Prisoners’ Families’ Research: Developments, Debates and Directions

After many years of relative obscurity, research on prisoners’ families has gained significant momentum. It has expanded from case-oriented descriptive analyses of family experiences to longitudinal studies of child and family development and even macro analyses of the effects on communities in societies of mass incarceration. Now the field engages multi-disciplinary and international interest although it arguably still remains on the periphery of mainstream criminological, psychological and sociological research agendas. This chapter discusses developments in prisoners’ families’ research and its positioning in academia and practice. It does not aim to provide an all-encompassing review of the literature rather it will offer some reflections on how and why the field has developed as it has and on its future directions. The chapter is divided into three parts. The first discusses reasons for the historically small body of research on prisoners’ families and for the growth in research interest over the past two decades. The second analyses patterns and shifts in the focus of research studies and considers how the field has been shaped by intersecting disciplinary interests of psychology, sociology, criminology and socio-legal studies. The final part reflects on substantive and ethical issues that are likely to shape the direction of prisoners’ families’ research in the future

Genetic mechanisms of critical illness in COVID-19.

Host-mediated lung inflammation is present1, and drives mortality2, in the critical illness caused by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Host genetic variants associated with critical illness may identify mechanistic targets for therapeutic development3. Here we report the results of the GenOMICC (Genetics Of Mortality In Critical Care) genome-wide association study in 2,244 critically ill patients with COVID-19 from 208 UK intensive care units. We have identified and replicated the following new genome-wide significant associations: on chromosome 12q24.13 (rs10735079, P = 1.65 × 10-8) in a gene cluster that encodes antiviral restriction enzyme activators (OAS1, OAS2 and OAS3); on chromosome 19p13.2 (rs74956615, P = 2.3 × 10-8) near the gene that encodes tyrosine kinase 2 (TYK2); on chromosome 19p13.3 (rs2109069, P = 3.98 ×  10-12) within the gene that encodes dipeptidyl peptidase 9 (DPP9); and on chromosome 21q22.1 (rs2236757, P = 4.99 × 10-8) in the interferon receptor gene IFNAR2. We identified potential targets for repurposing of licensed medications: using Mendelian randomization, we found evidence that low expression of IFNAR2, or high expression of TYK2, are associated with life-threatening disease; and transcriptome-wide association in lung tissue revealed that high expression of the monocyte-macrophage chemotactic receptor CCR2 is associated with severe COVID-19. Our results identify robust genetic signals relating to key host antiviral defence mechanisms and mediators of inflammatory organ damage in COVID-19. Both mechanisms may be amenable to targeted treatment with existing drugs. However, large-scale randomized clinical trials will be essential before any change to clinical practice

Kidney Transplant-Associated Viral Infection Rates and Outcomes in a Single-Centre Cohort

Background: Opportunistic infections remain a significant cause of morbidity and mortality after kidney transplantation. This retrospective cohort study aimed to assess the incidence and predictors of post-transplant DNA virus infections (CMV, EBV, BKV and JCV infections) in kidney transplant recipients (KTR) at a single tertiary centre and evaluate their impact on graft outcomes. Methods: KTR transplanted between 2000 and 2021 were evaluated. Multivariate logistic regression analysis and Cox proportional hazard analyses were used to identify factors associated with DNA virus infections and their impact on allograft outcomes respectively. A sub-analysis of individual viral infections was also conducted to describe the pattern, timing, interventions, and outcomes of individual infections. Results: Data from 962 recipients were evaluated (Mean age 47.3 ± 15 years, 62% male, 81% white). 30% of recipients (288/962) had infection(s) by one or more of the DNA viruses. Individually, CMV, EBV, BKV and JCV viruses were diagnosed in 13.8%. 11.3%, 8.9% and 4.4% of recipients respectively. Factors associated with increased risk of post-transplant DNA virus infection included recipient female gender, higher number of HLA mismatch, lower baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), CMV seropositive donor, maintenance with cyclosporin (rather than tacrolimus) and higher number of maintenance immunosuppressive medications. The slope of eGFR decline was steeper in recipients with a history of DNA virus infection irrespective of the virus type. Further, GFR declined faster with an increasing number of different viral infections. Death-censored graft loss adjusted for age, gender, total HLA mismatch, baseline eGFR and acute rejection was significantly higher in recipients with a history of DNA virus infection than those without infection (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR, 1.74, 95% CI, 1.08–2.80)). In contrast, dialysis-free survival did not differ between the two groups of recipients (aHR, 1.13, 95% CI, 0.88–1.47). Conclusion: Post-transplant DNA viral infection is associated with a higher risk of allograft loss. Careful management of immunosuppression and close surveillance of at-risk recipients may improve graft outcomes

Management of oral and maxillofacial trauma during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom

We assess the effect of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on UK oral and maxillofacial (OMF) trauma services and patient treatment during the first wave of the pandemic. From 1 April 2020 until 31 July 2020, OMF surgery units in the UK were invited to prospectively record all patients presenting with OMF trauma. Information included clinical presentation, mechanism of injury, how it was managed, and whether or not treatment included surgery. Participants were also asked to compare the patient’s care with the treatment that would normally have been given before the crisis. Twenty-nine units across the UK contributed with 2,229 entries. The most common aetiology was mechanical fall (39%). The most common injuries were soft tissue wounds (52%) and, for hard tissues, mandibular fractures (13%). Of 876 facial fractures, 79 patients’ treatment differed from what would have been normal pre-COVID, and 33 had their treatment deferred. Therefore the care of 112 (14%) patients was at variance with normal practice because of COVID restrictions. The pattern of OMFS injuries changed during the first COVID-19 lockdown. For the majority, best practice and delivery of quality trauma care continued despite the on-going operational challenges, and only a small proportion of patients had changes to their treatment. The lessons learnt from the first wave, combined with adequate resources and preoperative testing of patients, should allow those facial injuries in the second wave to receive best-practice care