Search

Background: As evidence related to the COVID-19 pandemic surged, databases, platforms, and repositories evolved with features and functions to assist users in promptly finding the most relevant evidence. In response, research synthesis teams adopted novel searching strategies to sift through the vast amount of evidence to synthesize and disseminate the most up-to-date evidence. This paper explores the key database features that facilitated systematic searching for rapid evidence synthesis during the COVID-19 pandemic to inform knowledge management infrastructure during future global health emergencies. Methods: This paper outlines the features and functions of previously existing and newly created evidence sources routinely searched as part of the NCCMT's Rapid Evidence Service methods, including databases, platforms, and repositories. Specific functions of each evidence source were assessed as they pertain to searching in the context of a public health emergency, including the topics of indexed citations, the level of evidence of indexed citations, and specific usability features of each evidence source. Results: Thirteen evidence sources were assessed, of which four were newly created and nine were either pre-existing or adapted from previously existing resources. Evidence sources varied in topics indexed, level of evidence indexed, and specific searching functions. Conclusion: This paper offers insights into which features enabled systematic searching for the completion of rapid reviews to inform decision makers within 5–10 days. These findings provide guidance for knowledge management strategies and evidence infrastructures during future public health emergencies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The ability of the public to remain psychologically resilient in the face of public health emergencies and disasters (such as the COVID-19 pandemic) is a key factor in the effectiveness of a national response to such events. Community resilience and social capital are often perceived as beneficial and ensuring that a community is socially and psychologically resilient may aid emergency response and recovery. This review presents a synthesis of literature which answers the following research questions: How are community resilience and social capital quantified in research?; What is the impact of community resilience on mental wellbeing?; What is the impact of infectious disease outbreaks, disasters and emergencies on community resilience and social capital?; and, What types of interventions enhance community resilience and social capital? A scoping review procedure was followed. Searches were run across Medline, PsycInfo, and EMBASE, with search terms covering both community resilience and social capital, public health emergencies, and mental health. 26 papers met the inclusion criteria. The majority of retained papers originated in the USA, used a survey methodology to collect data, and involved a natural disaster. There was no common method for measuring community resilience or social capital. The association between community resilience and social capital with mental health was regarded as positive in most cases. However, we found that community resilience, and social capital, were initially negatively impacted by public health emergencies and enhanced by social group activities. Several key recommendations are proposed based on the outcomes from the review, which include: the need for a standardised and validated approach to measuring both community resilience and social capital; that there should be enhanced effort to improve preparedness to public health emergencies in communities by gauging current levels of community resilience and social capital; that community resilience and social capital should be bolstered if areas are at risk of disasters or public health emergencies; the need to ensure that suitable short-term support is provided to communities with high resilience in the immediate aftermath of a public health emergency or disaster; the importance of conducting robust evaluation of community resilience initiatives deployed during the COVID-19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The ability of the public to remain psychologically resilient in the face of public health emergencies and disasters (such as the COVID-19 pandemic) is a key factor in the effectiveness of a national response to such events. Community resilience and social capital are often perceived as beneficial and ensuring that a community is socially and psychologically resilient may aid emergency response and recovery. This review presents a synthesis of literature which answers the following research questions: How are community resilience and social capital quantified in research?; What is the impact of community resilience on mental wellbeing?; What is the impact of infectious disease outbreaks, disasters and emergencies on community resilience and social capital?; and, What types of interventions enhance community resilience and social capital? A scoping review procedure was followed. Searches were run across Medline, PsycInfo, and EMBASE, with search terms covering both community resilience and social capital, public health emergencies, and mental health. 26 papers met the inclusion criteria. The majority of retained papers originated in the USA, used a survey methodology to collect data, and involved a natural disaster. There was no common method for measuring community resilience or social capital. The association between community resilience and social capital with mental health was regarded as positive in most cases. However, we found that community resilience, and social capital, were initially negatively impacted by public health emergencies and enhanced by social group activities. Several key recommendations are proposed based on the outcomes from the review, which include: the need for a standardised and validated approach to measuring both community resilience and social capital; that there should be enhanced effort to improve preparedness to public health emergencies in communities by gauging current levels of community resilience and social capital; that community resilience and social capital should be bolstered if areas are at risk of disasters or public health emergencies; the need to ensure that suitable short-term support is provided to communities with high resilience in the immediate aftermath of a public health emergency or disaster; the importance of conducting robust evaluation of community resilience initiatives deployed during the COVID-19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic significantly changed the prenatal care experience, specifically regarding medical appointments and social opportunities. It is critical to capture this change through the narratives of pregnant people, particularly those of marginalized populations, whose voices may often be underrepresented in the literature. This mixed-methods paper summarizes the experiences of 40 pregnant Black/African American (AA) women during the COVID-19 pandemic. A cross-sectional, online survey was administered between 2020 and 2021 to assess prenatal health and the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients' pregnancy experience. Coping behaviors during the pandemic were self-reported using the COPE-IS. Univariate analyses were conducted. An additional analysis of participants (n = 4) was explored through a week-long qualitative exercise using a photo documentation procedure. Photo-Elicitation Interviews (PEI) were conducted to capture and center their pandemic pregnancy experiences. Sources of stress during the pandemic varied, with the most common being financial concerns (n = 19, 47.5%). Over half of the sample (n = 18, 54.5%) self-reported increases in their positive coping behaviors during the pandemic, such as communicating with friends and family, talking to healthcare providers, listening to music, and engaging in spiritual practices–such as prayer. The four PEI study participants reflected on the impacts of social distancing on their prenatal experience and mentioned hospital and provider-related weariness due to their race. The findings of this study suggest that during the COVID-19 pandemic, Black/AA pregnant women in Charlotte, NC used social support, mindfulness practices, self-advocacy, and health literacy to navigate challenges present during their prenatal health experience. This paper highlights the personal, social, and structural experiences of pregnant women during a public health crisis so that responsive and effective programs or policies can be planned in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Conspiracy beliefs have become widespread throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Previous studies have shown that endorsing conspiracy beliefs leads to lower protective guideline adherence (i.e., wearing face masks), posing a threat to public health measures. The current study expands this research across the lifespan, i.e., in a sample of adolescents with mental health problems. Here, we investigated the association between conspiracy beliefs and guideline adherence while also exploring the predictors of conspiracy beliefs. Methods: N = 93 adolescent psychiatric outpatients (57% female, mean age: 15.8) were assessed using anonymous paper–pencil questionnaires. Endorsement of generic and COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs was assessed, in addition to items measuring adherence to protective guidelines and mental health (stress, depressive symptoms, emotional/behavioral problems, and adverse childhood experiences). Multiple regressions and supervised machine learning (conditional random forests) were used for analyses. Results: Fourteen percent of our sample fully endorsed at least one COVID-19 conspiracy theory, while protective guidelines adherence was relatively high (M = 4.92, on a scale from 1 to 7). The endorsement of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs—but not of generic conspiracy beliefs—was associated with lower guideline adherence (β = − 0.32, 95% CI − 0.53 to − 0.11, p <.001). Conditional random forests suggested that adverse childhood experiences and peer and conduct problems were relevant predictors of both conspiracy belief categories. Conclusion: While a significant proportion of our sample of adolescents in psychiatric treatment endorsed conspiracy beliefs, the majority did not. Furthermore, and to some degree, contrary to public perception, we found that adolescents show relatively good adherence to public health measures—even while experiencing a high degree of mental distress. The predictive value of adverse childhood experiences and peer/conduct problems for conspiracy beliefs might be explained by compensatory mechanisms to ensure the safety, structure, and inclusion that conspiracies provide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People with disabilities (PwD) have been facing multiple health, social, and economic disparities during the COVID-19 pandemic, stemming from structural disparities experienced for long time. This paper aims to present the PREparedness, RESponse and SySTemic transformation (PRE-RE-SyST): a model for a disability-inclusive pandemic responses and systematic disparities reduction. Methods: Scoping review with a thematic analysis was conducted on the literature published up to mid-September 2020, equating to the initial stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Seven scientific databases and three preprint databases were searched to identify empirical or perspective papers addressing health and socio-economic disparities experienced by PwD as well as reporting actions to address them. Snowballing searches and experts' consultation were also conducted. Two independent reviewers made eligibility decisions and performed data extractions on any action or recommended action to address disparities. A thematic analysis was then used for the model construction, informed by a systems-thinking approach (i.e., the Iceberg Model). Results: From 1027 unique references, 84 were included in the final analysis. The PRE-RE-SyST model articulates a four-level strategic action to: 1) Respond to prevent or reduce disability disparities during a pandemic crisis; 2) Prepare ahead for pandemic and other crises responses; 3) Design systems and policies for a structural disability-inclusiveness; and 4) Transform society's cultural assumptions about disability. 'Simple rules' and literature-based examples on how these strategies can be deployed are provided. Conclusion: The PRE-RE-SyST model articulates main strategies, 'simple rules' and possible means whereby public health authorities, policy-makers, and other stakeholders can address disability disparities in pandemic crises, and beyond. Beyond immediate pandemic responses, disability-inclusiveness is needed to develop everyday equity-oriented policies and practices that can transform societies towards greater resiliency, as a whole, to pandemic and other health and social emergencies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in unprecedented challenges to health systems worldwide, including the control of non-COVID-19 diseases. Malaria cases and deaths may increase due to the direct and indirect effects of the pandemic in malaria-endemic countries, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). This scoping review aims to summarize information on public health-relevant effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the malaria situation in SSA. Methods: Review of publications and manuscripts on preprint servers, in peer-reviewed journals and in grey literature documents from 1 December, 2019 to 9 June, 2021. A structured search was conducted on different databases using predefined eligibility criteria for the selection of articles. Results: A total of 51 papers have been included in the analysis. Modelling papers have predicted a significant increase in malaria cases and malaria deaths in SSA due to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Many papers provided potential explanations for expected COVID-19 effects on the malaria burden; these ranged from relevant diagnostical and clinical aspects to reduced access to health care services, impaired availability of curative and preventive commodities and medications, and effects on malaria prevention campaigns. Compared to previous years, fewer country reports provided data on the actual number of malaria cases and deaths in 2020, with mixed results. While highly endemic countries reported evidence of decreased malaria cases in health facilities, low endemic countries reported overall higher numbers of malaria cases and deaths in 2020. Conclusions: The findings from this review provide evidence for a significant but diverse impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on malaria in SSA. There is the need to further investigate the public health consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on the malaria burden. Protocol registered on Open Science Framework: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/STQ9D [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hygiene behaviors in public toilets are important to prevent the transmission of infectious diseases, especially during the pandemic. All through the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, governments in many countries published guidance on personal hygiene for the general population to prevent disease transmission. This study aimed to investigate improvements in residents' hygiene awareness and behaviors in public toilets before and during the pandemic.Methods: We recruited 316 residents between November and December 2018 before the pandemic, and 314 residents between December 2020 and January 2021 during the pandemic in the same study sites in Hangzhou, a well-developed city in China. Residents' hygiene behaviors in public toilets, hygiene awareness, risk perception, and sociodemographic factors were collected. Bivariate analysis and multivariable logistic regressions were used to test the differences between the two rounds. We conducted an observational study to record the provision of hygiene amenities at toilets during the pandemic.Results: After controlling for sociodemographic factors (gender, marital status, age, education level, and monthly household income), compared with respondents recruited before the pandemic, respondents recruited during the pandemic were more likely to perceive the risks of infection when using public toilets (aOR = 1.77, 95%CI [1.20, 2.60]), and were more likely to be aware of the risks of touching contaminated toilet facilities (aOR = 1.72, 95%CI [1.17, 2.54]) and the risks of not using soap to wash one's hands after using the toilet (aOR = 1.93, 95%CI [1.38, 2.72]). They were more likely to always clean their toilet seat with alcohol (aOR = 1.88, 95%CI [1.01, 3.51]), wash hands with soap (aOR = 1.52, 95%CI [1.09, 2.10]) and dry their hands with a dryer (aOR = 1.78, 95%CI [1.16, 2.71]), but they were less likely to always wash their hands after using the toilets (aOR = 0.57, 95%CI [0.32, 1.00]). Among 70 public toilets observed, 9 provided alcohol for toilet seat disinfection, 52 provided soap, 33 provided paper towels, and 41 had working hand dryers.Conclusions: Despite the overall improvement, residents' hygiene behaviors in public toilets and the supply of hygiene amenities were still suboptimal during the pandemic. Further hygiene education and an adequate supply of hygiene amenities in public toilets are needed to promote residents' hygiene behaviors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Researchers conducting cohort studies may wish to investigate the effect of episodes of COVID-19 illness on participants. A definitive diagnosis of COVID-19 is not always available, so studies have to rely on proxy indicators. This paper seeks to contribute evidence that may assist the use and interpretation of these COVID-indicators.Methods: We described five potential COVID-indicators: self-reported core symptoms, a symptom algorithm; self-reported suspicion of COVID-19; self-reported external results; and home antibody testing based on a 'lateral flow' antibody (IgG/IgM) test cassette. Included were staff and postgraduate research students at a large London university who volunteered for the study and were living in the UK in June 2020. Excluded were those who did not return a valid antibody test result. We provide descriptive statistics of prevalence and overlap of the five indicators.Results: Core symptoms were the most common COVID-indicator (770/1882 participants positive, 41%), followed by suspicion of COVID-19 (n = 509/1882, 27%), a positive symptom algorithm (n = 298/1882, 16%), study antibody lateral flow positive (n = 124/1882, 7%) and a positive external test result (n = 39/1882, 2%), thus a 20-fold difference between least and most common. Meeting any one indicator increased the likelihood of all others, with concordance between 65 and 94%. Report of a low suspicion of having had COVID-19 predicted a negative antibody test in 98%, but positive suspicion predicted a positive antibody test in only 20%. Those who reported previous external antibody tests were more likely to have received a positive result from the external test (24%) than the study test (15%).Conclusions: Our results support the use of proxy indicators of past COVID-19, with the caveat that none is perfect. Differences from previous antibody studies, most significantly in lower proportions of participants positive for antibodies, may be partly due to a decline in antibody detection over time. Subsequent to our study, vaccination may have further complicated the interpretation of COVID-indicators, only strengthening the need to critically evaluate what criteria should be used to define COVID-19 cases when designing studies and interpreting study results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Since COVID-19 first appeared in the United States (US) in January 2020, US states have pursued a wide range of policies to mitigate the spread of the virus and its economic ramifications. Without unified federal guidance, states have been the front lines of the policy response.Main Text: We created the COVID-19 US State Policy (CUSP) database ( https://statepolicies.com/ ) to document the dates and components of economic relief and public health measures issued at the state level in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Documented interventions included school and business closures, face mask mandates, directives on vaccine eligibility, eviction moratoria, and expanded unemployment insurance benefits. By providing continually updated information, CUSP was designed to inform rapid-response, policy-relevant research in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and has been widely used to investigate the impact of state policies on population health and health equity. This paper introduces the CUSP database and highlights how it is already informing the COVID-19 pandemic response in the US.Conclusion: CUSP is the most comprehensive publicly available policy database of health, social, and economic policies in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in the US. CUSP documents widespread variation in state policy decisions and implementation dates across the US and serves as a freely available and valuable resource to policymakers and researchers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: National responses to the COVID-19 pandemic depend on national preparedness systems that must be understood as components of global public health emergency preparedness systems, governed and coordinated through the World Health Organization's 2005 International Health Regulations. The pandemic has raised the question of why countries belonging to similar public health regimes, coordinated through the same global system, responded differently to the same threat. Comparing the responses of Denmark, Sweden and Norway, countries with similar public health regimes, the paper investigates to what degree national differences in COVID-19 policy response reflect significant differences in the policy preferences of national expert groups.Results: We employ a structured case comparison of Denmark, Norway, and Sweden to analyze their' politico-administrative pandemic preparedness systems and policy responses during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. We use the results of an interdisciplinary expert survey completed in 2020 to analyze expert perceptions in two ways. First, we analyze expert perceptions of COVID-19 responses while controlling for national COVID-19 trajectories and experts' characteristics. Second, we analyze the distribution and effect of dominant global expert-held ideas across countries, showing the importance of dominant ideas for experts' perceptions and preferences for COVID-19 response.Conclusion: The study finds no evidence indicating that COVID-19 policy variation between the most similar cases of Denmark, Norway, and Sweden are the result of differences in the policy preferences of national expert groups. Instead, our study highlights the importance of other factors than cross-national expert dissensus for explaining variation in pandemic response such as the politico-administrative organization of pandemic preparedness systems. Further, we find that expert support for dominant ideas such as a 'focused protection strategy' is associated with consistent policy preferences across locational, disciplinary, and geographic affiliations. Recognition of the latter should be a part of future discussions about how global ideas of pandemic preparedness are diffused transnationally and embedded in national politico-administrative systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In February 2021, a new Ebola virus disease outbreak was confirmed amid the COVID-19 pandemic in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Although the country has successfully contained the outbreak amid its fight against the COVID-19 pandemic, the epidemiological situation is still concerning, primarily due to the risk of an increase in the number of COVID-19 cases. The coexistence of both outbreaks increased the burden on the country's health system mainly because Ebola response programs were redirected to the COVID-19 national response. Strategies adopted and lessons learned from previous Ebola outbreaks were crucial to developing the COVID-19 national response. To tackle the challenges of combating both the viruses, it is essential to adopt multidisciplinary measures such as prevention, education, and vaccination campaigns, promoting hygiene and social distancing practices, and improving diagnostic and management protocols. This paper discusses the efforts, challenges, and possible solutions to grapple with Ebola amid the COVID-19 crisis in DRC successfully. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Public health emergencies-such as the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic-accelerate the need for both evidence generation and rapid dissemination and implementation (D&I) of evidence where it is most needed. In this paper, we reflect on how D&I frameworks and methods can be pragmatic (i.e., relevant to real-world context) tools for rapid and iterative planning, implementation, evaluation, and dissemination of evidence to address public health emergencies.the Pragmatic, Rapid, and Iterative D&i (pridi) Cycle: The PRIDI cycle is based on a "double-loop" learning process that recognizes the need for responsiveness and iterative adaptation of implementation cycle (inner loop) to the moving landscapes, presented by the outer loops of emerging goals and desired outcomes, emerging interventions and D&I strategies, evolving evidence, and emerging characteristics and needs of individuals and contexts. Stakeholders iteratively evaluate these surrounding landscapes of implementation, and reconsider implementation plans and activities.Conclusion: Even when the health system priority is provision of the best care to the individuals in need, and scientists are focused on development of effective diagnostic and therapeutic technologies, planning for D&I is critical. Without a flexible and adaptive process of D&I, which is responsive to emerging evidence generation cycles, and closely connected to the needs and priorities of stakeholders and target users through engagement and feedback, the interventions to mitigate public health emergencies (e.g., COVID-19 pandemic), and other emerging issues, will have limited reach and impact on populations that would most benefit. The PRIDI cycle is intended to provide a pragmatic approach to support planning for D&I throughout the evidence generation and usage processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Public health emergencies—such as the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic—accelerate the need for both evidence generation and rapid dissemination and implementation (D&I) of evidence where it is most needed. In this paper, we reflect on how D&I frameworks and methods can be pragmatic (i.e., relevant to real-world context) tools for rapid and iterative planning, implementation, evaluation, and dissemination of evidence to address public health emergencies. The pragmatic, rapid, and iterative D&I (PRIDI) cycle: The PRIDI cycle is based on a "double-loop" learning process that recognizes the need for responsiveness and iterative adaptation of implementation cycle (inner loop) to the moving landscapes, presented by the outer loops of emerging goals and desired outcomes, emerging interventions and D&I strategies, evolving evidence, and emerging characteristics and needs of individuals and contexts. Stakeholders iteratively evaluate these surrounding landscapes of implementation, and reconsider implementation plans and activities. Conclusion: Even when the health system priority is provision of the best care to the individuals in need, and scientists are focused on development of effective diagnostic and therapeutic technologies, planning for D&I is critical. Without a flexible and adaptive process of D&I, which is responsive to emerging evidence generation cycles, and closely connected to the needs and priorities of stakeholders and target users through engagement and feedback, the interventions to mitigate public health emergencies (e.g., COVID-19 pandemic), and other emerging issues, will have limited reach and impact on populations that would most benefit. The PRIDI cycle is intended to provide a pragmatic approach to support planning for D&I throughout the evidence generation and usage processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Health Impact Assessment (HIA) is promoted as a decision-informing tool by public health and governmental agencies. HIA is beneficial when carried out as part of policy development but is also valuable as a methodology when a policy is being implemented to identify and understand the wider health and well-being impacts of policy decisions, particularly when a decision needs to be taken rapidly to protect the population. This paper focusses on a HIA of the 'Staying at Home and Social Distancing Policy' or 'lockdown' in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in Wales conducted by the Welsh national public health institute. It describes the process and findings, captures the learning and discusses how the process has been used to better understand the wider health and well-being impacts of policy decisions beyond direct health harm. It also examines the role of public health institutes in promoting and using HIA.Methods: A HIA was conducted following a standard HIA five step process. A literature review was undertaken alongside 15 qualitative semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders, and relevant health and demographic data were collated. The results were triangulated and analysed to form a holistic assessment of the policy decision and its impacts.Results: A wide range of major health and well-being impacts of the lockdown in Wales were identified across the determinants of health, which included positive and negative social, economic, environmental and mental well-being impacts beyond the impact on direct health. Populations affected included children and young people, those on low incomes and women as well as those whose health has been directly impacted by COVID-19 such as older people. The work highlighted the benefit that HIA can bring in emphasizing impacts which can inform policy and shared learning with others.Conclusion: HIA is a largely underused tool to understand the impact of policy and political decisions, particularly when a decision has been taken at speed. This case study highlights how HIA provide evidence and information for advocacy and further work by public health institutes, health agencies and policy makers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The near universal adoption of cross-border health measures during the COVID-19 pandemic worldwide has prompted significant debate about their effectiveness and compliance with international law. The number of measures used, and the range of measures applied, have far exceeded previous public health emergencies of international concern. However, efforts to advance research, policy and practice to support their effective use has been hindered by a lack of clear and consistent definition.Results: Based on a review of existing datasets for cross-border health measures, such as the Oxford Coronavirus Government Response Tracker and World Health Organization Public Health and Social Measures, along with analysis of secondary and grey literature, we propose six categories to define measures more clearly and consistently - policy goal, type of movement (travel and trade), adopted by public or private sector, level of jurisdiction applied, stage of journey, and degree of restrictiveness. These categories are then brought together into a proposed typology that can support research with generalizable findings and comparative analyses across jurisdictions. Addressing the current gaps in evidence about travel measures, including how different jurisdictions apply such measures with varying effects, in turn, enhances the potential for evidence-informed decision-making based on fuller understanding of policy trade-offs and externalities. Finally, through the adoption of standardized terminology and creation of an agreed evidentiary base recognized across jurisdictions, the typology can support efforts to strengthen coordinated global responses to outbreaks and inform future efforts to revise the WHO International Health Regulations (2005).Conclusions: The widespread use of cross-border health measures during the COVID-19 pandemic has prompted significant reflection on available evidence, previous practice and existing legal frameworks. The typology put forth in this paper aims to provide a starting point for strengthening research, policy and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This paper describes a model for estimating COVID-19 related excess deaths that are a direct consequence of insufficient hospital ward bed and intensive care unit (ICU) capacity.Methods: Compartmental models were used to estimate deaths under different combinations of ICU and ward care required and received in England up to late April 2021. Model parameters were sourced from publicly available government information and organisations collating COVID-19 data. A sub-model was used to estimate the mortality scalars that represent increased mortality due to insufficient ICU or general ward bed capacity. Three illustrative scenarios for admissions numbers, 'Optimistic', 'Middling' and 'Pessimistic', were modelled and compared with the subsequent observations to the 3rd February.Results: The key output was the demand and capacity model described. There were no excess deaths from a lack of capacity in the 'Optimistic' scenario. Several of the 'Middling' scenario applications resulted in excess deaths-up to 597 deaths (0.6% increase) with a 20% reduction compared to best estimate ICU capacity. All the 'Pessimistic' scenario applications resulted in excess deaths, ranging from 49,178 (17.0% increase) for a 20% increase in ward bed availability, to 103,735 (35.8% increase) for a 20% shortfall in ward bed availability. These scenarios took no account of the emergence of the new, more transmissible, variant of concern (b.1.1.7).Conclusions: Mortality is increased when hospital demand exceeds available capacity. No excess deaths from breaching capacity would be expected under the 'Optimistic' scenario. The 'Middling' scenario could result in some excess deaths-up to a 0.7% increase relative to the total number of deaths. The 'Pessimistic' scenario would have resulted in significant excess deaths. Our sensitivity analysis indicated a range between 49,178 (17% increase) and 103,735 (35.8% increase). Given the new variant, the pessimistic scenario appeared increasingly likely and could have resulted in a substantial increase in the number of COVID-19 deaths. In the event, it would appear that capacity was not breached at any stage at a national level with no excess deaths. it will remain unclear if minor local capacity breaches resulted in any small number of excess deaths. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Health innovations are generally oriented on a techno-economic vision. In this perspective, technologies are seen as an end in themselves, and there is no arrangement between the technical and the social values of innovation. This vision prevails in sanitary crises, in which management is carried out based on the search for punctual, reactive, and technical solutions to remedy a specific problem without a systemic/holistic, sustainable, or proactive approach. This paper attempts to contribute to the literature on the epistemological orientation of innovations in the field of public health. Taking the Covid-19 and Ebola crises as examples, the primary objective is to show how innovation in health is oriented towards a techno-economic paradigm. Second, we propose a repositioning of public health innovation towards a social paradigm that will put more emphasis on the interaction between social and health dimensions in the perspective of social change. We will conclude by highlighting the roles that public health could play in allowing innovations to have more social value, especially during sanitary crises. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The pandemic COVID-19 abruptly exploded, taking most health professionals around the world unprepared. Italy, the first European country to be hit violently, was forced to activate the lockdown in mid-February 2020. At the time of the spread, a high number of victims were quickly registered, especially in the regions of Northern Italy which have a high rate of highly-polluting production activities. The need to hospitalize the large number of patients with severe forms of COVID-19 led the National Health System to move a large number of specialists from their disciplines to the emergency hospital departments for the treatment of COVID-19. Furthermore, the lockdown itself has limited the possibility for general practitioners and pediatricians to be able to make outpatient visits and/or home care for patients with chronic diseases. Among them, the patient with atopic diseases, such as asthma, rhinitis and atopic dermatitis, is worthy of particular attention as she/he is immersed in a studded negative scenario with the onset of spring, a factor that should not be underestimated for those who suffer from pollen allergy. The Italian Society of Asthma Allergology and Clinical Immunology, to quickly deal with the lack of references and specialist medical procedures, has produced a series of indications for immunologic patient care that are reported in this paper, and can be used as guidelines by specialists of our discipline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Keywords: COVID-19; Africa; Response; Innovation; Public health EN COVID-19 Africa Response Innovation Public health 1 3 3 05/23/20 20200522 NES 200522 Background As the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) continues to spread, countries in sub-Saharan Africa are still experiencing outbreaks of other infectious diseases; the top causes of outbreaks from 2016 to 2018 were cholera, measles, and viral hemorrhagic diseases, such as Ebola virus disease, yellow fever, dengue fever, Lassa fever, and Rift Valley fever. In our recent paper [[3]], we observed that Africa is better prepared than ever before because of our stronger national public health institutes, the rapid scale-up of testing capacity, better coordination at the continental level, and the capacity of built-in surveillance and contact tracing which has occurred since the 2013-2016 West African Ebola outbreak. COVID-19 Coronavirus disease HIV Human immunodeficiency virus IDSR Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response IHR International Health Regulations JEE Joint External Evaluation NAPHS National Action Plan for Health Security Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. [Extracted from the article]

Introduction: During the COVID-19 pandemic, hospitals faced increasing pressure, where people living with HIV risked to either acquire SARS-CoV-2 and to interrupt the HIV continuum of care. Methods: This is a retrospective, observational study. We compared the numbers of medical visits performed, antiretroviral drugs dispensed and the number of new HIV diagnosis and of hospitalizations in a cohort of people living with HIV (PLWH) followed by the Spedali Civili of Brescia between the bimester of the COVID-19 pandemic peak and the bimester of October–November 2019. Data were retrieved from administrative files and from paper and electronic clinical charts. Categorical variables were described using frequencies and percentages, while continuous variables were described using mean, median, and interquartile range (IQR) values. Means for continuous variables were compared using Student's t-tests and the Mann–Whitney test. Proportions for categorical variables were compared using the χ2 test. Results: As of December 31st, 2019, a total of 3875 PLWH were followed in our clinic. Mean age was 51.4 ± 13 years old, where 28% were females and 18.8% non-Italian. Overall, 98.9% were on ART (n = 3834), 93% were viro-suppressed. A total of 1217 and 1162 patients had their visit scheduled at our out-patient HIV clinic during the two bimesters of 2019 and 2020, respectively. Comparing the two periods, we observed a raise of missed visits from 5 to 8% (p < 0.01), a reduction in the number of new HIV diagnosis from 6.4 in 2019 to 2.5 per month in 2020 (p = 0.01), a drop in ART dispensation and an increase of hospitalized HIV patients due to COVID-19. ART regimens including protease inhibitors (PIs) had a smaller average drop than ART not including PIs (16.6 vs 21.6%, p < 0.05). Whether this may be due to the perception of a possible efficacy of PIs on COVID19 is not known. Conclusions: Our experience highlights the importance of a resilient healthcare system and the need to implement new strategies in order to guarantee the continuum of HIV care even in the context of emergency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]