultations with stakeholders. Second, a survey ascertained agreement and differences between groups regarding the relative importance of topic areas as research priorities. Over 50 people participated including older people (n = 7), family members (n = 11), homecare workers (n = 16), homecare providers (n = 9) and national policy, evidence and advocacy leads (n = 13). Twenty discrete research topic areas were identified. Only one topic area (Joint working between homecare and health services) was a ‘Top 5’ research priority for all stakeholder groups. Timely engagement with homecare and Workforce: recruitment and retention were ‘Top 5’ priorities for three stakeholder groups. Scoping of existing research indicates that topic areas receiving the most research attention to date are not among those identified as being of high priority for research. To our knowledge, this is the first time research priorities for homecare have been generated. Findings will be of value to research funders, organisations using research evidence and the research community

A novel mouse model expressing human forms for complement receptors CR1 and CR2

Background The complement cascade is increasingly implicated in development of a variety of diseases with strong immune contributions such as Alzheimer’s disease and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. Mouse models have been used to determine function of central components of the complement cascade such as C1q and C3. However, species differences in their gene structures mean that mice do not adequately replicate human complement regulators, including CR1 and CR2. Genetic variation in CR1 and CR2 have been implicated in modifying disease states but the mechanisms are not known. Results To decipher the roles of human CR1 and CR2 in health and disease, we engineered C57BL/6J (B6) mice to replace endogenous murine Cr2 with human complement receptors, CR1 and CR2 (B6.CR2CR1). CR1 has an array of allotypes in human populations and using traditional recombination methods (Flp-frt and Cre-loxP) two of the most common alleles (referred to here as CR1long and CR1short) can be replicated within this mouse model, along with a CR1 knockout allele (CR1KO). Transcriptional profiling of spleens and brains identified genes and pathways differentially expressed between mice homozygous for either CR1long, CR1short or CR1KO. Gene set enrichment analysis predicts hematopoietic cell number and cell infiltration are modulated by CR1long, but not CR1short or CR1KO. Conclusion The B6.CR2CR1 mouse model provides a novel tool for determining the relationship between human-relevant CR1 alleles and disease

Living with dementia during the COVID-19 pandemic: coping and support needs of community dwelling people with dementia and their family carers. : Research findings from the IDEAL COVID-19 Dementia Initiative (IDEAL-CDI)

We interviewed people with dementia and carers from the IDEAL cohort to find out how the COVID-19 lockdown and continuing restrictions affected those living with dementia. Some people with dementia coped well, while others coped with difficulty or were only just coping. The additional stress of COVID-19 exacerbated pre-existing coping difficulties. For many, social isolation increased anxiety. Some felt that lack of activity or lack of social contact caused a decline in their abilities to manage everyday tasks. Confusion about COVID-19 rules or difficulty remembering what to do led to anxiety when leaving the house. People felt that members of the public might not understand their particular needs. While some carers felt they were coping well, others experienced stress when having to leave the home because the person with dementia might not be safe if left alone. Some experienced increased strain in the caring relationship compounded by an uncertainty about future availability of respite. Some were concerned about the complex health needs of the person with dementia alongside COVID-19 risk and lack of personalised information. Both people with dementia and carers talked about the importance of access to safe outdoor space. People were anxious about how others would react or behave towards them regarding keeping a distance if they went out. Being connected to friends, family and wider community or support groups was important to help combat the effects of isolation. People from BAME communities worried about their increased vulnerability to the virus. A lack of trust in Government guidance and in health care services added to their anxiety. However, some benefitted from strong community and faith group involvement. What might be helpful for people with dementia? • Reablement to help regain or maintain skills • Personalised health advice regarding managing COVID-19 risk and the opportunity to ask questions. • Identification of people with dementia who live alone and an assessment of their needs. What might be helpful for carers? • Needs assessment in regard to respite. • Novel forms of respite care that incorporate social distancing. What might be helpful for both carers and people with dementia? • Access to COVID-safe outdoor spaces. • Continuation and expansion of ‘just checking’ services. • Support to get online and use the internet. • Communication and information through non-digital means. • Community COVID-19 ‘dementia awareness’ initiatives. What might be helpful for people from Black and minority ethnic groups? • Addressing concerns about their increased risk of COVID-19. • Directing information and support through existing community and faith groups

Multiple novel prostate cancer susceptibility signals identified by fine-mapping of known risk loci among Europeans

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified numerous common prostate cancer (PrCa) susceptibility loci. We have fine-mapped 64 GWAS regions known at the conclusion of the iCOGS study using large-scale genotyping and imputation in 25 723 PrCa cases and 26 274 controls of European ancestry. We detected evidence for multiple independent signals at 16 regions, 12 of which contained additional newly identified significant associations. A single signal comprising a spectrum of correlated variation was observed at 39 regions; 35 of which are now described by a novel more significantly associated lead SNP, while the originally reported variant remained as the lead SNP only in 4 regions. We also confirmed two association signals in Europeans that had been previously reported only in East-Asian GWAS. Based on statistical evidence and linkage disequilibrium (LD) structure, we have curated and narrowed down the list of the most likely candidate causal variants for each region. Functional annotation using data from ENCODE filtered for PrCa cell lines and eQTL analysis demonstrated significant enrichment for overlap with bio-features within this set. By incorporating the novel risk variants identified here alongside the refined data for existing association signals, we estimate that these loci now explain ∼38.9% of the familial relative risk of PrCa, an 8.9% improvement over the previously reported GWAS tag SNPs. This suggests that a significant fraction of the heritability of PrCa may have been hidden during the discovery phase of GWAS, in particular due to the presence of multiple independent signals within the same regio

Impact of COVID-19 on cardiovascular testing in the United States versus the rest of the world

Objectives: This study sought to quantify and compare the decline in volumes of cardiovascular procedures between the United States and non-US institutions during the early phase of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the care of many non-COVID-19 illnesses. Reductions in diagnostic cardiovascular testing around the world have led to concerns over the implications of reduced testing for cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality. Methods: Data were submitted to the INCAPS-COVID (International Atomic Energy Agency Non-Invasive Cardiology Protocols Study of COVID-19), a multinational registry comprising 909 institutions in 108 countries (including 155 facilities in 40 U.S. states), assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on volumes of diagnostic cardiovascular procedures. Data were obtained for April 2020 and compared with volumes of baseline procedures from March 2019. We compared laboratory characteristics, practices, and procedure volumes between U.S. and non-U.S. facilities and between U.S. geographic regions and identified factors associated with volume reduction in the United States. Results: Reductions in the volumes of procedures in the United States were similar to those in non-U.S. facilities (68% vs. 63%, respectively; p = 0.237), although U.S. facilities reported greater reductions in invasive coronary angiography (69% vs. 53%, respectively; p < 0.001). Significantly more U.S. facilities reported increased use of telehealth and patient screening measures than non-U.S. facilities, such as temperature checks, symptom screenings, and COVID-19 testing. Reductions in volumes of procedures differed between U.S. regions, with larger declines observed in the Northeast (76%) and Midwest (74%) than in the South (62%) and West (44%). Prevalence of COVID-19, staff redeployments, outpatient centers, and urban centers were associated with greater reductions in volume in U.S. facilities in a multivariable analysis. Conclusions: We observed marked reductions in U.S. cardiovascular testing in the early phase of the pandemic and significant variability between U.S. regions. The association between reductions of volumes and COVID-19 prevalence in the United States highlighted the need for proactive efforts to maintain access to cardiovascular testing in areas most affected by outbreaks of COVID-19 infection