Search

BackgroundDifferential exposure to public activities may contribute to stark deprivation-related inequalities in SARS-CoV-2 infection and outcomes but has not been directly investigated. We set out to investigate whether participants in Virus Watch—a large community cohort study based in England and Wales—reported differential exposure to public activities and non-household contacts during the autumn–winter phase of the COVID-19 pandemic according to postcode-level socioeconomic deprivation.MethodsParticipants (n=20 120–25 228 across surveys) reported their daily activities during 3 weekly periods in late November 2020, late December 2020 and mid-February 2021. Deprivation was quantified based on participants’ residential postcode using English or Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation quintiles. We used Poisson mixed-effect models with robust standard errors to estimate the relationship between deprivation and risk of exposure to public activities during each survey period.ResultsRelative to participants in the least deprived areas, participants in the most deprived areas exhibited elevated risk of exposure to vehicle sharing (adjusted risk ratio (aRR) range across time points: 1.73–8.52), public transport (aRR: 3.13–5.73), work or education outside of the household (aRR: 1.09–1.21), essential shops (aRR: 1.09–1.13) and non-household contacts (aRR: 1.15–1.19) across multiple survey periods.ConclusionDifferential exposure to essential public activities—such as attending workplaces and visiting essential shops—is likely to contribute to inequalities in infection risk and outcomes. Public health interventions to reduce exposure during essential activities and financial and practical support to enable low-paid workers to stay at home during periods of intense transmission may reduce COVID-related inequalities.

IntroductionThe Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic has caused significant global mortality and impacted lives around the world. Virus Watch aims to provide evidence on which public health approaches are most likely to be effective in reducing transmission and impact of the virus, and will investigate community incidence, symptom profiles, and transmission of COVID-19 in relation to population movement and behaviours.Methods and analysisVirus Watch is a household community cohort study of acute respiratory infections in England & Wales and will run from June 2020 to August 2021. The study aims to recruit 50,000 people, including 12,500 from minority ethnic backgrounds, for an online survey cohort and monthly antibody testing using home finger prick kits. Nested within this larger study will be a sub-cohort of 10,000 individuals, including 3,000 people from minority ethnic backgrounds. This cohort of 10,000 people will have full blood serology taken between October 2020 and January 2021 and repeat serology between May 2021 and August 2021. Participants will also post self-administered nasal swabs for PCR assays of SARS-CoV-2 and will follow one of three different PCR testing schedules based upon symptoms.Ethics and disseminationThis study has been approved by the Hampstead NHS Health Research Authority Ethics Committee. Ethics approval number – 20/HRA/2320. We are monitoring participant queries and using these to refine methodology where necessary, and are providing summaries and policy briefings of our preliminary findings to inform public health action by working through our partnerships with our study advisory group, Public Health England, NHS and Government Scientific Advisory panels.Strengths and limitations of this studyVirus Watch is a large national household community cohort study of the occurrence and risk factors for COVID-19 infection that aims to recruit 50,000 people, including 12,500 from minority ethnic backgrounds.Virus Watch is designed to estimate incidence of PCR confirmed COVID-19 in those with respiratory and non-respiratory presentations and the incidence of hospitalisation among PCR confirmed COVID-19 cases.Virus Watch will measure effectiveness and impact of recommended COVID-19 control measures including testing, isolation, social distancing, respiratory and hand hygiene measures on risk of respiratory infection.Only households with a lead householder able to speak English were able to take part in the study up until March 2021.Only households of up to six people were eligible for inclusion and they were also required to have access to an internet connection. These restrictions will limit the generalisability to large or multigenerational households, and those without access to the internet.

Introduction The 2015 RCEM End of Life Care best practice guideline highlighted the need for organ and tissue donation to be a usual part of end of life care in the Emergency Department (ED). NICE guideline states that all deaths meeting defined clinical triggers in the ED (in practice – mechanical ventilation, plan to withdraw life sustaining treatment, death expected) should prompt timely referral to organ donation services. Any family discussion in the ED regarding organ donation should be held collaboratively with a specialist nurse for organ donation (SNOD). What is the evidence in UK EDs that this is always the case? Methodology The NHS Blood and Transplant Potential Donor Audit, carried out by specialist nurses in organ donation, audits every death aged 80 years and under in UK Emergency Departments and Intensive Care Units. Data from the Potential Donor Audit was analysed and compared across the 12 Regional NHSBT teams. Results Almost all deceased donors in the UK are admitted to hospital via an Emergency Department (ED). The number of patients dying in UK EDs aged under 80 years of age and under (1 st April 2015 to 31 st March 2016) is variable across the country and not directly correlated with population. Patients dying in ED, who meet criteria for referral is equally variable across the UK (Range 1% Scotland – 3.9% Eastern). PDA data (1 April 2016 – 31 March 2017) reveals that 284 patients died in ED meeting referral criteria but only 47% were referred (Range 22%–65% across the 12 regions). Longer 4 year analysis (1 st April 2012 – 31 st March 2016) demonstrated that up to 16% of these patients are on the Organ Donor Register. Of the 125 families approached in the ED (1 April 2016 – 31 March 2017) only 67% involved a SNOD (Range 0%–100% across the 12 regions). Discussion In 2017, with the endorsement of RCEM, NHS Blood and Transplant published Organ Donation and the Emergency Department: A Strategy for Implementation of Best Practice. The strategy promotes identification and referral of potential organ donors in the emergency department and collaborative approach of their families when withdrawal of treatment is planned in the Emergency Department. Most importantly it is emphasised that organ donation should be firmly established as a usual part of end of life care irrespective of the location of the patient.