COVID-19 resources on infection control

Results 61 - 70 of 394

Order by    Date Title

Child protection conference practice during COVID-19: reflections and experiences (rapid consultation September–October 2020)

Nuffield Family Justice Observatory

This rapid consultation aimed to explore how child protection conferences (CPCs) practice has changed during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the impact this has had on the children, families, and professionals involved. The consultation included an online survey and a series of interviews; 492 professionals responded to the survey and there were respondents from 108 of 151 local authorities in England and 16 of 22 in Wales; 52 of the professionals were also interviewed; 24 parents responded to the survey and 14 of them were interviewed. Survey responses suggested that CPCs were mainly being conducted over video or by phone, while a substantial minority of professionals had attended at least one ‘hybrid’ conference, where some people attended in person, and others joined by phone or video. Overall, according to professionals, the positives and negatives associated with remote CPCs are fairly evenly balanced. The main advantages identified were: better attendance by, and improved engagement of, a wider range of professionals, as well as convenience in terms of time saved; some felt that CPCs were less intimidating for parents. The main disadvantages as far as professionals were concerned were: limitations in terms of the restricted opportunities for discussion and reflection; problems with technology; loss of a sense of seriousness; issues around parental engagement - this includes parents not always being able to understand what was happening and not being prepared or supported to engage fully - particular issues were identified for parents with learning difficulties and language or communication needs; overarching concerns around confidentiality and safety. The small sample of parents who responded to the survey or were interviewed were much less positive than professionals – all parents interviewed said they would have preferred a face-to-face conference.

Last updated on hub: 15 December 2020

Child protection conference practice during COVID-19: reflections and experiences (rapid consultation September–October 2020): executive summary

Nuffield Family Justice Observatory

Summary of the findings of a rapid consultation to explore how child protection conferences (CPCs) practice has changed during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the impact this has had on the children, families, and professionals involved. The consultation included an online survey and a series of interviews; 492 professionals responded to the survey and there were respondents from 108 of 151 local authorities in England and 16 of 22 in Wales; 52 of the professionals were also interviewed; 24 parents responded to the survey and 14 of them were interviewed. Survey responses suggested that CPCs were mainly being conducted over video or by phone, while a substantial minority of professionals had attended at least one ‘hybrid’ conference, where some people attended in person, and others joined by phone or video. Overall, according to professionals, the positives and negatives associated with remote CPCs are fairly evenly balanced. The main advantages identified were: better attendance by, and improved engagement of, a wider range of professionals, as well as convenience in terms of time saved; some felt that CPCs were less intimidating for parents. The main disadvantages as far as professionals were concerned were: limitations in terms of the restricted opportunities for discussion and reflection; problems with technology; loss of a sense of seriousness; issues around parental engagement - this includes parents not always being able to understand what was happening and not being prepared or supported to engage fully - particular issues were identified for parents with learning difficulties and language or communication needs; overarching concerns around confidentiality and safety. The small sample of parents who responded to the survey or were interviewed were much less positive than professionals – all parents interviewed said they would have preferred a face-to-face conference.

Last updated on hub: 15 December 2020

Children and COVID19: understanding impact on the growth trajectory of an evolving generation

Children and Youth Services Review

The COVID19 pandemic has forced the world to be closed in a shell. It has affected large population worldwide, but studies regarding its effect on children very limited. The majority of the children, who may not be able to grasp the entire emergency, are at a bigger risk with other problems lurking behind the attack of SARS-CoV-2 virus. The risk of infection in children was 1.3%, 1.5%, and 1.7% of total confirmed COVID-19 cases in China, Italy and United States respectively which is less compared to 2003 epidemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), when 5–7% of the positive cases were children, with no deaths reported while another recent multinational multicentric study from Europe which included 582 PCR (polymerase chain reaction) confirmed children of 0–18 year of age, provide deeper and generalize incite about clinical effects of COVID19 infection in children. According to this study 25% children have some pre-existing illness and 8% required ICU (intensive care unit) admission with 0.69% case fatality among all infected children. Common risk factor for serious illness as per this study are younger age, male sex and pre-existing underlying chronic medical condition. However, we need to be more concerned about possible implications of indirect and parallel psychosocial and mental health damage due to closure of schools, being in confinement and lack of peer interaction due to COVID19 related lockdown and other containment measures. The effects can range from mood swings, depression, anxiety symptoms to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, while no meaningful impact on COVID19 related mortality reduction is evident with school closure measures. The objective of this paper is to look at both the positive & negative effects in children due to COVID19 related indirect effects following lockdown and other containment measures. There is a need to gear up in advance with psychological strategies to deal with it post the pandemic by involving all stakeholders (parents, teachers, paediatricians, psychologists, psychiatrists, psychiatric social workers, counsellors), proposing an integrated approach to help the children to overcome the pandemic aftermath.

Last updated on hub: 15 January 2021

Children’s rights impact assessment on the response to Covid-19 in Scotland

Children and Young People's Commissioner Scotland

This report presents an independent children’s rights impact assessment on the emergency (CRIA) measures introduced by Scottish Government and UK Government to address the COVID-19 pandemic. The report outlines the framing and context for this independent CRIA and considers the predicted impacts of the COVID-19 measures on children and young people’s human rights. The overview then looks ahead to issues as Scotland comes out of the crisis, lessons learned, and conclusions for responding to the challenges and ensuring that children and young people’s human rights are respected, protected and fulfilled. While acknowledging that legislative decisions have been primarily concerned with protecting children’s, young people’s and their families’ rights to survival and development, the report looks at where such rights may have been limited unreasonably, and how such rights can be best addressed currently and into the future. It identifies three systemic issues that if addressed would ensure children and young people’s human rights are better respected, protected and fulfilled as the transition is made to the ‘new normal’. These are: law reform – COVID-19 has starkly highlighted areas of existing Scots law that are not compliant with the UNCRC; data and resources – for example, disaggregated data is needed to understand impact on children and young people from Gypsy/Traveller communities; asylum seeking, refugee and migrant children and young people; and those living in families affected by disability; and improving children’s rights impact assessments – ensuring for instance that they pay greater attention to children’s best interests, non-discrimination and participation.

Last updated on hub: 23 July 2020

Cohorting, zoning and isolation practice: commissioning for resilient care home provision: a report to the Social Care Sector COVID-19 Task Force

Care England

Guidance on developing good practice in cohorting, zoning and isolation practice in care home settings as a means of ensuring the effective implementation of the Public Health England (PHE) national guidance and high standards of infection prevention and control. Various examples and documents already exist which exemplify notable practice and provide national guidance. This document brings some of this together to address particular questions for the Task Force. As well as providing advice to the Task Force, it might also act as a checklist for commissioners to assess what they have already done / might do. It is split as follows: context; some key principles to guide work in this area; describing good practice in cohorting – within existing provision, or in dedicated facilities; what this means for commissioners and how they work with care providers recognising the critical relationships between them; resource considerations; and practice examples and references.

Last updated on hub: 17 September 2020

Community based health, social care, mental health trusts and ambulance services

NHS England

Resource hub from NHS England and NHS Improvement housing coronavirus information for community based health and social care and ambulance services. Includes links to guidance on topics including infection control, isolation, prevention and workforce.

Last updated on hub: 09 June 2020

Comparative optimism about infection and recovery from COVID‐19; Implications for adherence with lockdown advice

Health Expectations

Background: Comparative optimism, the belief that negative events are more likely to happen to others rather than to oneself, is well established in health risk research. It is unknown, however, whether comparative optimism also permeates people’s health expectations and potentially behaviour during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Objectives: Data were collected through an international survey (N = 6485) exploring people’s thoughts and psychosocial behaviours relating to COVID‐19. This paper reports UK data on comparative optimism. In particular, we examine the belief that negative events surrounding risk and recovery from COVID‐19 are perceived as more likely to happen to others rather than to oneself. Methods: Using online snowball sampling through social media, anonymous UK survey data were collected from N = 645 adults during weeks 5‐8 of the UK COVID‐19 lockdown. The sample was normally distributed in terms of age and reflected the UK ethnic and disability profile. Findings: Respondents demonstrated comparative optimism where they believed that as compared to others of the same age and gender, they were unlikely to experience a range of controllable (eg accidentally infect/ be infected) and uncontrollable (eg need hospitalization/ intensive care treatment if infected) COVID‐19‐related risks in the short term (P < .001). They were comparatively pessimistic (ie thinking they were more at risk than others for developing COVID‐19‐related infection or symptoms) when thinking about the next year. Discussion: This is the first ever study to report compelling comparative biases in UK adults’ thinking about COVID‐19 We discuss ways in which such thinking may influence adherence with lockdown regimes as these are being relaxed in the UK.

Last updated on hub: 15 October 2020

Coronavirus (COVID-19) and health inequalities

Welsh Government

The objective of this paper is to understand current and future health inequalities around COVID-19 and suggest some potential mitigations for these inequalities. Based on data from the first few months, the report reveals that people in the most deprived fifth of the population in Wales are twice as likely to be admitted to hospital, to end up in ICU, and to die from COVID-19 as those from the least deprived fifth. Data from England and some limited data for Wales suggest there has been proportionally more hospital admissions and deaths in BAME groups. In addition, deprived groups may be more vulnerable to indirect COVID-19 harms due to additional pressures on the health and social care system; and they may be more vulnerable to harms from lockdown changing people’s way of life and affecting their mental health, as well as their physical health, and for some, increasing the risk of domestic violence or children being exposed to adverse childhood experiences and trauma. The main recommendation of this report is to try to protect the most deprived population from the direct effects of COVID19 in a potential second wave, and from the indirect effects of COVID-19 on the economy which will increase health inequalities in the longer term. We will know we have succeeded in this if the gradient in COVID-19 mortality is less steep in future than in the first peak and if we see a reduction in the gradient in all-cause mortality in 2022, given that it is unlikely that inequalities will reduce in the next two years. In the longer term we need to look at policies to increase health and financial resilience across the population.

Last updated on hub: 09 December 2020

Coronavirus (COVID-19) and the Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) population in Wales

Welsh Government

This article summarises findings from a range of analyses relating to the Black, Asian and minority ethnic group (BAME) population in Wales. It focuses on areas where the impact of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) and/or the subsequent preventative measures may disproportionately affect the BAME population. These include employment, including occupations at higher risk and critical key workers; housing, including overcrowded housing and homelessness; and relative poverty and deprivation. The analysis shows that the proportion of critical workers from a BAME background was slightly higher than the proportion of all in employment; people from a number of Black, Asian or Minority ethnic groups are more likely to live in overcrowded housing than White British people; of those households who applied to local authorities in 2018-19 for housing assistance because they were threatened with homelessness, 8 per cent were from a Black or Ethnic minority background; people who are living in households in Wales where the head of the household is from a non-white ethnic group are more likely to be in relative income poverty; people from a BAME background were markedly more likely to be living in deprived areas.

Last updated on hub: 14 July 2020

Coronavirus (COVID‐19) in the United Kingdom: a personality‐based perspective on concerns and intention to self‐isolate

British Journal of Health Psychology

Objectives: Public behaviour change is necessary to contain the spread of coronavirus (COVID‐19). Based on the reinforcement sensitivity theory (RST) framework, this study presents an examination of individual differences in some relevant psychological factors. Design: Cross‐sectional psychometric. Methods: UK respondents (N = 202) completed a personality questionnaire (RST‐PQ), measures of illness attitudes, concerns about the impact of coronavirus on health services and socio‐economic infrastructures, personal safety, and likelihood of voluntary self‐isolation. Results: Respondents most concerned were older, had negative illness attitudes, and scored higher on reward reactivity (RR), indicating the motivation to take positive approach action despite prevailing worry/anxiety. Personal safety concerns were highest in those with negative illness attitudes and higher fight-flight-freeze system (FFFS, reflecting fear/avoidance) scores. Results suggest people are experiencing psychological conflict: between the urge to stay safe (FFFF‐related) and the desire to maintain a normal, pleasurable (RR‐related) life. Ways of ameliorating conflict may include maladaptive behaviours (panic buying), reflecting reward‐related displacement activity. Intended self‐isolation related to FFFS, but also low behavioural inhibition system (related to anxiety) scores. Older people reported themselves less likely to self‐isolate. Conclusions: Interventions need to consider individual differences in psychological factors in behaviour change, and we discuss relevant literature to inform policy makers and communicators.

Last updated on hub: 07 November 2020

Order by    Date Title