Housing options for older people in a reimagined housing system: a case study from England

The housing options of older people now extend far beyond the traditional choice between staying put and making do, or moving to specialist housing or residential care. A flexible suite of options has emerged, centred on promoting independence and wellbeing. Valuable insights have been provided into the development, delivery, costs and benefits of these options. Light has also been cast on the experiences and preferences of older people. However, little is know about who gets what housing, where and why. This reflects a tendency within analysis to consider these different housing options in isolation. This study responds by situating the housing options of older people within wider debates about the reimagining of the housing system driven by the neoliberal transformation in housing politics. Taking a case study approach, it explores the gap between the ambitions of policy and realities of provision at the local level, relates this to the particular intersection of state practices and market mechanisms manifest in the case study and, in doing so, rises to the challenge of extending analysis of the impacts of the neoliberal approach on the right to housing to new groups and different settings

Multilevel analysis of predictors of multiple indicators of childhood vaccination in Nigeria

Background Substantial inequalities exist in childhood vaccination coverage levels. To increase vaccine uptake, factors that predict vaccination coverage in children should be identified and addressed. Methods Using data from the 2018 Nigeria Demographic and Health Survey and geospatial data sets, we fitted Bayesian multilevel binomial and multinomial logistic regression models to analyse independent predictors of three vaccination outcomes: receipt of the first dose of Pentavalent vaccine (containing diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis, Hemophilus influenzae type B and Hepatitis B vaccines) (PENTA1) (n=6059) and receipt of the third dose having received the first (PENTA3/1) (n=3937) in children aged 12-23 months, and receipt of measles vaccine (MV) (n=11839) among children aged 12-35 months. Results Factors associated with vaccination were broadly similar for documented versus recall evidence of vaccination. Based on any evidence of vaccination, we found that health card/document ownership, receipt of vitamin A and maternal educational level were significantly associated with each outcome. Although the coverage of each vaccine dose was higher in urban than rural areas, urban residence was not significant in multivariable analyses that included travel time. Indicators relating to socio-economic status, as well as ethnic group, skilled birth attendance, lower travel time to the nearest health facility and problems seeking health care were significantly associated with both PENTA1 and MV. Maternal religion was related to PENTA1 and PENTA3/1 and maternal age related to MV and PENTA3/1; other significant variables were associated with one outcome each. Substantial residual community level variances in different strata were observed in the fitted models for each outcome. Conclusion Our analysis has highlighted socio-demographic and health care access factors that affect not only beginning but completing the vaccination series in Nigeria. Other factors not measured by the DHS such as health service quality and community attitudes should also be investigated and addressed to tackle inequities in coverage.<br/

Thigh-length compression stockings and DVT after stroke

Controversy exists as to whether neoadjuvant chemotherapy improves survival in patients with invasive bladder cancer, despite randomised controlled trials of more than 3000 patients. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effect of such treatment on survival in patients with this disease

Azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Background Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatory actions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients were randomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once per day by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatment groups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment and were twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants and local study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to the outcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936. Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) were eligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was 65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomly allocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall, 561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days (rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median 10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days (rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, no significant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilation or death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24). Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or other prespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restricted to patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication. Funding UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council) and National Institute of Health Research