Healthcare workers’ views on mandatory SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in the UK: A cross-sectional, mixed-methods analysis from the UK-REACH study

Background: Several countries now have mandatory SARS-CoV-2 vaccination for healthcare workers (HCWs) or the general population. HCWs’ views on this are largely unknown. Using data from the nationwide UK-REACH study we aimed to understand UK HCW's views on improving SARS-CoV-2 vaccination coverage, including mandatory vaccination. // Methods: Between 21st April and 26th June 2021, we administered an online questionnaire via email to 17 891 UK HCWs recruited as part of a longitudinal cohort from across the UK who had previously responded to a baseline questionnaire (primarily recruited through email) as part of the United Kingdom Research study into Ethnicity And COVID-19 outcomes in Healthcare workers (UK-REACH) nationwide prospective cohort study. We categorised responses to a free-text question “What should society do if people do not get vaccinated against COVID-19?” using qualitative content analysis. We collapsed categories into a binary variable: favours mandatory vaccination or not, using logistic regression to calculate its demographic predictors, and its occupational, health, and attitudinal predictors adjusted for demographics. // Findings: Of 5633 questionnaire respondents, 3235 answered the free text question. Median age of free text responders was 47 years (IQR 36–56) and 2705 (74.3%) were female. 18% (n = 578) favoured mandatory vaccination (201 [6%] participants for HCWs and others working with vulnerable populations; 377 [12%] for the general population), but the most frequent suggestion was education (32%, n = 1047). Older HCWs (OR 1.84; 95% CI 1.44–2.34 [≥55 years vs 16 years to <40 years]), HCWs vaccinated against influenza (OR 1.49; 95% CI 1.11–2.01 [2 vaccines vs none]), and with more positive vaccination attitudes generally (OR 1.10; 95% CI 1.06–1.15) were more likely to favour mandatory vaccination, whereas female HCWs (OR= 0.79, 95% CI 0.63–0.96, vs male HCWs) and Black HCWs (OR=0.46, 95% CI 0.25–0.85, vs white HCWs) were less likely to. // Interpretation: Only one in six of the HCWs in this large, diverse, UK-wide sample favoured mandatory vaccination. Building trust, educating, and supporting HCWs who are hesitant about vaccination may be more acceptable, effective, and equitable

Access to personal protective equipment in healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom: results from a nationwide cohort study (UK-REACH)

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Effective use of personal protective equipment (PPE) reduces this risk. We sought to determine the prevalence and predictors of self-reported access to appropriate PPE (aPPE) for HCWs in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted cross sectional analyses using data from a nationwide questionnaire-based cohort study administered between December 2020-February 2021. The outcome was a binary measure of self-reported aPPE (access all of the time vs access most of the time or less frequently) at two timepoints: the first national lockdown in the UK in March 2020 (primary analysis) and at the time of questionnaire response (secondary analysis). RESULTS: Ten thousand five hundred eight HCWs were included in the primary analysis, and 12,252 in the secondary analysis. 35.2% of HCWs reported aPPE at all times in the primary analysis; 83.9% reported aPPE at all times in the secondary analysis. In the primary analysis, after adjustment (for age, sex, ethnicity, migration status, occupation, aerosol generating procedure exposure, work sector and region, working hours, night shift frequency and trust in employing organisation), older HCWs and those working in Intensive Care Units were more likely to report aPPE at all times. Asian HCWs (aOR:0.77, 95%CI 0.67-0.89 [vs White]), those in allied health professional and dental roles (vs those in medical roles), and those who saw a higher number of COVID-19 patients compared to those who saw none (≥ 21 patients/week 0.74, 0.61-0.90) were less likely to report aPPE at all times. Those who trusted their employing organisation to deal with concerns about unsafe clinical practice, compared to those who did not, were twice as likely to report aPPE at all times. Significant predictors were largely unchanged in the secondary analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Only a third of HCWs in the UK reported aPPE at all times during the first lockdown and that aPPE had improved later in the pandemic. We also identified key determinants of aPPE during the first UK lockdown, which have mostly persisted since lockdown was eased. These findings have important implications for the safe delivery of healthcare during the pandemic

Psychotherapy as a treatment modality for psychiatric disorders: Perceptions of general public of Karachi, Pakistan

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Psychiatric disorders affect about 450 million individuals worldwide. A number of treatment modalities such as psychotropic medications, psychotherapy and electroconvulsive therapy can be used to treat these disorders. Attitudes of general public play a pivotal role in effective utilization of mental health services. We explored the perceptions of general public of Karachi, Pakistan regarding psychotherapy.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A cross-sectional study was conducted in Karachi, Pakistan during July-August, 2008. A three-step sampling strategy and a structured questionnaire were employed to survey knowledge and perceptions of adult general public about psychotherapy. Descriptive statistics were used for baseline characteristics. Logistic regression models were used to investigate any significant associations between baseline characteristics of the participants and their perceptions.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The study sample comprised of 985 individuals (536 males; 531 financially independent) with an average age of 36.7 years (SD 13.54 years) and 12.5 years (SD 3.09 years) of education were included. Majority (59.4%; n = 585) claimed to be aware of psychotherapy as a treatment option for psychiatric disorders but 47.5% of these (n = 278/585) failed to identify its correct definition. Concerns voiced by the participants about psychotherapy included stigma (48.7%) and breech in confidentiality (39.5%); 60.7% opined it cost effective and 86.5% favored its use as an adjuvant modality. A preference for psychotherapy as the treatment strategy for psychiatric disorders was demonstrated by 46.6% (n = 459/985). Younger, more educated, financially independent and female participants were more likely to prefer psychotherapy as were those who deemed it cost effective.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Positive attitudes regarding the acceptability, clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of psychotherapy were observed in a sample representative of general public of Karachi, Pakistan. These findings highlight its potential utility for devising pragmatic mental health strategies in the face of limited resources.</p

Incident type 2 diabetes attributable to suboptimal diet in 184 countries

The global burden of diet-attributable type 2 diabetes (T2D) is not well established. This risk assessment model estimated T2D incidence among adults attributable to direct and body weight-mediated effects of 11 dietary factors in 184 countries in 1990 and 2018. In 2018, suboptimal intake of these dietary factors was estimated to be attributable to 14.1 million (95% uncertainty interval (UI), 13.8–14.4 million) incident T2D cases, representing 70.3% (68.8–71.8%) of new cases globally. Largest T2D burdens were attributable to insufficient whole-grain intake (26.1% (25.0–27.1%)), excess refined rice and wheat intake (24.6% (22.3–27.2%)) and excess processed meat intake (20.3% (18.3–23.5%)). Across regions, highest proportional burdens were in central and eastern Europe and central Asia (85.6% (83.4–87.7%)) and Latin America and the Caribbean (81.8% (80.1–83.4%)); and lowest proportional burdens were in South Asia (55.4% (52.1–60.7%)). Proportions of diet-attributable T2D were generally larger in men than in women and were inversely correlated with age. Diet-attributable T2D was generally larger among urban versus rural residents and higher versus lower educated individuals, except in high-income countries, central and eastern Europe and central Asia, where burdens were larger in rural residents and in lower educated individuals. Compared with 1990, global diet-attributable T2D increased by 2.6 absolute percentage points (8.6 million more cases) in 2018, with variation in these trends by world region and dietary factor. These findings inform nutritional priorities and clinical and public health planning to improve dietary quality and reduce T2D globally.publishedVersio

Children’s and adolescents’ rising animal-source food intakes in 1990–2018 were impacted by age, region, parental education and urbanicity

Animal-source foods (ASF) provide nutrition for children and adolescents’ physical and cognitive development. Here, we use data from the Global Dietary Database and Bayesian hierarchical models to quantify global, regional and national ASF intakes between 1990 and 2018 by age group across 185 countries, representing 93% of the world’s child population. Mean ASF intake was 1.9 servings per day, representing 16% of children consuming at least three daily servings. Intake was similar between boys and girls, but higher among urban children with educated parents. Consumption varied by age from 0.6 at <1 year to 2.5 servings per day at 15–19 years. Between 1990 and 2018, mean ASF intake increased by 0.5 servings per week, with increases in all regions except sub-Saharan Africa. In 2018, total ASF consumption was highest in Russia, Brazil, Mexico and Turkey, and lowest in Uganda, India, Kenya and Bangladesh. These findings can inform policy to address malnutrition through targeted ASF consumption programmes.publishedVersio

Risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection in a multiethnic cohort of United Kingdom healthcare workers (UK-REACH) : a cross-sectional analysis

Background: Healthcare workers (HCWs), particularly those from ethnic minority groups, have been shown to be at disproportionately higher risk of infection with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) compared to the general population. However, there is insufficient evidence on how demographic and occupational factors influence infection risk among ethnic minority HCWs. Methods and findings: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis using data from the baseline questionnaire of the United Kingdom Research study into Ethnicity and Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Outcomes in Healthcare workers (UK-REACH) cohort study, administered between December 2020 and March 2021. We used logistic regression to examine associations of demographic, household, and occupational risk factors with SARS-CoV-2 infection (defined by polymerase chain reaction (PCR), serology, or suspected COVID-19) in a diverse group of HCWs. The primary exposure of interest was self-reported ethnicity. Among 10,772 HCWs who worked during the first UK national lockdown in March 2020, the median age was 45 (interquartile range [IQR] 35 to 54), 75.1% were female and 29.6% were from ethnic minority groups. A total of 2,496 (23.2%) reported previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. The fully adjusted model contained the following dependent variables: demographic factors (age, sex, ethnicity, migration status, deprivation, religiosity), household factors (living with key workers, shared spaces in accommodation, number of people in household), health factors (presence/absence of diabetes or immunosuppression, smoking history, shielding status, SARS-CoV-2 vaccination status), the extent of social mixing outside of the household, and occupational factors (job role, the area in which a participant worked, use of public transport to work, exposure to confirmed suspected COVID-19 patients, personal protective equipment [PPE] access, aerosol generating procedure exposure, night shift pattern, and the UK region of workplace). After adjustment, demographic and household factors associated with increased odds of infection included younger age, living with other key workers, and higher religiosity. Important occupational risk factors associated with increased odds of infection included attending to a higher number of COVID-19 positive patients (aOR 2.59, 95% CI 2.11 to 3.18 for ≥21 patients per week versus none), working in a nursing or midwifery role (1.30, 1.11 to 1.53, compared to doctors), reporting a lack of access to PPE (1.29, 1.17 to 1.43), and working in an ambulance (2.00, 1.56 to 2.58) or hospital inpatient setting (1.55, 1.38 to 1.75). Those who worked in intensive care units were less likely to have been infected (0.76, 0.64 to 0.92) than those who did not. Black HCWs were more likely to have been infected than their White colleagues, an effect which attenuated after adjustment for other known risk factors. This study is limited by self-selection bias and the cross sectional nature of the study means we cannot infer the direction of causality. Conclusions: We identified key sociodemographic and occupational risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection among UK HCWs, and have determined factors that might contribute to a disproportionate odds of infection in HCWs from Black ethnic groups. These findings demonstrate the importance of social and occupational factors in driving ethnic disparities in COVID-19 outcomes, and should inform policies, including targeted vaccination strategies and risk assessments aimed at protecting HCWs in future waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Trial registration: The study was prospectively registered at ISRCTN (reference number: ISRCTN11811602)

Healthcare workers' views on mandatory SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in the UK: A cross-sectional, mixed-methods analysis from the UK-REACH study.

Several countries now have mandatory SARS-CoV-2 vaccination for healthcare workers (HCWs) or the general population. HCWs' views on this are largely unknown. Using data from the nationwide UK-REACH study we aimed to understand UK HCW's views on improving SARS-CoV-2 vaccination coverage, including mandatory vaccination.Between 21st April and 26th June 2021, we administered an online questionnaire via email to 17 891 UK HCWs recruited as part of a longitudinal cohort from across the UK who had previously responded to a baseline questionnaire (primarily recruited through email) as part of the United Kingdom Research study into Ethnicity And COVID-19 outcomes in Healthcare workers (UK-REACH) nationwide prospective cohort study. We categorised responses to a free-text question "What should society do if people do not get vaccinated against COVID-19?" using qualitative content analysis. We collapsed categories into a binary variable: favours mandatory vaccination or not, using logistic regression to calculate its demographic predictors, and its occupational, health, and attitudinal predictors adjusted for demographics.Of 5633 questionnaire respondents, 3235 answered the free text question. Median age of free text responders was 47 years (IQR 36-56) and 2705 (74.3%) were female. 18% (n = 578) favoured mandatory vaccination (201 [6%] participants for HCWs and others working with vulnerable populations; 377 [12%] for the general population), but the most frequent suggestion was education (32%, n = 1047). Older HCWs (OR 1.84; 95% CI 1.44-2.34 [≥55 years vs 16 years to <40 years]), HCWs vaccinated against influenza (OR 1.49; 95% CI 1.11-2.01 [2 vaccines vs none]), and with more positive vaccination attitudes generally (OR 1.10; 95% CI 1.06-1.15) were more likely to favour mandatory vaccination, whereas female HCWs (OR= 0.79, 95% CI 0.63-0.96, vs male HCWs) and Black HCWs (OR=0.46, 95% CI 0.25-0.85, vs white HCWs) were less likely to.Only one in six of the HCWs in this large, diverse, UK-wide sample favoured mandatory vaccination. Building trust, educating, and supporting HCWs who are hesitant about vaccination may be more acceptable, effective, and equitable.</p

Sugar-sweetened beverage intakes among adults between 1990 and 2018 in 185 countries

Sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) are associated with cardiometabolic diseases and social inequities. For most nations, recent estimates and trends of intake are not available; nor variation by education or urbanicity. We investigated SSB intakes among adults between 1990 and 2018 in 185 countries, stratified subnationally by age, sex, education, and rural/urban residence, using data from the Global Dietary Database. In 2018, mean global SSB intake was 2.7 (8 oz = 248 grams) servings/week (95% UI 2.5-2.9) (range: 0.7 (0.5-1.1) in South Asia to 7.8 (7.1-8.6) in Latin America/Caribbean). Intakes were higher in male vs. female, younger vs. older, more vs. less educated, and urban vs. rural adults. Variations by education and urbanicity were largest in Sub-Saharan Africa. Between 1990 and 2018, SSB intakes increased by +0.37 (+0.29, +0.47), with the largest increase in Sub-Saharan Africa. These findings inform intervention, surveillance, and policy actions worldwide, highlighting the growing problem of SSBs for public health in Sub-Saharan Africa.Peer reviewe

Global, regional, and national consumption of animal-source foods between 1990 and 2018: findings from the Global Dietary Database

International audienceBackground:Diet is a major modifiable risk factor for human health and overall consumption patterns affect planetary health. We aimed to quantify global, regional, and national consumption levels of animal-source foods (ASF) to inform intervention, surveillance, and policy priorities.Methods:Individual-level dietary surveys across 185 countries conducted between 1990 and 2018 were identified, obtained, standardised, and assessed among children and adults, jointly stratified by age, sex, education level, and rural versus urban residence. We included 499 discrete surveys (91·2% nationally or subnationally representative) with data for ASF (unprocessed red meat, processed meat, eggs, seafood, milk, cheese, and yoghurt), comprising 3·8 million individuals from 134 countries representing 95·2% of the world population in 2018. We used Bayesian hierarchical models to account for differences in survey methods and representativeness, time trends, and input data and modelling uncertainty, with five-fold cross-validation.Findings:In 2018, mean global intake per person of unprocessed red meat was 51 g/day (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 48–54; region-specific range 7–114 g/day); 17 countries (23·9% of the world's population) had mean intakes of at least one serving (100 g) per day. Global mean intake of processed meat was 17 g/day (95% UI 15–21 g/day; region-specific range 3–54 g/day); seafood, 28 g/day (27–30 g/day; 12–44 g/day); eggs, 21 g/day (18–24 g/day; 6–35 g/day); milk 88 g/day (84–93 g/day; 45–185 g/day); cheese, 8 g/day (8–10 g/day; 1–34 g/day); and yoghurt, 20 g/day (17–23 g/day; 7–84 g/day). Mean national intakes were at least one serving per day for processed meat (≥50 g/day) in countries representing 6·9% of the global population; for cheese (≥42 g/day) in 2·3%; for eggs (≥55 g/day) in 0·7%; for milk (≥245 g/day) in 0·3%; for seafood (≥100 g/day) in 0·8%; and for yoghurt (≥245 g/day) in less than 0·1%. Among the 25 most populous countries in 2018, total ASF intake was highest in Russia (5·8 servings per day), Germany (3·8 servings per day), and the UK (3·7 servings per day), and lowest in Tanzania (0·9 servings per day) and India (0·7 servings per day). Global and regional intakes of ASF were generally similar by sex. Compared with children, adults generally consumed more unprocessed red meat, seafood and cheese, and less milk; energy-adjusted intakes of other ASF were more similar. Globally, ASF intakes (servings per week) were higher among more-educated versus less-educated adults, with greatest global differences for milk (0·79), eggs (0·47), unprocessed red meat (0·42), cheese (0·28), seafood (0·28), yoghurt (0·22), and processed meat (0·21). This was also true for urban compared to rural areas, with largest global differences (servings per week) for unprocessed red meat (0·47), milk (0·38), and eggs (0·20). Between 1990 and 2018, global intakes (servings per week) increased for unprocessed red meat (1·20), eggs (1·18), milk (0·63), processed meat (0·50), seafood (0·44), and cheese (0·14).Interpretation:Our estimates of ASF consumption identify populations with both lower and higher than optimal intakes. These estimates can inform the targeting of intervention, surveillance, and policy priorities relevant to both human and planetary health