No abstract

Objective To evaluate the relation between diagnosis of covid-19 with SARS-CoV-2 variant B.1.1.7 (also known as variant of concern 202012/01) and the risk of hospital admission compared with diagnosis with wild-type SARS-CoV-2 variants. Design Retrospective cohort analysis. Setting Community based SARS-CoV-2 testing in England, individually linked with hospital admission data. Participants 839 278 patients with laboratory confirmed covid-19, of whom 36 233 had been admitted to hospital within 14 days, tested between 23 November 2020 and 31 January 2021 and analysed at a laboratory with an available TaqPath assay that enables assessment of S-gene target failure (SGTF), a proxy test for the B.1.1.7 variant. Patient data were stratified by age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation, region of residence, and date of positive test. Main outcome measures Hospital admission between one and 14 days after the first positive SARS-CoV-2 test. Results 27 710 (4.7%) of 592 409 patients with SGTF variants and 8523 (3.5%) of 246 869 patients without SGTF variants had been admitted to hospital within one to 14 days. The stratum adjusted hazard ratio of hospital admission was 1.52 (95% confidence interval 1.47 to 1.57) for patients with covid-19 infected with SGTF variants, compared with those infected with non-SGTF variants. The effect was modified by age (P<0.001), with hazard ratios of 0.93-1.21 in patients younger than 20 years with versus without SGTF variants, 1.29 in those aged 20-29, and 1.45-1.65 in those aged ≥30 years. The adjusted absolute risk of hospital admission within 14 days was 4.7% (95% confidence interval 4.6% to 4.7%) for patients with SGTF variants and 3.5% (3.4% to 3.5%) for those with non-SGTF variants. Conclusions The results suggest that the risk of hospital admission is higher for people infected with the B.1.1.7 variant compared with wild-type SARS-CoV-2, likely reflecting a more severe disease. The higher severity may be specific to adults older than 30 years.

Background The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) has rapidly replaced the Delta variant (B.1.617.2) to become dominant in England. This epidemiological study assessed differences in transmissibility between the Omicron and Delta using two methods and data sources. Methods Omicron and Delta cases were identified through genomic sequencing, genotyping and S-gene target failure in England from 5-11 December 2021. Secondary attack rates for Omicron and Delta using named contacts and household clustering were calculated using national surveillance and contact tracing data. Logistic regression was used to control for factors associated with transmission. Findings Analysis of contact tracing data identified elevated secondary attack rates for Omicron vs Delta in household (15.0% vs 10.8%) and non-household (8.2% vs 3.7%) settings. The proportion of index cases resulting in residential clustering was twice as high for Omicron (16.1%) compared to Delta (7.3%). Transmission was significantly less likely from cases, or in named contacts, in receipt of three compared to two vaccine doses in household settings, but less pronounced for Omicron (aRR 0.78 and 0.88) compared to Delta (aRR 0.62 and 0.68). In non-household settings, a similar reduction was observed for Delta cases and contacts (aRR 0.84 and 0.51) but only for Omicron contacts (aRR 0.76, 95% CI: 0.58-0.93) and not cases in receipt of three vs two doses (aRR 0.95, 0.77-1.16). Interpretation Our study identified increased risk of onward transmission of Omicron, consistent with its successful global displacement of Delta. We identified a reduced effectiveness of vaccination in lowering risk of transmission, a likely contributor for the rapid propagation of Omicron.

Background Long-term care facilities (LTCF) worldwide have suffered high rates of COVID-19, reflecting the vulnerability of the persons who live there and the institutional nature of care delivered. This study describes the impact of the pandemic on incidences and deaths in LTCF across England. Methods Laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 cases in England, notified to Public Health England from 01 Jan to 25 Dec 2020, were address-matched to an Ordnance Survey reference database to identify residential property classifications. Data were analysed to characterize cases and identify clusters. Associated deaths were defined as death within 60 days of diagnosis or certified as cause of death. Results Of 1 936 315 COVID-19 cases, 81 275 (4.2%) and 10 050 (0.52%) were identified as resident or staff in an LTCF, respectively, with 20 544 associated deaths in residents, accounting for 31.3% of all COVID-19 deaths. Cases were identified in 69.5% of all LTCFs in England, with 33.1% experiencing multiple outbreaks. Multivariable analysis showed a 67% increased odds of death in residents [adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.67, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.63–1.72], compared with those not residing in LTCFs. A total of 10 321 outbreaks were identified at these facilities, of which 8.2% identified the first case as a staff member. Conclusions Over two-thirds of LTCFs have experienced large and widespread outbreaks of COVID-19, and just under one-third of all COVID-19 deaths occurring in this setting in spite of early policies. A key implication of our findings is upsurges in community incidences seemingly leading to increased outbreaks in LTCFs; thus, identifying and shielding residents from key sources of infection are vital to reduce the number of future outbreaks.

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.