By Public Health Wales Observatory (2020)
Category: Mortality
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)
National monitoring tool that brings together metrics to assess the wider impacts of coronavirus (COVID-19) on health.
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.
By Public Health England (2020)
We are delighted to announce the launch of the COVID-19 Register of PHE led studies. It includes Public Health England led studies relating to COVID-19, that have taken place since February 2020. The register will be updated every two months, and can be accessed via our re-vamped Finding the evidence: Coronavirus page – 4th heading down
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.
By Institute of Health Equity (Feb 2020)
This report, Health equity in England: The Marmot Review 10 years on, was commissioned by the Health Foundation, to explore what has happened to health inequalities and social determinants of health in the decade since the Marmot Review. We provide in-depth analysis of health inequalities in England and assess what has happened in key social determinants of health, positively and negatively, in the last 10 years. Critically, we set out an agenda for the Government and local authorities to take action to reduce health inequalities in England. This agenda is based on evidence and practical action evidence from the Marmot Review, and enhanced by new evidence from the succeeding decade, including evidence and learning from practical experience of implementing approaches to health inequalities in England and internationally.
By Kock, L et al. The Lancet Public Health, 2019 Volume 4, Issue 12, Pe628-e644,
By Royal College of Psychiatrists (2019)
This guidance is to help local areas plan and deliver specialist services, led by old age psychiatrists, to meet the needs of older people. It brings together views from older people, service users, carers and a wide range of health and social care professionals.