Coronavirus disease (COVID‐19) is now dominating the lives of everyone, and its history is constantly being rewritten. This article gives a brief account of the story so far: where SARS‐CoV‐2 might have originated, how it compares with other viruses that cause major respiratory disease, and some of the treatments and vaccines currently being investigated to combat it.

Aims There is evidence that people with haemophilia A still experience morbidity and functional limitation due to joint damage despite prophylaxis. This study aimed to compare their quality of life and work‐related function with that of the general population and patients with osteoarthritis. Methods Data from the Cost of Haemophilia in Europe: a Socioeconomic Survey (CHESS) database were compared with published data from normative populations and patients with osteoarthritis in Europe and the United States. Results In the predominantly young (age 18‐35 years) adult CHESS population treated with primary prophylaxis, about 30% reported a target joint; the average frequency of bleeds was one per year; half reported chronic pain. Levels of anxiety and depression were similar to those reported by people using on‐demand treatment. Employment and productivity were lower than in the general population. The level of presenteeism (attending work with impairment) was comparable with that reported for a much older population with osteoarthritis who had more extensive joint damage and greater prevalence of pain. Conclusion Compared with the general population, clinical outcomes and quality of life are indicated to be impaired for young adults whose haemophilia is managed by primary prophylaxis. Primary prophylaxis is not associated with lower levels of anxiety and depression than on‐demand treatment, and pain is common. The level of presenteeism is comparable to that reported in people with osteoarthritis, an older population with more joint disease. Further studies are needed to fully assess the implications of compromised work performance among young adults with haemophilia as they seek to build a career.

The SGLT2 inhibitors dapagliflozin, canagliflozin and empagliflozin are now becoming established in the management of type 2 diabetes, but they are associated with an increased risk of genital and urinary tract infections, compounding the problem that people with diabetes are already at higher risk than the general population. This article examines the extent of these risks and how they may affect treatment adherence.

Introduction Gene therapy is used in life‐limiting conditions of childhood. While not a current therapeutic option for children with haemophilia, it may be considered in the future especially for those where access to treatment is limited. Aim To assess the attitudes and opinions of parents of children with haemophilia about gene therapy as a potential future treatment, by understanding their awareness about gene therapy and what they need to know now and in the future; gauging levels of interest in gene therapy for their children; and exploring perceived current motivations and barriers. Methods A mixed methods study with an online questionnaire and in‐depth qualitative interviews in focus groups which were analysed using thematic analysis. Results One hundred and fifty‐eight participants commenced the online survey; 63 were fully completed (39%). 60 had heard of gene therapy but few (17/60 [28.3%]) felt they had a good understanding. 38/60 (63.3%) respondents did not know that gene therapy is not available for children. However, most held positive views: 53/60 (88.3%) saying they would consider it for their child. In the interviews, participants (N = 10, all mothers) discussed their awareness and understanding of gene therapy and opinions about it for children, including how this should be communicated to the child and parents. Conclusion A coherent, community‐wide strategy for communicating information and news about gene therapy should now be provided for children and families living with haemophilia. This should come primarily from trusted haemophilia nursing teams, who can give tailored, age‐appropriate, factual advice.

The terms ‘nurse-led service’ and ‘nurse-led care’ are often used, but are frequently not well defined. As health care delivery evolves across the world and struggles to cope with changes in medical care and with the rising number of people living longer with long term conditions, it is frequently suggested that more care should be delivered and coordinated by nurses who have the most day-to-day contact with affected individuals and their families. This paper addresses the notion of modern ‘nurse-led’ care in the 21st century, with a focus on haemophilia. Haemophilia is one specialty in which totally nurse-led and delivered care could become a reality, there is already evidence from both developing and developed countries of nurses providing excellent and innovative haemophilia care.

Introduction For many people with haemophilia (PwH) gene therapy offers a potential functional cure. However, some have stated that they do not wish to have gene therapy either now or in the future. Aim This sub‐study, part of the larger Exigency programme, assesses the attitudes, views and understanding of those who do not wish to undergo gene therapy. Methods Participants were approached via social media and word of mouth referral and invited to participate in a focus group or individual interview to discuss their views. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. Results Ten adult men with severe haemophilia (eight haemophilia A and two haemophilia B), mean age 34.3 years, participated in a 1‐h focus group (n = 9) or interview (n = 1). All were on prophylaxis. None reported significant treatment burden, and all had annual bleeding rates of less than five in the previous 12 months. Four major themes emerged: self‐identity and its loss, lack of long‐term safety and efficacy data, ongoing concerns about past viral infection, and lack of current treatment burden. Conclusion There are many concerns about gene therapy, including eligibility, effectiveness and safety, which may result in individuals declining it as a therapy. These concerns may recede as more data are published. This study reveals a psychological dynamic around self‐identity and belonging for PwH. The nature of this dynamic is poorly understood and needs exploration to facilitate support for those making decisions about gene therapy.

Background Research studies have described the morbidity associated with inherited bleeding disorders such as hemophilia and von Willebrand disease in women, but their effect on daily living has long been underrecognized. This systematic review sought to document the lived experience of women with a bleeding disorder by assessing research findings on quality of health care, socioeconomic factors, and mental health. Methods A systematic search was carried out in Web of Science, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and PubMed on July 31, 2020. References were hand searched. Abstracts of the 2019 and 2020 congresses on bleeding disorders were hand searched. Key journals were screened for relevant studies published after the search date until the analysis was completed on December 7, 2020. Results Of 635 potentially eligible publications, 27 published since 1998 were selected for review. Most studies were of moderate to high quality but meta‐analysis of quantitative studies was not possible due to difference in outcomes and assessment. Women with a bleeding disorder experience obstacles to accessing care, difficulties living with their disorder, interference with schooling and work, and poor mental health. Diagnostic delay and lack of recognition of symptoms mean treatment and support may not be available. Where comparisons with controls were made, women’s negative experiences were greater than those of men. Conclusions Women with bleeding disorders experience major negative impacts of their disorders on daily life and mental well‐being. Many of the challenges identified in earlier research are evident in more recent studies.

Steve Chaplin and Professor Sunil Bhandari provide an overview of the properties of oral iron preparations and their current recommended place in the treatment of anaemia. Copyright © 2012 Wiley Interface Ltd