Project description:Background/objectivesThe effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine on preventing the spread of COVID-19 and deaths in nursing homes (NH) is unknown.DesignWe used zero-inflated negative binomial mixed effects regressions to model the associations of time since the vaccine clinic ending the week of December 27, 2020 (cohort 1), January 3, 2021 (cohort 2), or January 10, 2021 (cohort 3) controlling for county rate of COVID-19, bed size, urban location, racial and ethnic census, and level of registered nurses with resident cases and deaths of COVID-19 and staff cases of COVID-19.Setting and participantsAll 2501 NHs who held a vaccine clinic from the first 17 states to initiate clinics as part of the Pharmacy Partnership for Long-Term Care Program.Main outcome(s) and measure(s)Adjusted Incidence Rate Ratio (IRR) for time in 3, 4, 5, and 6 weeks after the first vaccine clinic for resident cases and deaths of COVID-19 and staff cases of COVID-19.ResultsResident and staff cases trended downward in all three cohorts following the vaccine clinics. Time following the first clinic at 5 and 6 weeks was consistently associated with fewer resident cases (IRR: 0.68 [95% CI: 0.54-0.84], IRR: 0.64 [95% CI: 0.48-0.86], respectively); resident deaths (IRR: 0.59 [95% CI: 0.45-0.77], IRR: 0.45 [95% CI: 0.31-0.65], respectively); and staff cases (IRR: 0.64 [95% CI: 0.56-0.73], IRR: 0.51 [95% CI: 0.42-0.62], respectively). Other factors associated with fewer resident and staff cases included facilities with less than 50 certified beds and high nurse staffing per resident day (>0.987). Contrary to prior research, higher Hispanic non-white resident census was associated with fewer resident cases (IRR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.31-0.56) and deaths (IRR: 0.18, 95% CI: 0.12-0.27).ConclusionsThe BNT162b2 vaccine is associated with decreased spread of SARS-CoV-2 in both residents and staff as well as decreased deaths among residents.
Project description:BackgroundAfter the first of three COVID-19 vaccination clinics in U.S. nursing homes (NHs), the median vaccination coverage of staff was 37.5%, indicating the need to identify strategies to increase staff coverage. We aimed at comparing the facility-level activities, policies, incentives, and communication methods associated with higher staff COVID-19 vaccination coverage.MethodsDesign. Case-control analysis.SettingNationally stratified random sample of 1338 U.S. NHs participating in the Pharmacy Partnership for Long-Term Care Program.ParticipantsNursing home leadership.MeasurementDuring February 4-March 2, 2021, we surveyed NHs with low (<35%), medium (40%-60%), and high (>75%) staff vaccination coverage, to collect information on facility strategies used to encourage staff vaccination. Cases were respondents with medium and high vaccination coverage, whereas controls were respondents with low coverage. We used logistic regression modeling, adjusted for county and NH characteristics, to identify strategies associated with facility-level vaccination coverage.ResultsWe obtained responses from 413 of 1338 NHs (30.9%). Compared with facilities with lower staff vaccination coverage, facilities with medium or high coverage were more likely to have designated frontline staff champions (medium: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.6, 95% CI 1.3-10.3; high: aOR 2.9, 95% CI 1.1-7.7) and set vaccination goals (medium: aOR 2.4, 95% 1.0-5.5; high: aOR 3.7, 95% CI 1.6-8.3). NHs with high vaccination coverage were more likely to have given vaccinated staff rewards such as T-shirts compared with NHs with low coverage (aOR 3.8, 95% CI 1.3-11.0). Use of multiple strategies was associated with greater likelihood of facilities having medium or high vaccination coverage: For example, facilities that used ≥9 strategies were three times more likely to have high staff vaccination coverage than facilities using <6 strategies (aOR 3.3, 95% CI 1.2-8.9).ConclusionsUse of designated champions, setting targets, and use of non-monetary awards were associated with high NH staff COVID-19 vaccination coverage.
Project description:Nursing homes and other long-term care facilities account for a disproportionate share of COVID-19 cases and fatalities worldwide. Outbreaks in US nursing homes have persisted despite nationwide visitor restrictions beginning in mid-March. An early report issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention identified staff members working in multiple nursing homes as a likely source of spread from the Life Care Center in Kirkland, WA, to other skilled nursing facilities. The full extent of staff connections between nursing homes-and the role these connections serve in spreading a highly contagious respiratory infection-is currently unknown given the lack of centralized data on cross-facility employment. We perform a large-scale analysis of nursing home connections via shared staff and contractors using device-level geolocation data from 50 million smartphones, and find that 5.1% of smartphone users who visited a nursing home for at least 1 h also visited another facility during our 11-wk study period-even after visitor restrictions were imposed. We construct network measures of connectedness and estimate that nursing homes, on average, share connections with 7.1 other facilities. Traditional federal regulatory metrics of nursing home quality are unimportant in predicting outbreaks, consistent with recent research. Controlling for demographic and other factors, a home's staff network connections and its centrality within the greater network strongly predict COVID-19 cases.
Project description:IntroductionOlder adults are at greater risk of both infection with and mortality from COVID-19. Many U.S. nursing homes have been devastated by the COVID-19 pandemic, yet little has been described regarding the typical disease course in this population. The objective of this study is to describe and identify patterns in the disease course of nursing home residents infected with COVID-19.Setting and methodsThis is a case series of 74 residents with COVID-19 infection in a nursing home in central Indiana between March 28 and June 17, 2020. Data were extracted from the electronic medical record and from nursing home medical director tracking notes from the time of the index infection through August 31, 2020. The clinical authorship team reviewed the data to identify patterns in the disease course of the residents.ResultsThe most common symptoms were fever, hypoxia, anorexia, and fatigue/malaise. The duration of symptoms was extended, with an average of over 3 weeks. Of those infected 25 died; 23 of the deaths were considered related to COVID-19 infection. A subset of residents with COVID-19 infection experienced a rapidly progressive, fatal course.Discussion/conclusionsNursing home residents infected with COVID-19 from the facility we studied experienced a prolonged disease course regardless of the severity of their symptoms, with implications for the resources needed to care for and support of these residents during active infection and post-disease. Future studies should combine data from nursing home residents across the country to identify the risk factors for disease trajectories identified in this case series.
Project description:IntroductionMany nursing homes (NHs) are affected by COVID-19 and 30-day mortality is high. Knowledge on recovery of NH residents after COVID-19 is limited. Therefore, we investigated the trajectory in the first three months after a COVID-19 infection in NH residents.MethodsRetrospective observational cohort study of Dutch NH residents with COVID-19 between 1 September 2020 and 1 March 2021. Prevalence of COVID-19 symptoms and functioning was determined using interRAI (ADL-Hierarchy Scale (ADL-HS), Cognitive Performance Scale (CPS) and Revised Index of Social Engagement (RISE)) at four time points. Descriptive and pattern analyses were performed.ResultsEighty-six residents were included. Symptom prevalences after three months were higher than at baseline. At group level, functioning on all domains deteriorated and was followed by recovery towards baseline, except for ADL functioning. There were four trajectories; 9.3% had no deterioration. Total and partial recovery occurred in respectively 30.2% and 55.8% of the residents. In 4.7% there was no recovery.ConclusionIn 86% of NH residents surviving three months after COVID-19, occurrence of COVID-19 symptoms and deterioration in functioning was followed by recovery. COVID-19 symptoms fatigue and sleeping behaviour were significantly more prevalent, and ADL functioning was significantly lower, at three months compared to baseline.
Project description:ObjectivesTo explore experiences of U.S. (United States) nursing home leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic in their efforts to address resident loneliness and social isolation and to elicit stories about personal and professional impacts on themselves and staff.DesignQualitative inquiry via three optional open-ended questions appended to a national self-administered survey of American nursing home leaders was employed. Textual data was analyzed using an iterative reflexive thematic approach.Setting and participantsA stratified sample frame defined by facility size (beds: 30-99, 100+) and quality ratings (1, 2-4, 5) was employed. Web survey links and paper surveys were sent to 1,676 nursing home directors of nursing between February and May 2022.ResultsOpen text responses were collected from 271 nursing homes. Broad themes included: 1) Addressing needs of residents & families; 2) Challenges; and 3) Personal experiences of nursing home leadership/staff. Respondents described trauma to residents, staff, and leadership. Resident loneliness was addressed using existing and newer technologies and innovative indoor and outdoor activities. Residents experienced fear, illness, loss, and sometimes death. Isolation from family and lack of touch were particularly difficult. Regulations were seen as punitive while ignoring emotional needs of residents. Staffing challenges and pressures to do more with less created additional stress. Leadership and staff made significant sacrifices resulting in physical, social, and emotional consequences. Beneficial outcomes included staff bonding, professional growth, and permanent implementation of new interventions.Conclusions and implicationsNew and creative interventions were successfully implemented to address social isolation and loneliness. Improved Wi-Fi and other nursing home infrastructure upgrades are needed to maintain them. Reimagining often conflicting overlapping federal, state, and local regulations, grounding them in good clinical judgement, and incentivizing performance improvement should be considered. Trauma experienced by staff needs to be addressed to deal with current and future workforce needs.
Project description:BackgroundNursing home (NH) residents have borne a disproportionate share of SARS-CoV-2 morbidity and mortality. Vaccines have limited hospitalisation and death from earlier variants in this vulnerable population. With the rise of Omicron and future variants, it is vital to sustain and broaden vaccine-induced protection. We examined the effect of boosting with BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine on humoral immunity and Omicron-specific neutralising activity among NH residents and healthcare workers (HCWs).MethodsWe longitudinally enrolled 85 NH residents (median age 77) and 48 HCWs (median age 51), and sampled them after the initial vaccination series; and just before and 2 weeks after booster vaccination. Anti-spike, anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) and neutralisation titres to the original Wuhan strain and neutralisation to the Omicron strain were obtained.FindingsBooster vaccination significantly increased vaccine-specific anti-spike, anti-RBD, and neutralisation levels above the pre-booster levels in NH residents and HCWs, both in those with and without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Omicron-specific neutralisation activity was low after the initial 2 dose series with only 28% of NH residents' and 28% HCWs' titres above the assay's lower limit of detection. Omicron neutralising activity following the booster lifted 86% of NH residents and 93% of HCWs to the detectable range.InterpretationWith boosting, the vast majority of HCWs and NH residents developed detectable Omicron-specific neutralising activity. These data provide immunologic evidence that strongly supports booster vaccination to broaden neutralising activity and counter waning immunity in the hope it will better protect this vulnerable, high-risk population against the Omicron variant.FundingNIH AI129709-03S1, U01 CA260539-01, CDC 200-2016-91773, and VA BX005507-01.
Project description:BackgroundThe BNT162b2 SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination has mitigated the burden of COVID-19 among residents of long-term care facilities considerably, despite being excluded from the vaccine trials. Data on reactogenicity (vaccine side effects) in this population are limited.AimsTo assess reactogenicity among nursing home (NH) residents. To provide a plausible proxy for predicting vaccine response among this population.MethodsWe enrolled and sampled NH residents and community-dwelling healthcare workers who received the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine, to assess local or systemic reactogenicity and antibody levels (immunogenicity).ResultsNH residents reported reactions at a much lower frequency and lesser severity than the community-dwelling healthcare workers. These reactions were mild and transient with all subjects experiencing more local than systemic reactions. Based on our reactogenicity and immunogenicity data, we developed a linear regression model predicting log-transformed anti-spike, anti-receptor-binding domain (RBD), and neutralizing titers, with a dichotomous variable indicating the presence or absence of reported reactions which revealed a statistically significant effect, with estimated shifts in log-transformed titers ranging from 0.32 to 0.37 (all p < 0.01) indicating greater immunogenicity in subjects with one or more reported reactions of varying severity.DiscussionWith a significantly lower incidence of post-vaccination reactions among NH residents as reported in this study, the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine appears to be well-tolerated among this vulnerable population. If validated in larger populations, absence of reactogenicity could help guide clinicians in prioritizing vaccine boosters.ConclusionsReactogenicity is significantly mild among nursing home residents and overall, subjects who reported post-vaccination reactions developed higher antibody titers.
Project description:Nursing home residents (NHR) have been targeted as a vaccination priority due to their higher risk of worse outcome after COVID-19 infection. The mRNA-based vaccine BTN2b2 was first approved in Europe for NHRs. The assessment of the specific vaccine immune response (both humoral and cellular) at long term in NHRs has not been addressed yet. A representative sample of 624 NHR subjects in Northern region of Spain was studied to assess immune response against full vaccination with BTN2b2. The anti-S1 antibody levels and specific T cells were measured at two and six months after vaccination. 24.4% of NHR had a previous infection prior to vaccination. The remaining NHR were included in the full vaccination assessment group (FVA). After two months, a 94.9% of the FVA presented anti-S1 antibodies, whereas those seronegative without specific cellular response were 2.54%. At long-term, the frequency of NHR within the FVA group with anti-S1 antibodies at six months were 88.12% and the seronegative subjects without specific cellular response was 8.07%. The cellular immune assays complement the humoral test in the immune vaccine response assessment. Therefore, the cellular immune assessment in NHRs allows for the fine tuning of those seronegative subjects with potential competent immune responses against the vaccine.