Social deprivation as a risk factor for COVID-19 mortality among women and men in the UK Biobank: nature of risk and context suggests that social interventions are essential to mitigate the effects of future pandemics

Inequalities in the recovery of colorectal cancer services during the COVID-19 pandemic: a national population-based study

AIM

Evidence is lacking on whether there were inequalities in the recovery of colorectal cancer (CRC) services within the English National Health Service (NHS) following the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study was to evaluate recovery according to patient age and socioeconomic status.

METHOD

Using routinely collected data, CRC patients diagnosed and treated in the English NHS were identified for two timeframes: the 'initial pandemic period' (April-June 2020) and the 'pandemic period' (April 2020-March 2022). Poisson models evaluated changes in numbers of diagnoses, major resections, adjuvant chemotherapy and neoadjuvant radiotherapy use for each timeframe, relative to the equivalent pre-pandemic timeframe (April-June 2019 and April 2018-March 2020, respectively), stratified by age and socioeconomic status. Tumour stage at presentation was evaluated over time.

RESULTS

Substantial deficits in diagnoses, major resections and adjuvant chemotherapy were identified in the initial pandemic period, whilst the use of neoadjuvant radiotherapy increased. Overall, these deficits recovered. Patients outside screening age, and in the most deprived group, had greater deficits in diagnoses and major resections. There was no evidence of stage migration by June 2021.

CONCLUSIONS

CRC services showed recovery to baseline during the pandemic. However, evident inequalities must be addressed in ongoing recovery efforts. Long-term outcomes will fully establish the impact of the pandemic on CRC patients.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mortality in Sweden-Did it differ across socioeconomic groups?

The characterization of the socioeconomic profile of COVID-19 mortality is limited. Likewise, the mapping of potential indirect adverse outcomes of the pandemic, such as suicide and alcohol abuse, along socioeconomic lines is still meagre. The main aim of this paper is to (i) depict SES-differences in COVID-19 mortality, and (ii) to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on suicide and alcohol mortality across socioeconomic groups. We used Swedish monthly data spanning the period January 2016-December 2021. We chose education as indicator of socioeconomic status (SES). The following causes of deaths were included in the analysis: COVID-19, all-cause mortality excluding COVID-19, suicide and a composite index of alcohol-specific deaths. SARIMA-modelling was used to assess the impact of the pandemic on suicide and alcohol-specific mortality. Two alternative measures of the pandemic were used: (1) a dummy that was coded 1 during the pandemic (March 2020 and onwards), and 0 otherwise, and (2) the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker's Stringency Index. There was a marked SES-gradient in COVID-19 mortality in the working-age population (25-64) which was larger than for other causes of death. A SES-gradient was also found in the old-age population, but this gradient did not differ from the gradient for other causes of death. The outcome from the SARIMA time-series analyses suggested that the pandemic did not have any impact on suicide or alcohol-specific mortality in any of the educational and gender groups.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Vaccines for COVID-19 According to Sex, Comorbidity and Socioeconomic Status: A Population Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are extremely effective in preventing severe disease, but their real-world cost effectiveness is still an open question. We present an analysis of the cost-effectiveness and economic impact of the initial phase of the COVID-19 vaccination rollout in the Basque Country, Spain.

METHODS

To calculate costs and quality-adjusted life years for the entire population of the Basque Country, dynamic modelling and a real-world data analysis were combined. Data on COVID-19 infection outcomes (cases, hospitalisations, intensive care unit admissions and deaths) and population characteristics (age, sex, socioeconomic status and comorbidity) during the initial phase of the vaccination rollout, from January to June of 2021, were retrieved from the Basque Health Service database. The outcomes in the alternative scenario (without vaccination) were estimated with the dynamic model used to guide public health authority policies, from February to December 2020. Individual comorbidity-adjusted life expectancy and costs were estimated.

RESULTS

By averting severe disease-related outcomes, COVID-19 vaccination resulted in monetary savings of €26.44 million for the first semester of 2021. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €707/quality-adjusted life year considering official vaccine prices and dominant real prices. While the analysis by comorbidity showed that vaccines were considerably more cost effective in individuals with pre-existing health conditions, this benefit was lower in the low socioeconomic status group.

CONCLUSIONS

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the vaccination programme justified the policy of prioritising high-comorbidity patients. The initial phase of COVID-19 vaccination was dominant from the perspective of the healthcare payer.

"I'll meet you at our bench": adaptation, innovation and resilience among VCSE organisations who supported marginalised and minoritised communities during the Covid-19 pandemic in Northern England - a qualitative focus group study

BACKGROUND

The Covid-19 pandemic has exacerbated pre-existing inequalities and increased adversity and challenges for vulnerable and marginalised communities worldwide. In the UK, the Voluntary Community and Social Enterprise (VCSE) sector play a vital role in supporting the health and wellbeing of people who are marginalised or experiencing multiple complex needs. However, only a small number of studies have focused on the impact that Covid-19 had on the VCSE sector.

METHODS

As part of a Health Inequalities Impact Assessment (HIIA), we conducted qualitative focus groups with staff and volunteers from five organisations to examine short, medium and longer-term impacts of Covid-19 upon the VCSE sector in Northern England. Nine online focus groups were conducted between March and July 2021.

FINDINGS

Focus group transcripts were analysed using Framework Analysis and yielded three central themes: (1) exacerbation of pre-existing inequalities, adversity and challenges for vulnerable and marginalised populations; (2) the 'price' of being flexible, innovative and agile for VCSE staff and volunteers; and (3) the voluntary sector as a 'lifeline' - organisational pride and resilience.

CONCLUSIONS

While the voluntary sector 'adapted at pace' to provide support during Covid-19 and in its continued aftermath, this resilience has potentially come at the cost of workforce and volunteer wellbeing, compounded by political obstacles and chronic shortage in funding and support. The VCSE sector has a vital role to play in the post-lockdown 'levelling up' agenda. The expertise, capacity and resilience of VCSE organisations, and their ability to respond to Covid-19, should be celebrated, recognised and supported adequately to maintain its resilience. To not do so threatens the sector's sustainability and risks jeopardising attempts to involve the sector in addressing the social determinants of health.

Spatial patterns of COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 mortality across waves of infection in England, Wales, and Scotland

Recent studies have established the key individual-level risk factors of COVID-19 mortality such as age, gender, ethnicity, and socio-economic status. However, the spread of infectious diseases is a spatial and temporal process implying that COVID-19 mortality and its determinants may vary sub-nationally and over time. We investigate the spatial patterns of age-standardised death rates due to COVID-19 and their correlates across local authority districts in England, Wales, and Scotland across three waves of infection. Using a Spatial Durbin model, we explore within- and between-country variation and account for spatial dependency. Areas with a higher share of ethnic minorities and higher levels of deprivation had higher rates of COVID-19 mortality. However, the share of ethnic minorities and population density in an area were more important predictors of COVID-19 mortality in earlier waves of the pandemic than in later waves, whereas area-level deprivation has become a more important predictor over time. Second, during the first wave of the pandemic, population density had a significant spillover effect on COVID-19 mortality, indicating that the pandemic spread from big cities to neighbouring areas. Third, after accounting for differences in ethnic composition, deprivation, and population density, initial cross-country differences in COVID-19 mortality almost disappeared. COVID-19 mortality remained higher in Scotland than in England and Wales in the third wave when COVID-19 mortality was relatively low in all three countries. Interpreting these results in the context of higher overall (long-term) non-COVID-19 mortality in Scotland suggests that Scotland may have performed better than expected during the first two waves. Our study highlights that accounting for both spatial and temporal factors is essential for understanding social and demographic risk factors of mortality during pandemics.

Association between ethnic background and COVID-19 morbidity, mortality and vaccination in England: a multistate cohort analysis using the UK Biobank

OBJECTIVES

Despite growing evidence suggesting increased COVID-19 mortality among people from ethnic minorities, little is known about milder forms of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We sought to explore the association between ethnic background and the probability of testing, testing positive, hospitalisation, COVID-19 mortality and vaccination uptake.

DESIGN

A multistate cohort analysis. Participants were followed between 8 April 2020 and 30 September 2021.

SETTING

The UK Biobank, which stores medical data on around half a million people who were recruited between 2006 and 2010.

PARTICIPANTS

405 541 subjects were eligible for analysis, limited to UK Biobank participants living in England. 23 891 (6%) of participants were non-white.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The associations between ethnic background and testing, testing positive, hospitalisation and COVID-19 mortality were studied using multistate survival analyses. The association with single and double-dose vaccination was also modelled. Multistate models adjusted for age, sex and socioeconomic deprivation were fitted to estimate adjusted HRs (aHR) for each of the multistate transitions.

RESULTS

18 172 (4.5%) individuals tested positive, 3285 (0.8%) tested negative and then positive, 1490 (6.9% of those tested positive) were hospitalised, and 129 (0.6%) tested positive at the moment of hospital admission (ie, direct hospitalisation). Finally, 662 (17.4%) died after admission. Compared with white participants, Asian participants had an increased risk of negative to positive transition (aHR 1.24 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.52)), testing positive (95% CI 1.44 (1.33 to 1.55)) and direct hospitalisation (1.61 (95% CI 1.28 to 2.03)). Black participants had an increased risk of hospitalisation following a positive test (1.71 (95% CI 1.29 to 2.27)) and direct hospitalisation (1.90 (95% CI 1.51 to 2.39)). Although not the case for Asians (aHR 1.00 (95% CI 0.98 to 1.02)), black participants had a reduced vaccination probability (0.63 (95% CI 0.62 to 0.65)). In contrast, Chinese participants had a reduced risk of testing negative (aHR 0.64 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.73)), of testing positive (0.40 (95% CI 0.28 to 0.57)) and of vaccination (0.78 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.83)).

CONCLUSIONS

We identified inequities in testing, vaccination and COVID-19 outcomes according to ethnicity in England. Compared with whites, Asian participants had increased risks of infection and admission, and black participants had almost double hospitalisation risk, and a 40% lower vaccine uptake.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Socioeconomic Inequalities in Mortality in Spanish Provinces

BACKGROUND

Although many studies have assessed the socioeconomic inequalities caused by COVID-19 in several health outcomes, there are numerous issues that have been poorly addressed. For instance, have socioeconomic inequalities in mortality from COVID-19 increased? What impact has the pandemic had on inequalities in specific causes of mortality other than COVID-19? Are the inequalities in COVID-19 mortality different from other causes? In this paper we have attempted to answer these questions for the case of Spain.

METHODS

We used a mixed longitudinal ecological design in which we observed mortality from 2005 to 2020 in the 54 provinces into which Spain is divided. We considered mortality from all causes, not excluding, and excluding mortality from COVID-19; and cause-specific mortality. We were interested in analysing the trend of the outcome variables according to inequality, controlling for both observed and unobserved confounders.

RESULTS

Our main finding was that the increased risk of dying in 2020 was greater in the Spanish provinces with greater inequality. In addition, we have found that: (i) the pandemic has exacerbated socioeconomic inequalities in mortality, (ii) COVID-19 has led to gender differences in the variations in risk of dying (higher in the case of women) and (iii) only in cardiovascular diseases and Alzheimer did the increased risk of dying differ between the most and least unequal provinces. The increase in the risk of dying was different by gender (greater in women) for cardiovascular diseases and cancer.

CONCLUSION

Our results can be used to help health authorities know where and in which population groups future pandemics will have the greatest impact and, therefore, be able to take appropriate measures to prevent such effects.

Association of socio-economic deprivation with COVID-19 incidence and fatality during the first wave of the pandemic in Italy: lessons learned from a local register-based study

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 has been characterised by its global and rapid spread, with high infection, hospitalisation, and mortality rates worldwide. However, the course of the pandemic showed differences in chronology and intensity in different geographical areas and countries, probably due to a multitude of factors. Among these, socio-economic deprivation has been supposed to play a substantial role, although available evidence is not fully in agreement. Our study aimed to assess incidence and fatality rates of COVID-19 across the levels of socio-economic deprivation during the first epidemic wave (March-May 2020) in the Italian Province of Foggia, Apulia Region.

METHODS

Based on the data of the regional active surveillance platform, we performed a retrospective epidemiological study among all COVID-19 confirmed cases that occurred in the Apulian District of Foggia, Italy, from March 1st to May 5th, 2020. Geocoded addresses were linked to the individual Census Tract (CT) of residence. Effects of socio-economic condition were calculated by means of the Socio-Economic and Health-related Deprivation Index (SEHDI) on COVID-19 incidence and fatality.

RESULTS

Of the 1054 confirmed COVID-19 cases, 537 (50.9%) were men, 682 (64.7%) were 0-64 years old, and 338 (32.1%) had pre-existing comorbidities. COVID-19 incidence was higher in the less deprived areas (p < 0.05), independently on age. The level of socio-economic deprivation did not show a significant impact on the vital status, while a higher fatality was observed in male cases (p < 0.001), cases > 65 years (p < 0.001), cases having a connection with a nursing home (p < 0.05) or having at least 1 comorbidity (p < 0.001). On the other hand, a significant protection for healthcare workers was apparent (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings show that deprivation alone does not affect COVID-19 incidence and fatality burden, suggesting that the burden of disease is driven by a complexity of factors not yet fully understood. Better knowledge is needed to identify subgroups at higher risk and implement effective preventive strategies.

Changes in COVID-19-related mortality across key demographic and clinical subgroups in England from 2020 to 2022: a retrospective cohort study using the OpenSAFELY platform

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 has been shown to differently affect various demographic and clinical population subgroups. We aimed to describe trends in absolute and relative COVID-19-related mortality risks across clinical and demographic population subgroups during successive SARS-CoV-2 pandemic waves.

METHODS

We did a retrospective cohort study in England using the OpenSAFELY platform with the approval of National Health Service England, covering the first five SARS-CoV-2 pandemic waves (wave one [wild-type] from March 23 to May 30, 2020; wave two [alpha (B.1.1.7)] from Sept 7, 2020, to April 24, 2021; wave three [delta (B.1.617.2)] from May 28 to Dec 14, 2021; wave four [omicron (B.1.1.529)] from Dec 15, 2021, to April 29, 2022; and wave five [omicron] from June 24 to Aug 3, 2022). In each wave, we included people aged 18-110 years who were registered with a general practice on the first day of the wave and who had at least 3 months of continuous general practice registration up to this date. We estimated crude and sex-standardised and age-standardised wave-specific COVID-19-related death rates and relative risks of COVID-19-related death in population subgroups.

FINDINGS

18 895 870 adults were included in wave one, 19 014 720 in wave two, 18 932 050 in wave three, 19 097 970 in wave four, and 19 226 475 in wave five. Crude COVID-19-related death rates per 1000 person-years decreased from 4·48 deaths (95% CI 4·41-4·55) in wave one to 2·69 (2·66-2·72) in wave two, 0·64 (0·63-0·66) in wave three, 1·01 (0·99-1·03) in wave four, and 0·67 (0·64-0·71) in wave five. In wave one, the standardised COVID-19-related death rates were highest in people aged 80 years or older, people with chronic kidney disease stage 5 or 4, people receiving dialysis, people with dementia or learning disability, and people who had received a kidney transplant (ranging from 19·85 deaths per 1000 person-years to 44·41 deaths per 1000 person-years, compared with from 0·05 deaths per 1000 person-years to 15·93 deaths per 1000 person-years in other subgroups). In wave two compared with wave one, in a largely unvaccinated population, the decrease in COVID-19-related mortality was evenly distributed across population subgroups. In wave three compared with wave one, larger decreases in COVID-19-related death rates were seen in groups prioritised for primary SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, including people aged 80 years or older and people with neurological disease, learning disability, or severe mental illness (90-91% decrease). Conversely, smaller decreases in COVID-19-related death rates were observed in younger age groups, people who had received organ transplants, and people with chronic kidney disease, haematological malignancies, or immunosuppressive conditions (0-25% decrease). In wave four compared with wave one, the decrease in COVID-19-related death rates was smaller in groups with lower vaccination coverage (including younger age groups) and conditions associated with impaired vaccine response, including people who had received organ transplants and people with immunosuppressive conditions (26-61% decrease).

INTERPRETATION

There was a substantial decrease in absolute COVID-19-related death rates over time in the overall population, but demographic and clinical relative risk profiles persisted and worsened for people with lower vaccination coverage or impaired immune response. Our findings provide an evidence base to inform UK public health policy for protecting these vulnerable population subgroups.

FUNDING

UK Research and Innovation, Wellcome Trust, UK Medical Research Council, National Institute for Health and Care Research, and Health Data Research UK.

Did the Physical and Mental Health of Orthopaedic Patients Change After the Onset of the COVID-19 Pandemic?

BACKGROUND

The 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has been associated with poor mental health outcomes and widened health disparities in the United States. Given the inter-relationship between psychosocial factors and functional outcomes in orthopaedic surgery, it is important that we understand whether patients presenting for musculoskeletal care during the pandemic were associated with worse physical and mental health than before the pandemic's onset.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Did patients seen for an initial visit by an orthopaedic provider during the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrate worse physical function, pain interference, depression, and/or anxiety than patients seen before the pandemic, as measured by the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) instrument? (2) During the COVID-19 pandemic, did patients living in areas with high levels of social deprivation demonstrate worse patterns of physical function, pain interference, depression, or anxiety on initial presentation to an orthopaedic provider than patients living in areas with low levels of social deprivation, compared with prepandemic PROMIS scores?

METHODS

This was a retrospective, comparative study of new patient evaluations that occurred in the orthopaedic department at a large, urban tertiary care academic medical center. During the study period, PROMIS computer adaptive tests were routinely administered to patients at clinical visits. Between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2019, we identified 26,989 new patients; we excluded 4% (1038 of 26,989) for being duplicates, 4% (1034 of 26,989) for having incomplete demographic data, 44% (11,925 of 26,989) for not having a nine-digit home ZIP Code recorded, and 5% (1332 of 26,989) for not completing all four PROMIS computer adaptive tests of interest. This left us with 11,660 patients in the "before COVID-19" cohort. Between January 1, 2021 and December 31, 2021, we identified 30,414 new patients; we excluded 5% (1554 of 30,414) for being duplicates, 4% (1142 of 30,414) for having incomplete demographic data, 41% (12,347 of 30,414) for not having a nine-digit home ZIP Code recorded, and 7% (2219 of 30,414) for not completing all four PROMIS computer adaptive tests of interest. This left us with 13,152 patients in the "during COVID-19" cohort. Nine-digit home ZIP Codes were used to determine patients' Area Deprivation Indexes, a neighborhood-level composite measure of social deprivation. To ensure that patients included in the study represented our overall patient population, we performed univariate analyses on available demographic and PROMIS data between patients included in the study and those excluded from the study, which revealed no differences (results not shown). In the before COVID-19 cohort, the mean age was 57 ± 16 years, 60% (7046 of 11,660) were women, 86% (10,079 of 11,660) were White non-Hispanic, and the mean national Area Deprivation Index percentile was 47 ± 25. In the during COVID-19 cohort, the mean age was 57 ± 16 years, 61% (8051 of 13,152) were women, 86% (11,333 of 13,152) were White non-Hispanic, and the mean national Area Deprivation Index percentile was 46 ± 25. The main outcome measures in this study were the PROMIS Physical Function ([PF], version 2.0), Pain Interference ([PI], version 1.1), Depression (version 1.0), and Anxiety (version 1.0). PROMIS scores follow a normal distribution with a mean t-score of 50 and a standard deviation of 10. Higher PROMIS PF scores indicate better self-reported physical capability, whereas higher PROMIS PI, Depression, and Anxiety scores indicate more difficulty managing pain, depression, and anxiety symptoms, respectively. Clinically meaningful differences in PROMIS scores between the cohorts were based on a minimum clinically important difference (MCID) threshold of 4 points. Multivariable linear regression models were created to determine whether presentation to an orthopaedic provider during the pandemic was associated with worse PROMIS scores than for patients who presented before the pandemic. Regression coefficients (ß) represent the estimated difference in PROMIS scores that would be expected for patients who presented during the pandemic compared with patients who presented before the pandemic, after adjusting for confounding variables. Regression coefficients were evaluated in the context of clinical importance and statistical significance. Regression coefficients equal to or greater than the MCID of 4 points were considered clinically important, whereas p values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

We found no clinically important differences in baseline physical and mental health PROMIS scores between new patients who presented to an orthopaedic provider before the COVID-19 pandemic and those who presented during the COVID-19 pandemic (PROMIS PF: ß -0.2 [95% confidence interval -0.43 to 0.03]; p = 0.09; PROMIS PI: ß 0.06 [95% CI -0.13 to 0.25]; p = 0.57; PROMIS Depression: ß 0.09 [95% CI -0.14 to 0.33]; p = 0.44; PROMIS Anxiety: ß 0.58 [95% CI 0.33 to 0.84]; p < 0.001). Although patients from areas with high levels of social deprivation had worse PROMIS scores than patients from areas with low levels of social deprivation, patients from areas with high levels of social deprivation demonstrated no clinically important differences in PROMIS scores when groups before and during the pandemic were compared (PROMIS PF: ß -0.23 [95% CI -0.80 to 0.33]; p = 0.42; PROMIS PI: ß 0.18 [95% CI -0.31 to 0.67]; p = 0.47; PROMIS Depression: ß 0.42 [95% CI -0.26 to 1.09]; p = 0.23; PROMIS Anxiety: ß 0.84 [95% CI 0.16 to 1.52]; p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

Contrary to studies describing worse physical and mental health since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, we found no changes in the health status of orthopaedic patients on initial presentation to their provider. Although large-scale action to mitigate the effects of worsening physical or mental health of orthopaedic patients may not be needed at this time, orthopaedic providers should remain aware of the psychosocial needs of their patients and advocate on behalf of those who may benefit from intervention. Our study is limited in part to patients who had the self-agency to access specialty orthopaedic care, and therefore may underestimate the true changes in the physical or mental health status of all patients with musculoskeletal conditions. Future longitudinal studies evaluating the impact of specific COVID-19-related factors (for example, delays in medical care, social isolation, or financial loss) on orthopaedic outcomes may be helpful to prepare for future pandemics or natural disasters.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, prognostic study.

Analysis of Multiple Causes of Death: A Review of Methods and Practices

BACKGROUND

Research and reporting of mortality indicators typically focus on a single underlying cause of death selected from multiple causes recorded on a death certificate. The need to incorporate the multiple causes in mortality statistics-reflecting increasing multimorbidity and complex causation patterns-is recognized internationally. This review aims to identify and appraise relevant analytical methods and practices related to multiple causes.

METHODS

We searched Medline, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from their incept ion to December 2020 without language restrictions, supplemented by consultation with international experts. Eligible articles analyzed multiple causes of death from death certificates. The process identified 4,080 items of which we reviewed 434 full-text articles.

RESULTS

Most articles we reviewed (76%, n = 332) were published since 2001. The majority of articles examined mortality by "any- mention" of the cause of death (87%, n = 377) and assessed pairwise combinations of causes (57%, n = 245). Since 2001, applications of methods emerged to group deaths based on common cause patterns using, for example, cluster analysis (2%, n = 9), and application of multiple-cause weights to re-evaluate mortality burden (1%, n = 5). We describe multiple-cause methods applied to specific research objectives for approaches emerging recently.

CONCLUSION

This review confirms rapidly increasing international interest in the analysis of multiple causes of death and provides the most comprehensive overview, to our knowledge, of methods and practices to date. Available multiple-cause methods are diverse but suit a range of research objectives. With greater availability of data and technology, these could be further developed and applied across a range of settings.

The association between the proportion of Brexiters and COVID-19 death rates in England

RATIONALE

A cultural divide may exist between a set of people who accept and a set of people who reject the advice of experts. This cultural divide may have important consequences and policy implications, especially in times of severe crisis.

OBJECTIVE

Ecological study of whether there exists a significant conditional correlation between two variables that appear unrelated except for attitude towards experts: (1) Proportion of people voting in favour of remaining in the European Union in 2016 and (2) COVID-19 outcomes measured by death rates and vaccination rates. A significant conditional correlation would indicate that polarized beliefs have important consequences across a broad spectrum of societal challenges.

METHODS

This study uses simple descriptive statistics and multiple linear regression, considering confounders suggested in the related literature, with data at the District level in England.

RESULTS

Districts where people voted most heavily in favour of remaining in the EU (top quintile) had nearly half the death rate of districts in the bottom quintile. This relationship was stronger after the first wave, which was a time when protective measures were communicated to the public by experts. A similar relationship was observed with the decision to get vaccinated, and results were strongest for the booster dose, which was the dose that was not mandatory, but highly advised by experts. The Brexit vote is the variable most correlated with COVID-19 outcomes among many variables including common proxies for trust and civic capital or differences in industry composition across Districts.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest a need for designing incentive schemes that take into consideration different belief systems. Scientific prowess - such as finding effective vaccines - may not be sufficient to solve crises.

Inequalities in SARS-CoV-2 case rates by ethnicity, religion, measures of socioeconomic position, English proficiency, and self-reported disability: cohort study of 39 million people in England during the alpha and delta waves

Objective

To examine sociodemographic inequalities in people with SARS-CoV-2 during the second (alpha) and third (delta) waves of the covid-19 pandemic.

Design

Retrospective, population based cohort study.

Setting

Resident population of England.

Participants

39 006 194 people aged 10 years and older who were enumerated in the 2011 census, registered with the NHS, and alive on 1 September 2020.

Main outcome measures

Age standardised SARS-CoV-2 case rates (ie, the number of people who received a positive test result per 100 000 person weeks at risk) during the second wave (1 September 2020 to 22 May 2021) or third wave (23 May to 10 December 2021) of the pandemic. Age standardised rates were calculated by sociodemographic characteristics and adjusted rate ratios were estimated using generalised linear regression models with a Poisson distribution (models were adjusted for covariates including sex, age, geographical variables, and sociodemographic characteristics).

Results

During the study period, 5 767 584 people (14.8% of the study population) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. In the second wave, the fully adjusted relative risks of having a positive test were highest for the Bangladeshi and Pakistani ethnic groups compared with the white British group, with rate ratios of 1.75 (95% confidence interval 1.73 to 1.77) and 1.69 (1.68 to 1.70), respectively. Muslim and Sikh religious groups had fully adjusted rate ratios of 1.51 (1.50 to 1.51) and 1.64 (1.63 to 1.66), respectively, compared with the Christian group. Greater area deprivation, disadvantaged socioeconomic position, living in a care home, and low English language proficiency were also associated with higher relative risk of having a positive test. However, the inequalities among groups varied over time. Being Christian, white British, without a disability, and from a more advantaged socioeconomic position were associated with increased relative risk of testing positive during the third wave.

Conclusion

Research is urgently needed to understand the large sociodemographic inequalities in SARS-CoV-2 case rates in order to inform policy interventions in future waves or pandemics.

Does ethnicity influence dementia, stroke and mortality risk? Evidence from the UK Biobank

Introduction

The number of people with dementia and stroke is increasing worldwide. There is increasing evidence that there are clinically relevant genetic differences across ethnicities. This study aims to quantify risk factors of dementia, stroke, and mortality in Asian and black participants compared to whites.

Methods

272,660 participants from the UK Biobank were included in the final analysis, among whom the vast majority are white (n = 266,671, 97.80%), followed by Asian (n = 3,790, 1.35%), and black (n = 2,358, 0.84%) participants. Cumulative incidence risk was calculated based on all incident cases occurring during the follow-up of the individuals without dementia and stroke at baseline. We compared the allele frequency of variants in Asian and black participants with the referent ethnicity, whites, by chi-square test. Hierarchical cluster analysis was used in the clustering analysis. Significance level corrected for the false discovery rate was considered.

Results

After adjusting for risk factors, black participants have an increased risk of dementia and stroke compared to white participants, while Asians has similar odds to the white. The risk of mortality is not different in blacks and white participants but Asians have a decreased risk.

Discussion

The study provides important insights into the potential differences in the risk of dementia and stroke among different ethnic groups. Specifically, the study found that black individuals had a higher incidence of dementia and stroke compared to white individuals living in the UK. These findings are particularly significant as they suggest that there may be underlying factors that contribute to these differences, including genetic, environmental, and social factors. By identifying these differences, the study helps to inform interventions and policies aimed at reducing the risk of dementia and stroke, particularly among high-risk populations.

Impact of social deprivation on clinical outcomes of adults hospitalised with community-acquired pneumonia in England: a retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Socioeconomic deprivation has been associated with an increased incidence of infection and poorer clinical outcomes during influenza pandemics and the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study was to determine the relationship between deprivation and adverse clinical outcomes following hospital admission with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), specifically 30-day all-cause mortality and non-elective hospital readmission.

METHODS

Data from the British Thoracic Society national CAP audit on patients admitted to hospital with CAP in England between 1 December 2018 and 31 January 2019 were linked to patient-level Hospital Episode Statistics data and Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) scores. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine the association between deprivation and (a) 30-day mortality and (b) 30-day readmission with p values for trend reported. Age was examined as a potential effect modifier on the effect of IMD quintile on mortality and subsequent subanalysis in those <65 and ≥65 years was performed.

RESULTS

Of 9165 adults admitted with CAP, 24.7% (n=2263) were in the most deprived quintile. No significant trend between deprivation and mortality was observed (p trend=0.38); however, the association between deprivation and mortality differed by age group. In adults aged<65 years, 30-day mortality was highest in the most deprived and lowest in the least deprived quintiles (4.4% vs 2.5%, aOR 1.83, 95% CI 0.84 to 4.0) with a significant trend across groups (p trend=0.04). Thirty-day readmission was highest in the most deprived quintile (17.1%) with a significant p trend across groups (p trend 0.003). Age-adjusted odds of readmission were highest in the most deprived compared with the least deprived (aOR 1.41, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.73).

CONCLUSIONS

In adults aged<65 years hospitalised with CAP in England, mortality varied inversely with indices of social deprivation. There was also a significant association between deprivation and 30-day readmission. Strategies are required to decrease health inequalities in pneumonia mortality and hospital readmissions associated with deprivation.

Risk Factors for COVID-19 Mortality in Malaysia

Background

Understanding the risks of COVID-19 mortality helps in the planning and prevention of the disease. This study aimed to determine the risk factors for COVID-19 mortality in Malaysia.

Methods

Secondary online data provided by the Ministry of Health, Malaysia and Malaysia's national COVID-19 immunisation programme were used: i) COVID-19 deaths data; ii) vaccination coverage data and iii) population estimate data. Quasi-Poisson regression was performed to determine the risk factors for COVID-19 mortality.

Results

Four risk factors were identified: i) vaccination status (partial versus unvaccinated, incidence rate ratio [IRR]: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.54, 0.64; complete versus unvaccinated, IRR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.45, 0.56; booster versus unvaccinated, IRR: 0.13; 95% CI: 0.05, 0.26); ii) age group (19 years old-59 years old versus above 60 years old, IRR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.84, 0.97; 13 years old-18 years old versus above 60 years old, IRR: 0.09; 95% CI: 0.04, 0.19; 6 years old-12 years old versus above 60 years old, IRR: 0.09; 95% CI: 0.03, 0.22; below 5 years old versus above 60 years old, IRR: 0.11; 95% CI: 0.04, 0.23); iii) gender (male versus female, IRR: 1.23; 95% CI: 1.14, 1.32) and iv) comorbidity (yes versus no, IRR: 2.13; 95% CI: 1.96, 2.32).

Conclusion

This study highlighted the risk factors for COVID-19 mortality and the benefit of COVID-19 vaccination, especially of booster vaccination, in reducing the risk of COVID-19 mortality in Malaysia.

The public health impact of loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

Social distancing measures have been effective in mitigating the spread of COVID-19; however, they have imposed a significant burden on population mental health and well-being. This study aimed to identify factors associated with loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to describe the relationship between loneliness and the risk of worsening health outcomes and behaviours.

Methods

Data for 8,960 adults were drawn from a national cross-sectional survey undertaken in Wales between January and June 2021. Participants self-reported changes to health and behaviour since the start of the pandemic. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with loneliness, and the impact of loneliness on self-reported changes in physical health, physical fitness, mental health, weight, alcohol consumption and social relations in comparison with pre-pandemic experiences.

Results

Groups most at risk of loneliness were those aged < 35 years, women (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 1.86 [1.70–2.05]), those with chronic health conditions (1.43 [1.29–1.58]) and the unemployed (2.18 [1.76–2.70]). Loneliness was a strong predictor of worsening health outcomes and behaviours, with those reporting often feeling lonely being at increased odds of worsening physical health (3.29 [2.80–3.86]), physical fitness (2.22 [1.90–2.60]), mental health (8.33 [6.95–9.99]), weight (1.39 [1.19–1.62]), alcohol consumption (1.37 [1.12,-1.66]) and social relations (2.45 [2.07–2.89]) during the pandemic.

Conclusion

This study established an association between loneliness and self-reported worsening health during the pandemic, and identified factors increasing the risk of loneliness. The effect that social control measures have on loneliness should influence the design of future public health policy.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-022-14055-2.

Area Deprivation and COVID-19 Incidence and Mortality in Bavaria, Germany: A Bayesian Geographical Analysis

Background

Area deprivation has been shown to be associated with various adverse health outcomes including communicable as well as non-communicable diseases. Our objective was to assess potential associations between area deprivation and COVID-19 standardized incidence and mortality ratios in Bavaria over a period of nearly 2 years. Bavaria is the federal state with the highest infection dynamics in Germany and demographically comparable to several other European countries.

Methods

In this retrospective, observational ecological study, we estimated the strength of associations between area deprivation and standardized COVID-19 incidence and mortality ratios (SIR and SMR) in Bavaria, Germany. We used official SARS-CoV-2 reporting data aggregated in monthly periods between March 1, 2020 and December 31, 2021. Area deprivation was assessed using the quintiles of the 2015 version of the Bavarian Index of Multiple Deprivation (BIMD 2015) at district level, analyzing the overall index as well as its single domains.

Results

Deprived districts showed higher SIR and SMR than less deprived districts. Aggregated over the whole period, the SIR increased by 1.04 (95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.01 to 1.07, p = 0.002), and the SMR by 1.11 (95% CI: 1.07 to 1.16, p < 0.001) per BIMD quintile. This represents a maximum difference of 41% between districts in the most and least deprived quintiles in the SIR and 110% in the SMR. Looking at individual months revealed clear linear association between the BIMD quintiles and the SIR and SMR in the first, second and last quarter of 2021. In the summers of 2020 and 2021, infection activity was low.

Conclusions

In more deprived areas in Bavaria, Germany, higher incidence and mortality ratios were observed during the COVID-19 pandemic with particularly strong associations during infection waves 3 and 4 in 2020/2021. Only high infection levels reveal the effect of risk factors and socioeconomic inequalities. There may be confounding between the highly deprived areas and border regions in the north and east of Bavaria, making the relationship between area deprivation and infection burden more complex. Vaccination appeared to balance incidence and mortality rates between the most and least deprived districts. Vaccination makes an important contribution to health equality.

The association between a lifestyle score, socioeconomic status, and COVID-19 outcomes within the UK Biobank cohort

BACKGROUND

Infection with SARS-CoV-2 virus (COVID-19) impacts disadvantaged groups most. Lifestyle factors are also associated with adverse COVID-19 outcomes. To inform COVID-19 policy and interventions, we explored effect modification of socioeconomic-status (SES) on associations between lifestyle and COVID-19 outcomes.

METHODS

Using data from UK-Biobank, a large prospective cohort of 502,536 participants aged 37-73 years recruited between 2006 and 2010, we assigned participants a lifestyle score comprising nine factors. Poisson regression models with penalised splines were used to analyse associations between lifestyle score, deprivation (Townsend), and COVID-19 mortality and severe COVID-19. Associations between each exposure and outcome were examined independently before participants were dichotomised by deprivation to examine exposures jointly. Models were adjusted for sociodemographic/health factors.

RESULTS

Of 343,850 participants (mean age > 60 years) with complete data, 707 (0.21%) died from COVID-19 and 2506 (0.76%) had severe COVID-19. There was evidence of a nonlinear association between lifestyle score and COVID-19 mortality but limited evidence for nonlinearity between lifestyle score and severe COVID-19 and between deprivation and COVID-19 outcomes. Compared with low deprivation, participants in the high deprivation group had higher risk of COVID-19 outcomes across the lifestyle score. There was evidence for an additive interaction between lifestyle score and deprivation. Compared with participants with the healthiest lifestyle score in the low deprivation group, COVID-19 mortality risk ratios (95% CIs) for those with less healthy scores in low versus high deprivation groups were 5.09 (1.39-25.20) and 9.60 (4.70-21.44), respectively. Equivalent figures for severe COVID-19 were 5.17 (2.46-12.01) and 6.02 (4.72-7.71). Alternative SES measures produced similar results.

CONCLUSIONS

Unhealthy lifestyles are associated with higher risk of adverse COVID-19, but risks are highest in the most disadvantaged, suggesting an additive influence between SES and lifestyle. COVID-19 policy and interventions should consider both lifestyle and SES. The greatest public health benefit from lifestyle focussed COVID-19 policy and interventions is likely to be seen when greatest support for healthy living is provided to the most disadvantaged groups.

Families' Health after the Great East Japan Earthquake: Findings from the Tohoku Medical Megabank Project Birth and Three-Generation Cohort Study

Infectious diseases, chronic diseases, and mental disorders in both adults and children are reported after disasters occur. The correlation between chronic diseases and mental disorders has also been reported. Moreover, disasters may affect perinatal outcomes. Thus, both adult and child health should be carefully monitored in disaster aftermath. A prospective cohort study of pregnant women and their families, the Tohoku Medical Megabank Project (TMM) Birth and Three-Generation Cohort Study (TMM BirThree Cohort Study), has been conducted since 2013. A total of 73,529 family members participated in the TMM BirThree Cohort Study. Among siblings, the proportion of "small for gestational age" was the same in the pre- and post-disaster periods. Among parents and grandparents who answered the baseline questionnaire, 5.6% in the inland area and 19.8% in the coastal area had their houses totally/mostly destroyed by the Great East Japan Earthquake. Although a depression trend due to house damage was not observed in mothers, the proportion of psychological distress was high according to house damage (P for trend = 0.04). Among parents, there was an increase in overweight persons (P for trend = 0.004 in mothers and < 0.0001 in fathers) and in the number of smokers based on the severity of house damage (P for trend = 0.002 in mothers and < 0.0001 in fathers), whereas no such trend was observed in grandparents. Continuous monitoring and support for those who need are essential. Moreover, utilizing existing cohort studies to investigate health status when we face a new disaster is desirable.

A retrospective cohort study of outcomes in hospitalised COVID-19 patients during the first pandemic wave in Ireland

Aim

Describe the epidemiology, resource use and adverse outcomes of COVID-19 patients hospitalised during wave 1 of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ireland. Use this data to identify specific cohorts at high risk of adverse outcomes and to inform acute hospital requirements for future COVID-19 waves in Ireland.

Methods

The Health Service Executive’s (HSE) Hospital Inpatient Enquiry (HIPE) system produced a daily database of COVID-19 discharge episodes from the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ireland. This study analysed data on episodes of COVID-19 hospitalisation recorded between February 29 and July 31, 2020. A deterministic record linkage process transformed records from episode to patient level. Logistic regression modelling identified factors associated with long length of stay (LLOS), intensive care unit (ICU) admission and inhospital mortality.

Results

Median length of stay was 9 days; 12.8% of patients had ICU admission and 16.6% died in hospital. Male patients were more likely to have ICU admission and die in hospital. Likelihood of LLOS and inhospital mortality increased with age. Obesity, hypertension and diabetes were associated with ICU admission while chronic kidney disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were associated with inhospital mortality. Nursing home residents were less likely to be admitted to ICU and more likely to die in hospital compared to patients admitted from home.

Conclusion

This study provides patient-level epidemiological characterisation of hospitalisations during the first COVID-19 pandemic wave in Ireland. The higher risk of adverse outcomes in older age groups supports the age-based prioritisation of COVID-19 vaccinations currently used in Ireland.

The Significance of Observing the Risk of Non-communicable Diseases after Large-scale Disasters and Communicable Disease Epidemics

Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are a global challenge, accounting for 71% of all deaths worldwide. The spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and past huge disasters have affected the prevention and treatment of NCDs and require urgent action. In this narrative review, I will discuss several reports on the risk of NCDs during past disasters and propose possible future directions. Hypertension, the most common NCD, carries a high risk of death due to cerebrovascular, renal, and other complications. Effective use of information and communication technology-based telemedicine is necessary to manage the risk of cardiovascular diseases during disasters and pandemics. We observed the cumulative incidence of metabolic syndrome in subjects from tsunami-affected areas. We found that moving into prefabricated temporary housing was a risk factor for a higher incidence of metabolic syndrome in elderly females. Our follow-up of 1,009 subjects showed a slight, but significant, increase in HbA1c values after a state of emergency was introduced, even though the lockdown was not as stringent as in other countries. In a study elucidating the prevalence of wheezing and eczema symptoms and the associated factors after the Great East Japan Earthquake, psychological effects, such as depression and self-reported posttraumatic stress disorder, were observed, particularly in people with allergic diseases. In recent years, new birth cohort studies have been initiated to complement the studies designed to collect information across multiple generations, such as the Lifelines study in the Netherlands and the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) study in the UK. It is desirable to assess the effects of COVID-19 to complement the existing cohort studies in Japan as well.