Search

Background: Local health protection systems play a crucial role in infectious disease prevention and control and were critical to COVID-19 pandemic responses. Despite this vital function, few studies have explored the lived experience of health protection responders managing COVID-19. We provide new insights by examining how COVID-19 shaped infectious disease prevention and control in local health protection systems in England., Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with twenty local health protection responders from three contrasting local authority areas, and Public Health England (PHE) health protection teams, in England between June 2021 - March 2022. Participants were from: PHE health protection teams (n=6); local authority public health teams (n=5); local authority Public Protection Services (n=7); and local authority commissioned Infection Prevention and Control Teams (n=2). Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis., Results: First, participants acknowledged the pandemic caused an unprecedented workload and disruption to local health protection service delivery. There was not enough capacity within existing local health protection systems to manage the increased workload. PHE health protection teams therefore transferred some COVID-19 related health protection tasks to other staff, mainly those employed by local authorities. Second, health protection responders highlighted how COVID-19 drew attention to the weaknesses in local health protection systems already stressed by reduced funding in the years leading up to the pandemic. Injecting money into the COVID-19 response did not completely overcome former losses in specialist health protection workforce. Third, health protection responders described how pandemic management raised the profile of public health, especially infectious disease prevention and control. Managing COVID-19 strengthened collaborative working, resulting in enhanced capacity of local health protection systems at the time., Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic challenged the public health preparedness of all countries. Health protection responders in this study also expressed many challenges. There was insufficient resilience in these local health protection systems and an inability to scale up the specialist health protection workforce, as required in a pandemic situation. The UK needs to learn from the pandemic experience by acknowledging and addressing the challenges faced by local health protection responders so that it can more effectively respond to future threats., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objectives: The aim of this systematic overview of reviews was to synthesise available evidence on inequalities in infectious disease based on three dimensions of inequalities; inclusion health groups, protected characteristics and socioeconomic inequalities., Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and OpenGrey databases in November 2021. We included reviews published from the year 2000 which examined inequalities in the incidence, prevalence or consequences of infectious diseases based on the dimensions of interest. Our search focused on tuberculosis, HIV, sexually transmitted infections, hepatitis C, vaccination and antimicrobial resistance. However, we also included eligible reviews of any other infectious diseases. We appraised the quality of reviews using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews V.2 (AMSTAR2) checklist. We conducted a narrative data synthesis., Results: We included 108 reviews in our synthesis covering all the dimensions of inequalities for most of the infectious disease topics of interest, however the quality and volume of review evidence and consistency of their findings varied. The existing literature reviews provide strong evidence that people in inclusion health groups and lower socioeconomic status are consistently at higher risk of infectious diseases, antimicrobial resistance and incomplete/delayed vaccination. In the protected characteristics dimension, ethnicity, and sexual orientation are important factors contributing to inequalities across the various infectious disease topics included in this overview of reviews., Conclusion: We identified many reviews that provide evidence of various types of health inequalities in different infectious diseases, vaccination, and antimicrobial resistance. We also highlight areas where reviews may be lacking. The commonalities in the associations and their directions suggest it might be worth targeting interventions for some high risk-groups that may have benefits across multiple infectious disease outcomes rather than operating purely in infectious disease siloes., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

This ethnographic study in two socio-economically contrasting areas employed geo-ethnography, underpinned by a relational approach, to understand inequalities in gastrointestinal infections in families with young children. In our 'relatively disadvantaged' area, gastrointestinal infections spread to multiple households within a small radius, whereas in our 'relatively advantaged' area, illness was confined to one household or dispersed long distances. These differences were shaped by historical, social and economic contrasts in: housing; social networks and childcare arrangements; employment and household income. Our findings show how linking places, pathogens and people helps us understand inequalities in gastrointestinal infections and may be pertinent to other infectious diseases such as COVID-19., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Gastrointestinal infections are an important global public health issue. In the UK, one in four people experience a gastrointestinal infection each year and epidemiological research highlights inequalities in the burden of disease. Specifically, poorer children are at greater risk of infection and the consequences of illness, such as symptom severity and time off work/school, are greater for less privileged groups of all ages. Gastrointestinal infections are, however, largely 'hidden' within the home and little is known about the lived experience and practices surrounding these illnesses, how they vary across contrasting socioeconomic contexts, or how inequalities in the disease burden across socioeconomic groups might come about. This paper presents data from an ethnographic study which illuminate how socioeconomic inequalities in the physical and material management and consequences of gastrointestinal infections are generated in families with young children. The study shows how the 'work' needed to manage gastrointestinal infections is more laborious for people living in more 'disadvantaged' conditions, exacerbated by: more overcrowded homes with fewer washing and toilet facilities; inflexible employment; low household incomes; and higher likelihood of co-morbidities which can be made worse by having a gastrointestinal infection. Our findings call into question the current approach to prevention of gastrointestinal infections which tend to focus almost exclusively on individual behaviours, which are not adapted to reflect differences in socioeconomic context. Public health agencies should also consider how wider social, economic and policy contexts shape inequalities in the management and consequences of illness. Our findings are also pertinent to the COVID-19 pandemic response in the UK. They highlight how research and policy approaches to acute infectious diseases need to take into consideration the differing lived experiences of contrasting households if they wish to address (and avoid exacerbating) inequalities in the future., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Gastrointestinal (GI) infections cause a significant public health burden worldwide and in the UK with evidence pointing to socio-economic inequalities, particularly among children. Qualitative studies can help us understand why inequalities occur and contribute to developing more effective interventions. This study had two aims: 1. Conduct a systematic review to determine the extent and nature of UK qualitative evidence on gastrointestinal infections; 2. Use meta-ethnography to examine the influences of the differing social contexts in which people live., Methods: MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of science, CINAHL and JSTOR were searched for UK qualitative studies engaging with the risk, diagnosis, management or consequences of gastrointestinal infections from 1980 to July 2019. Five reviewers were involved in applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracting and synthesising data (PROSPERO CRD 42017055157)., Results: Searches identified 4080 studies, 18 met the inclusion criteria. The majority (n = 16) contained data relating to the risk of gastrointestinal infection and these made up the main synthesis. The tenets of meta-ethnography were used to glean new understandings of the role of social and environmental contexts in shaping the risk of gastrointestinal infection, specifically with respect to foodborne GI illness. Three main explanations concerning risk emerged from the data: explanations of risk in the community were underpinned by understandings of 'bugs', dirt and where food comes from; risks were negotiated in households alongside diverse processes of decision making around food; and resources available to households shaped food practices., Conclusion: This systematic review highlights the scarcity of UK qualitative evidence examining gastrointestinal infections. Apart from risk, questions around diagnosis, management and consequences of illness were largely untouched. No studies investigated patterning by socio-economic status. Nevertheless, the meta-ethnography yielded wider contextual theories and explanations as to why people might not follow food hygiene guidance, giving pointers to the types of qualitative enquiry needed to develop more effective interventions., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

People with a learning disability in the UK are increasingly choosing to spend their time on 'care farms' but there is limited research examining these spaces from their perspective. A qualitative research design was used to ask eighteen of these clients how care farms contributed to their health and wellbeing. For these participants care farms can be understood, using Fleuret and Atkinson's (2007) framework, as a 'space of wellbeing' and as a positive and life-enhancing space. Positive language was used by participants to describe the farms contrasting with ne gative language describing other spaces and activities. Farms were identified as contributing positively to mental and social wellbeing., (Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)