By Public Health Wales Observatory (2020)
Category: Accident Prevention
The Lancet Public Health Volume 5, ISSUE 9, e475-e483, September 01, 2020
Click here to read the full article
Background
Data for front-line health-care workers and risk of COVID-19 are limited. We sought to assess risk of COVID-19 among front-line health-care workers compared with the general community and the effect of personal protective equipment (PPE) on risk.
Methods
We did a prospective, observational cohort study in the UK and the USA of the general community, including front-line health-care workers, using self-reported data from the COVID Symptom Study smartphone application (app) from March 24 (UK) and March 29 (USA) to April 23, 2020. Participants were voluntary users of the app and at first use provided information on demographic factors (including age, sex, race or ethnic background, height and weight, and occupation) and medical history, and subsequently reported any COVID-19 symptoms. We used Cox proportional hazards modelling to estimate multivariate-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) of our primary outcome, which was a positive COVID-19 test. The COVID Symptom Study app is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04331509.
Findings
Among 2 035 395 community individuals and 99 795 front-line health-care workers, we recorded 5545 incident reports of a positive COVID-19 test over 34 435 272 person-days. Compared with the general community, front-line health-care workers were at increased risk for reporting a positive COVID-19 test (adjusted HR 11·61, 95% CI 10·93–12·33). To account for differences in testing frequency between front-line health-care workers and the general community and possible selection bias, an inverse probability-weighted model was used to adjust for the likelihood of receiving a COVID-19 test (adjusted HR 3·40, 95% CI 3·37–3·43). Secondary and post-hoc analyses suggested adequacy of PPE, clinical setting, and ethnic background were also important factors.
Interpretation
In the UK and the USA, risk of reporting a positive test for COVID-19 was increased among front-line health-care workers. Health-care systems should ensure adequate availability of PPE and develop additional strategies to protect health-care workers from COVID-19, particularly those from Black, Asian, and minority ethnic backgrounds. Additional follow-up of these observational findings is needed
by Public Health England (2020)
During the COVID-19 response sexual and reproductive health services have adapted swiftly to ensure continued provision of essential services. This has included, for example, the scale up of online triaging and delivery, and prioritising face-to-face consultations for less well served groups, clinically complex cases and to address safeguarding concerns.
Public Health England is collating practice examples to capture how sexual and reproductive health services have adapted during the COVID-19 response with a particular focus on changes put in place to meet the needs of less well served populations. The practice examples below have been collected and published with no assumption or evidence of effectiveness at this stage. They are intended to briefly capture what has been done locally for the purpose of rapid knowledge translation. The practice examples were collected by PHE from local sexual and reproductive health providers and commissioners. PHE is collecting examples on an ongoing basis.
Click here to view the examples
By North West Health & Population Network (June 2020)
The impacts of COVID-19 have not been felt equally. The pandemic has both exposed and exacerbated longstanding inequalities in society. As we move from the response phase into recovery, the direct and wider impacts of the pandemic on individuals, households and communities will influence their capacity to recover. By providing a summary of the direct and indirect impacts of COVID-19 on health and wellbeing, this review aims to assist with the development of priorities and mitigating actions to support recovery” ( Dr Andrew Turner, Health Policy Lead & Public Health Specialty Registrar Liverpool City Region Combined Authority)
Click here to review this review
The Lancet Public Health Volume 5, ISSUE 7, e395-e403, July 01, 2020
Click here to read the full article
Background
Retirement ages are rising in many countries to offset the challenges of population ageing, but people’s capacity to work for more years in their later working life (>50 years) is unclear. We aimed to estimate healthy working life expectancy in England.
Methods
This analysis included adults aged 50 years and older from six waves (2002–13) of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA), with linked mortality data. Healthy working life expectancy was defined as the average number of years expected to be spent healthy (no limiting long-standing illness) and in paid work (employment or self-employment) from age 50 years. Healthy working life expectancy was estimated for England overall and stratified by sex, educational attainment, deprivation level, occupation type, and region by use of interpolated Markov chain multi-state modelling.
Findings
There were 15 284 respondents (7025 men and 8259 women) with survey and mortality data for the study period. Healthy working life expectancy at age 50 years was on average 9·42 years (10·94 years [95% CI 10·65–11·23] for men and 8·25 years [7·92–8·58] for women) and life expectancy was 31·76 years (30·05 years for men and 33·49 years for women). The number of years expected to be spent unhealthy and in work from age 50 years was 1·84 years (95% CI 1·74–1·94) in England overall. Population subgroups with the longest healthy working life expectancy were the self-employed (11·76 years [95% CI 10·76–12·76]) or those with non-manual occupations (10·32 years [9·95–10·69]), those with a tertiary education (11·27 years [10·74–11·80]), those living in southern England (10·73 years [10·16–11·30] in the South East and 10·51 years [9·80–11·22] in the South West), and those living in the least deprived areas (10·53 years [10·06–10·99]).
Interpretation
Healthy working life expectancy at age 50 years in England is below the remaining years to State Pension age. Older workers of lower socioeconomic status and in particular regions in England might benefit from proactive approaches to improve health, workplace environments, and job opportunities to improve their healthy working life expectancy. Continued monitoring of healthy working life expectancy would provide further examination of the success of such approaches and that of policies to extend working lives.
By Health Information and Quality Authority (2020)
To inform the ongoing response to the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically, to inform the development of public health guidance to prevent the spread of COVID-19, we have created a database of COVID-19 public health guidance produced by international organisations.
This database is updated daily, and is primarily for the use of relevant stakeholders in the Health Protection Surveillance Centre, the National Public Health Emergency Team, the Department of Health, and Health Service Executive.
The PHE Knowledge and Library Services Team (KLS) has produced this page to help those, working on the current coronavirus outbreak, embed evidence-informed decision-making in their daily practice.
The page signposts to a range of open access resources that have been promoted by different groups including National Library of Medicine Disaster Information Management Research Center, Erasmus MC, Cambridge University, Bedford Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Evidence Aid, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai.
This is a review article which is updated weekly regarding COVID-19
By WHO (2019)
Environmental conditions are a major determinant of health and well-being, but they are not shared equally across the population. Higher levels of environmental risk are often found in disadvantaged population subgroups. This assessment report considers the distribution of environmental risks and
injuries within countries and shows that unequal environmental conditions, risk exposures and related health outcomes affect citizens daily in all settings where people live, work and spend their time.
The report documents the magnitude of environmental health inequalities within countries through 19 inequality indicators on urban, housing and working conditions, basic services and injuries. Inequalities in risks and outcomes occur in all countries in the WHO European Region, and the latest
evidence confirms that socially disadvantaged population subgroups are those most affected by environmental hazards, causing avoidable health effects and contributing to health inequalities.
The results call for more environmental and intersectoral action to identify and protect those who already carry a disproportionate environmental burden. Addressing inequalities in environmental risk will help to mitigate health inequalities and contribute to fairer and more socially cohesive societies.
Categories
Accident Prevention Alcohol Cancer Care of the Elderly Community Safety CVD CYP Healthcare Health Protection (Emergency planning Healthy Child including NCMP & CDO Healthy Settings Infant Feeding Infant Mortality Infection Control Library Liver Disease including NHS Health Checks Long-Term Conditions Mortality Respiratory Disease seasonal mortality) Tobacco & Drugs
NHS long term plan case studies
The NHS Long Term Plan will make sure the NHS is fit for the future.
Find out through our case studies and films about how the NHS is already making significant changes and developing to better meet the needs of patients and their families through every stage of life.
View case studies by topic:
Cancer
Cardiovascular
Diabetes
Digital
Integrated care
Learning disabilities
Maternity
Mental health
Personalised care
Primary care
Stroke
Urgent and emergency care
View case studies by life stage:
Starting well
Better care for major health conditions
Ageing well