Conectar
To identify subgroups with similar social determinants of health (SDOH) characteristics using latent class analysis (LCA) and examine their associations with physical and mental health, cognitive function and missed workdays at 3 and 6 months post-SARS-CoV-2 infection. We hypothesised that intersecting SDOH factors would differentially influence COVID-19-related health outcomes across subgroups.
Prospective cohort study from the Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infections Registry (INSPIRE), with longitudinal data collection and cross-sectional analyses at baseline, 3-month and 6-month follow-ups.
Multicentre registry across eight US academic medical centres (Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Los Angeles, New Haven, Philadelphia, San Francisco and Seattle).
Adults aged ≥18 years, fluent in English or Spanish, with self-reported acute COVID-19 symptoms and a confirmed positive SARS-CoV-2 test within 42 days before enrolment (9 December 2020 to 12 August 2022), and access to an internet-connected device. Exclusions included incarceration, inability to provide informed consent, lack of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection or no internet access. Of 3791 eligible participants with complete baseline data, 2897 (76.4%) completed the 3-month follow-up and 2666 (70.3%) completed the 6-month follow-up; most were aged 18–49 years (74–75%), female (66–67%), white (86.6–87.5%) and non-Hispanic (86.6–87.5%).
Prespecified primary outcomes were physical and mental health (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-29 V.2.1 T-scores for depression, anxiety, fatigue, sleep disturbance, pain interference, physical function and social participation), cognitive function (PROMIS Cognitive Function Short Form 8 T-scores) and missed workdays due to illness (binary: >1 week vs ≤1 week, from a single-item survey). All measures were self-reported and collected at baseline, 3 months and 6 months; no changes from protocol.
LCA identified a 4-class model as optimal (lowest Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) after evaluating 1–7 class models; significant demographic differences (2 p
In this US prospective cohort, SDOH-based subgroups showed persistent disparities in health outcomes post-SARS-CoV-2 infection. Findings highlight the urgent need for intersectional approaches to address systemic inequities in post-COVID-19 recovery.
by Tamara Muir, Chandra Sharma Poudyal, Romana De Lima, Farah Otaki
IntroductionCOVID-19 pandemic emerged in late 2019, leading to global disruption and forcing people to adapt to a new reality. The intensity of the pandemic affected many organisations’ preparedness, response, and recovery efforts, causing numerous businesses to struggle. Although no single theory fully explains why some businesses thrived during this time, the concept of organisational resilience stands out. Organisations with a resilient culture seemed better equipped to address risks, adapt effectively, and seize opportunities for innovation. Therefore, the purpose of the current study is to critically examine the response to COVID-19 of a medicine and health sciences university in Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
MethodsThe study relied on a convergent mixed methods approach to research. A tailor-made questionnaire was used to collect quantitative data using two 5-point Likert-type scales: ‘Opinions about Organizational Response’ and ‘Conducive Organizational Response Behaviours’ (where 110 current employees who were tenured during COVID-19 were selected, using purposive, non-probability sampling, and in turn invited to participate). Semi-structured interviews were conducted to collect qualitative data [where seven respondents who had completed the questionnaire and agreed to participate in follow-up interviews were selected (i.e., convenience, nonprobability sampling) and in turn invited to participate]. The quantitative data were descriptively and inferentially analysed. Qualitative data was analysed using an inductive six-step thematic approach. The quantitative findings were mapped onto the output of qualitative analysis using the iterative joint display analysis process.
ResultsA total of 70 employees completed the questionnaire (63.64%), and six out of seven invitees participated in the semi-structured interviews. The percentage of the total extent of agreement of ‘Opinions about Organizational Response’ score was 90.94%. As for the percentage of the total frequency of observation of ‘Conducive Organizational Response Behaviours’ score, it was 95.08%. The qualitative analysis generated a conceptual model, namely: ‘Enablers of Organizational Resilience’, with five interlinked themes namely: Preparedness and planning for uncertainty, Adaptation and agility, Team cohesion, Social responsibility, and Learning organisation. Four meta-inferences emerged from integrating the data findings: Response characteristics, Behaviour specificities, Consistency of opinions, and the Fundamental role of organizational culture.
ConclusionThe findings reveal that organizations, in the intersect between higher education and public health, should continue on innovatively investing in agile leadership, strategic partnerships, and a robust continuous learning and development culture to better navigate future disruptions.
People experiencing severe and multiple disadvantage (SMD: homelessness, substance use and criminal offending) have multiple intersecting unmet health and social care needs and high mortality rates, often due to street-drug overdose. Pilot randomised controlled trials (RCTs) suggest an integrated, holistic, collaborative outreach intervention (Pharmacy Homeless Outreach Engagement Non-medical Independent Prescribing Rx (PHOENIx)) involving generalist-trained pharmacists, nurses or General Practitioners accompanied by staff from third sector homeless organisations may improve outcomes, including reducing overdose.
Multicentre, parallel group, prospective RCT with parallel economic and process evaluation. Set in six areas of Scotland, UK, 378 adults with SMD will be recruited and randomised (stratified by setting and previous non-fatal overdoses) to PHOENIx intervention in addition to usual care (UC) or UC. Aiming to meet participants weekly for 9–15 months, PHOENIx teams assess and address health and social care needs while referring onwards as necessary, co-ordinating care with wider health and third sector teams. During a person-centred consultation, in the participants’ choice of venue, and taking account of the participant’s priorities, the NHS clinician may prescribe, de-prescribe and treat, for example, wound care, and refer to other health services as necessary. The third sector worker may help with welfare benefit applications, social prescribing or advocacy, for example, securing stable housing. Pairings of clinicians and third sector workers support the same participants. The primary outcome is time to first fatal/non-fatal street-drug overdose at nine months. Secondary endpoints include health-related quality of life, healthcare use and criminal justice encounters. A health economic evaluation will assess cost per quality adjusted life year of PHOENIx relative to standard care. A parallel qualitative process evaluation will explore the perceptions and experiences of PHOENIx, by participants, stakeholders and PHOENIx staff.
The primary and other time-to-event secondary outcomes will be analysed by Cox proportional hazards regression.
IRAS number 345246, approved 23/10/2024 by North of Scotland Research Ethics Service. Results will be shared with participants, third sector homelessness organisations, health and social care partnerships, then peer-reviewed journals and conferences worldwide, from the first quarter of 2027.
ISRCTN12234059 registered on 20/2/2025 (ISRCTN).
FreshRSS 