Objectives The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the extreme vulnerability of older people and other individuals who reside in long term care, creating an urgent need for evidence-based policy that can adequately protect these community members. This study aimed to provide synthesized evidence to support policy decision-making. Design Rapid narrative review investigating strategies that have prevented or mitigated SARS-CoV-2 transmission in long term care. Setting and Participants Residents and staff in care settings such as nursing homes and long term care facilities. Methods PubMed/Medline, Cochrane Library and Scopus were systematically searched, with studies describing potentially effective strategies included. Studies were excluded if they did not report empirical evidence (for example commentaries and consensus guidelines). Study quality was appraised on the basis of study design; data were extracted from published reports and synthesised narratively using tabulated data extracts and summary tables. Results Searches yielded 713 articles; 80 papers describing 77 studies were included. Most studies were observational with no randomized controlled trials identified. Intervention studies provided strong support for widespread surveillance, early identification and response, and rigorous infection prevention and control (IPC) measures. Symptom or temperature based screening, and single point-prevalence testing, were found to be ineffective, and serial universal testing of residents and staff was considered crucial. Attention to ventilation and environmental management, digital health applications and acute sector support were also considered beneficial although evidence for effectiveness was lacking. In observational studies, staff represented substantial transmission risk and workforce management strategies were important components of pandemic response. Higher performing facilities with less crowding and higher nurse staffing ratios had reduced transmission rates. Outbreak investigations suggested that facility-level leadership, inter-sectoral collaboration and policy that facilitated access to critical resources were all significant enablers of success. Conclusions and Implications High quality evidence of effectiveness in protecting LTCFs from COVID-19 was limited at the time of this study, though continues to emerge. Despite widespread COVID-19 vaccination programs in many countries, continuing prevention and mitigation measures may be required to protect vulnerable long term care residents from COVID-19 and other infectious diseases. This rapid review summarises current evidence regarding strategies which may be effective.

The unedited version of this article was published as a preprint on mja.com.au on

Introduction Internationally the COVID-19 pandemic has triggered a dramatic and unprecedented shift in telehealth uptake as a means of protecting healthcare consumers and providers through remote consultation modes. Early in the pandemic, Australia implemented a comprehensive and responsive set of policy measures to support telehealth. Initially targeted at protecting vulnerable individuals, including health professionals, this rapidly expanded to a “whole population” approach as the pandemic evolved. This policy response supported health system capacity and community confidence by protecting patients and healthcare providers; creating opportunities for controlled triage, remote assessment and treatment of mild COVID-19 cases; redeploying quarantined or isolated health care workers (HCWs); and maintaining routine and non-COVID healthcare. Purpose This paper provides a review of the literature regarding telephone and video consulting, outlines the pre-COVID background to telehealth implementation in Australia, and describes the national telehealth policy measures instituted in response to COVID-19. Aligned with the existing payment system for out of hospital care, and funded by the national health insurance scheme, a suite of approximately 300 temporary telehealth Medicare-subsidised services were introduced. Response to these initiatives was swift and strong, with 30.01 million services, at a cost of AUD $1.54 billion, claimed in the first six months. Findings This initiative has been a major policy success, ensuring the safety of healthcare consumers and healthcare workers during a time of great uncertainty, and addressing known financial risks and barriers for health service providers. The risks posed by COVID-19 have radically altered the value proposition of telehealth for patients and clinicians, overcoming many previously encountered barriers to implementation, including willingness of clinicians to adopt telehealth, consumer awareness and demand, and the necessity of learning new ways of conducting safe consultations. However, ensuring the quality of telehealth services is a key ongoing concern. Conclusions Despite a preference by policymakers for video consultation, the majority of telehealth consults in Australia were conducted by telephone. The pronounced dominance of telephone item numbers in early utilisation data suggests there are still barriers to video-consultations, and a number of challenges remain before the well-described benefits of telehealth can be fully realised from this policy and investment. Ongoing exposure to a range of clinical, legislative, insurance, educational, regulatory, and interoperability concerns and solutions, driven by necessity, may drive changes in expectations about what is desirable and feasible – among both patients and clinicians.

Background COVID-19 is the fifth and most significant infectious disease epidemic this century. Primary health care providers, which include those working in primary care and public health roles, have critical responsibilities in the management of health emergencies. Objective To synthesize accounts of primary care lessons learnt from past epidemics and their relevance to COVID-19. Methods We conducted a review of lessons learnt from previous infectious disease epidemics for primary care, and their relevance to COVID-19. We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, PROQUEST and Google Scholar, hand-searched reference lists of included studies, and included research identified through professional contacts. Results Of 173 publications identified, 31 publications describing experiences of four epidemics in 11 countries were included. Synthesis of findings identified six key lessons: (i) improve collaboration, communication and integration between public health and primary care; (ii) strengthen the primary health care system; (iii) provide consistent, coordinated and reliable information emanating from a trusted source; (iv) define the role of primary care during pandemics; (v) protect the primary care workforce and the community and (vi) evaluate the effectiveness of interventions. Conclusions Evidence highlights distinct challenges to integrating and supporting primary care in response to infectious disease epidemics that have persisted over time, emerging again during COVID-19. These insights provide an opportunity for strengthening, and improved preparedness, that cannot be ignored in a world where the frequency, virility and global reach of infectious disease outbreaks are increasing. It is not too soon to plan for the next pandemic, which may already be on the horizon.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in the diversion of health resources away from routine primary care delivery. This disruption of health services has necessitated new approaches to providing care to ensure continuity. Objectives To summarize changes to the provision of routine primary care services during the pandemic. Methods Rapid literature review using PubMed/MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and Cochrane. Eligible studies were based in primary care and described practice-level changes in the provision of routine care in response to COVID-19. Relevant data addressing changes to routine primary care delivery, impact on primary care functions and challenges experienced in adjusting to new approaches to providing care, were obtained from included studies. A narrative summary was guided by Burns et al.’s framework for primary care provision in disasters. Results Seventeen of 1,699 identified papers were included. Studies reported on telehealth use and public health measures to maintain safe access to routine primary care, including providing COVID-19 screening, and establishing dedicated care pathways for non-COVID and COVID-related issues. Acute and urgent care were prioritized, causing disruptions to chronic disease management and preventive care. Challenges included telehealth use including disparities in access and practical difficulties in assessing patients, personal protective equipment shortages, and financial solvency of medical practices. Conclusions Substantial disruptions to routine primary care occurred due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Primary care practices’ rapid adaptation, often with limited resources and support, demonstrates agility and innovative capacity. Findings underscore the need for timely guidance and support from authorities to optimize the provision of comprehensive routine care during pandemics.