The Sustained Effects of CBT Training on Therapist Competence and Patient Outcomes

The continued effectiveness of in-service psychological therapy training requires evaluation. This study assessed therapist competence and patient clinical outcome during cognitive behaviour therapy training and 12+ months post-training. Trainee competence was assessed using audio-recorded sessions rated on the Cognitive Therapy Scale Revised at the beginning (n = 33) and end of training (n = 45), and at least 12 months post-training (n = 45). Pre-to-posttreatment clinical outcome for trainees’ patients during the course (n = 360) and post-training (n = 360) was evaluated using standardised self-report measures. The relationship between therapist competence and patient outcomes was explored. Trainees achieved competence during training (100%, n = 45) and largely maintained competence post-training (84%, n = 38). Patients demonstrated pre-to-posttreatment effect sizes between 1.38 and 1.89 and reliable improvement exceeding 80% during and after training. Competence was not significantly associated with patient outcome. Trainees predominantly maintained competence and achieved good clinical outcomes post-training. Structured training and continued use of regular supervision possibly supported retention of competence

The changing contributory role to infections of work, public transport, shopping, hospitality and leisure activities throughout the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in England and Wales

Background: Understanding how non-household activities contributed to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections under different levels of national health restrictions is vital. // Methods: Among adult Virus Watch participants in England and Wales, we used multivariable logistic regressions and adjusted-weighted population attributable fractions (aPAF) assessing the contribution of work, public transport, shopping, and hospitality and leisure activities to infections. // Results: Under restrictions, among 17,256 participants (502 infections), work [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.01 (1.65–2.44), (aPAF) 30% (22–38%)] and transport [(aOR 1.15 (0.94–1.40), aPAF 5% (-3–12%)], were risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 but shopping, hospitality and leisure were not. Following the lifting of restrictions, among 11,413 participants (493 infections), work [(aOR 1.35 (1.11–1.64), aPAF 17% (6–26%)] and transport [(aOR 1.27 (1.04–1.57), aPAF 12% (2–22%)] contributed most, with indoor hospitality [(aOR 1.21 (0.98–1.48), aPAF 7% (-1–15%)] and leisure [(aOR 1.24 (1.02–1.51), aPAF 10% (1–18%)] increasing. During the Omicron variant, with individuals more socially engaged, among 11,964 participants (2335 infections), work [(aOR 1.28 (1.16–1.41), aPAF (11% (7–15%)] and transport [(aOR 1.16 (1.04–1.28), aPAF 6% (2–9%)] remained important but indoor hospitality [(aOR 1.43 (1.26–1.62), aPAF 20% (13–26%)] and leisure [(aOR 1.35 (1.22–1.48), aPAF 10% (7–14%)] dominated. // Conclusions: Work and public transport were important to transmissions throughout the pandemic with hospitality and leisure’s contribution increasing as restrictions were lifted, highlighting the importance of restricting leisure and hospitality alongside advising working from home, when facing a highly infectious and virulent respiratory infection

Differential Risk of SARS-CoV-2 Infection by Occupation: Evidence from the Virus Watch prospective cohort study in England and Wales

BACKGROUND: Workers across different occupations vary in their risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, but the direct contribution of occupation to this relationship is unclear. This study aimed to investigate how infection risk differed across occupational groups in England and Wales up to April 2022, after adjustment for potential confounding and stratification by pandemic phase. METHODS: Data from 15,190 employed/self-employed participants in the Virus Watch prospective cohort study were used to generate risk ratios for virologically- or serologically-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection using robust Poisson regression, adjusting for socio-demographic and health-related factors and non-work public activities. We calculated attributable fractions (AF) amongst the exposed for belonging to each occupational group based on adjusted risk ratios (aRR). RESULTS: Increased risk was seen in nurses (aRR = 1.44, 1.25-1.65; AF = 30%, 20-39%), doctors (aRR = 1.33, 1.08-1.65; AF = 25%, 7-39%), carers (1.45, 1.19-1.76; AF = 31%, 16-43%), primary school teachers (aRR = 1.67, 1.42- 1.96; AF = 40%, 30-49%), secondary school teachers (aRR = 1.48, 1.26-1.72; AF = 32%, 21-42%), and teaching support occupations (aRR = 1.42, 1.23-1.64; AF = 29%, 18-39%) compared to office-based professional occupations. Differential risk was apparent in the earlier phases (Feb 2020-May 2021) and attenuated later (June-October 2021) for most groups, although teachers and teaching support workers demonstrated persistently elevated risk across waves. CONCLUSIONS: Occupational differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection risk vary over time and are robust to adjustment for socio-demographic, health-related, and non-workplace activity-related potential confounders. Direct investigation into workplace factors underlying elevated risk and how these change over time is needed to inform occupational health interventions

Settings for non-household transmission of SARS-CoV-2 during the second lockdown in England and Wales – analysis of the Virus Watch household community cohort study [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]

Background: "Lockdowns" to control serious respiratory virus pandemics were widely used during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.  However, there is limited information to understand the settings in which most transmission occurs during lockdowns, to support refinement of similar policies for future pandemics. / Methods: Among Virus Watch household cohort participants we identified those infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) outside the household.  Using survey activity data, we undertook multivariable logistic regressions assessing the contribution of activities on non-household infection risk.  We calculated adjusted population attributable fractions (APAF) to estimate which activity accounted for the greatest proportion of non-household infections during the pandemic's second wave. / Results: Among 10,858 adults, 18% of cases were likely due to household transmission.  Among 10,475 participants (household-acquired cases excluded), including 874 non-household-acquired infections, infection was associated with: leaving home for work or education (AOR 1.20 (1.02 - 1.42), APAF 6.9%); public transport (more than once per week AOR 1.82 (1.49 - 2.23), public transport APAF 12.42%); and shopping (more than once per week AOR 1.69 (1.29 - 2.21), shopping APAF 34.56%).  Other non-household activities were rare and not significantly associated with infection. / Conclusions: During lockdown, going to work and using public or shared transport independently increased infection risk, however only a minority did these activities.  Most participants visited shops, accounting for one-third of non-household transmission.  Transmission in restricted hospitality and leisure settings was minimal suggesting these restrictions were effective.   If future respiratory infection pandemics emerge these findings highlight the value of working from home, using forms of transport that minimise exposure to others, minimising exposure to shops and restricting non-essential activities

Commercial Immunoglobulin Products Contain Neutralizing Antibodies Against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Spike Protein

BACKGROUND: Patients with antibody deficiency respond poorly to COVID-19 vaccination and are at risk of severe or prolonged infection. They are given long-term immunoglobulin replacement therapy (IRT) prepared from healthy donor plasma to confer passive immunity against infection. Following widespread COVID-19 vaccination alongside natural exposure, we hypothesised that immunoglobulin preparations will now contain neutralising SARS-CoV-2 spike antibodies which confer protection against COVID-19 disease and may help to treat chronic infection. METHODS: We evaluated anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike antibody in a cohort of patients before and after immunoglobulin infusion. Neutralising capacity of patient samples and immunoglobulin products was assessed using in vitro pseudo-virus and live-virus neutralisation assays, the latter investigating multiple batches against current circulating omicron variants. We describe the clinical course of nine patients started on IRT during treatment of COVID-19. RESULTS: In 35 individuals with antibody deficiency established on IRT, median anti-spike antibody titre increased from 2123 to 10600 U/ml post-infusion, with corresponding increase in pseudo-virus neutralisation titres to levels comparable to healthy donors. Testing immunoglobulin products directly in the live-virus assay confirmed neutralisation, including of BQ1.1 and XBB variants, but with variation between immunoglobulin products and batches.Initiation of IRT alongside Remdesivir in patients with antibody deficiency and prolonged COVID-19 infection (median 189 days, maximum over 900 days with an ancestral viral strain) resulted in clearance of SARS-CoV-2 virus at a median of 20 days. CONCLUSIONS: Immunoglobulin preparations now contain neutralising anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies which are transmitted to patients and help to treat COVID-19 in individuals with failure of humoral immunity

Exploring the relationship between job characteristics and infection: Application of a COVID-19 job exposure matrix to SARS-CoV-2 infection data in the United Kingdom

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess whether workplace exposures as estimated via a COVID-19 job exposure matrix (JEM) are associated with SARS-CoV-2 in the UK. METHODS: Data on 244 470 participants were available from the Office for National Statistics Coronavirus Infection Survey (CIS) and 16 801 participants from the Virus Watch Cohort, restricted to workers aged 20-64 years. Analysis used logistic regression models with SARS-CoV-2 as the dependent variable for eight individual JEM domains (number of workers, nature of contacts, contact via surfaces, indoor or outdoor location, ability to social distance, use of face covering, job insecurity, and migrant workers) with adjustment for age, sex, ethnicity, index of multiple deprivation (IMD), region, household size, urban versus rural area, and health conditions. Analyses were repeated for three time periods (i) February 2020 (Virus Watch)/April 2020 (CIS) to May 2021), (ii) June 2021 to November 2021, and (iii) December 2021 to January 2022. RESULTS: Overall, higher risk classifications for the first six domains tended to be associated with an increased risk of infection, with little evidence of a relationship for domains relating to proportion of workers with job insecurity or migrant workers. By time there was a clear exposure-response relationship for these domains in the first period only. Results were largely consistent across the two UK cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: An exposure-response relationship exists in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic for number of contacts, nature of contacts, contacts via surfaces, indoor or outdoor location, ability to social distance and use of face coverings. These associations appear to have diminished over time

Relative contribution of essential and non-essential activities to SARS-CoV-2 transmission following the lifting of public health restrictions in England and Wales

PURPOSE: We aimed to understand which non-household activities increased infection odds and contributed greatest to SARS-CoV-2 infections following the lifting of public health restrictions in England and Wales. PROCEDURES: We undertook multivariable logistic regressions assessing the contribution to infections of activities reported by adult Virus Watch Community Cohort Study participants. We calculated adjusted weighted population attributable fractions (aPAF) estimating which activity contributed greatest to infections. FINDINGS: Among 11 413 participants (493 infections), infection was associated with: leaving home for work (aOR 1.35 (1.11-1.64), aPAF 17%), public transport (aOR 1.27 (1.04-1.57), aPAF 12%), shopping once (aOR 1.83 (1.36-2.45)) vs. more than three times a week, indoor leisure (aOR 1.24 (1.02-1.51), aPAF 10%) and indoor hospitality (aOR 1.21 (0.98-1.48), aPAF 7%). We found no association for outdoor hospitality (1.14 (0.94-1.39), aPAF 5%) or outdoor leisure (1.14 (0.82-1.59), aPAF 1%). CONCLUSION: Essential activities (work and public transport) carried the greatest risk and were the dominant contributors to infections. Non-essential indoor activities (hospitality and leisure) increased risk but contributed less. Outdoor activities carried no statistical risk and contributed to fewer infections. As countries aim to 'live with COVID', mitigating transmission in essential and indoor venues becomes increasingly relevant

Antibody correlates of protection from SARS-CoV-2 reinfection prior to vaccination : a nested case-control within the SIREN study

Funding: This study was supported by the U.K. Health Security Agency, the U.K. Department of Health and Social Care (with contributions from the governments in Northern Ireland, Wales, and Scotland), the National Institute for Health Research, and grant from the UK Medical Research Council (grant number MR/W02067X/1). This work was supported by the Francis Crick Institute which receives its core funding from Cancer Research UK (CC2087, CC1283), the UK Medical Research Council (CC2087, CC1283), and the Wellcome Trust (CC2087, CC1283).Objectives To investigate serological differences between SARS-CoV-2 reinfection cases and contemporary controls, to identify antibody correlates of protection against reinfection. Methods We performed a case-control study, comparing reinfection cases with singly infected individuals pre-vaccination, matched by gender, age, region and timing of first infection. Serum samples were tested for anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike (anti-S), anti-SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (anti-N), live virus microneutralisation (LV-N) and pseudovirus microneutralisation (PV-N). Results were analysed using fixed effect linear regression and fitted into conditional logistic regression models. Results We identified 23 cases and 92 controls. First infections occurred before November 2020; reinfections occurred before February 2021, pre-vaccination. Anti-S levels, LV-N and PV-N titres were significantly lower among cases; no difference was found for anti-N levels. Increasing anti-S levels were associated with reduced risk of reinfection (OR 0·63, CI 0·47-0·85), but no association for anti-N levels (OR 0·88, CI 0·73-1·05). Titres >40 were correlated with protection against reinfection for LV-N Wuhan (OR 0·02, CI 0·001–0·31) and LV-N Alpha (OR 0·07, CI 0·009–0·62). For PV-N, titres >100 were associated with protection against Wuhan (OR 0·14, CI 0·03–0·64) and Alpha (0·06, CI 0·008–0·40). Conclusions Before vaccination, protection against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection was directly correlated with anti-S levels, PV-N and LV-N titres, but not with anti-N levels. Detectable LV-N titres were sufficient for protection, whilst PV-N titres >100 were required for a protective effect. Trial registration number ISRCTN11041050Publisher PDFPeer reviewe