User login
Many pandemic-driven changes to cancer clinical trials should remain
Many of the changes to cancer clinical trials forced through by the COVID-19 pandemic should remain, as they have made trials “more patient centered and efficient,” according to a group of thought leaders in oncology.
Among the potential improvements were more efficient study enrollment through secure electronic platforms, direct shipment of oral drugs to patients, remote assessment of adverse events, and streamlined data collection.
These changes should be implemented on a permanent basis, the group argues in a commentary published online July 21, 2021, in Cancer Discovery, a journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.
“The ability to distribute oral investigational drugs by mail to patients at their home has probably been the single most impactful change to clinical trial conduct, linked with virtual visits with patients to assess side effects and symptoms,” commented lead author Keith Flaherty, MD, who is director of clinical research at Massachusetts General Hospital, a professor at Harvard Medical School, Boston, and a member of the AACR board of directors.
“This has made it more feasible for patients for whom participation in clinical trials poses a disruption of their ability to work or provide care for family members to participate in trials,” he added in a press statement issued by the AACR.
Pandemic halted many clinical trials
A survey of cancer programs in early 2020 showed that nearly 60% halted screening and/or enrollment for at least some trials because of COVID-19.
“In the spring of 2020, clinical trial conduct halted and then restarted focusing on the bare minimum procedures that first allowed patients continued access to their experimental therapies, and then allowed clinical trial sites and sponsors to collect information on the effects of the therapies,” the authors said.
“The COVID-19–induced changes to clinical trials were a big challenge, probably the largest change in clinical trial conduct since the start of modern oncology clinical testing,” they commented.
“But it also represents an opportunity to rethink the key aspects of clinical trial conduct that are strictly necessary to reach the goal of testing the effectiveness of cancer therapies, and which others are dispensable or provide only minor additional contributions,” they added.
As previously reported at the time by this news organization, efforts to find alternative approaches to conducting trials amid the pandemic led to the emergence of a few “silver linings.”
Key adaptations made to clinical trials and highlighted by the authors include:
- Uptake of remote consenting and telemedicine
- Use of alternative laboratories and imaging centers
- Delivery or administration of investigational drugs at patients’ homes or local clinics
- Commercial attainment of study drugs already approved for other indications
Indeed, the restrictions encountered during the pandemic underscore the importance of designing patient-centered trials versus study site–centered trials, added Antoni Ribas, MD, commentary coauthor and immediate past president of the AACR.
Many of the changes implemented during the pandemic could help increase access for patients living in underserved communities who are underrepresented in clinical trials, he explained.
Harnessing the lessons learned
The authors also recommended the following additional adaptations, which they believe will enhance efficiency and further expand access to clinical trials:
- Incorporating patient-reported outcomes and alternative endpoints in efficacy assessments
- Aiming for 100% remote drug infusions and monitoring
- Increasing funding for clinical trials conducted in underserved communities
- Expanding clinical trial eligibility to include patients with a wide range of comorbidities
- Reducing collection of low-grade adverse events and allowing minor protocol deviations
The group’s recommendations are based on discussions by the AACR COVID-19 and Cancer Task Force, in which they participated.
The American Society of Clinical Oncology is also working to leverage pandemic-related lessons to streamline care and trial planning.
ASCO’s “Road to Recovery” recommendations, published in December 2020, aim to “ensure lessons learned from the COVID-19 experience are used to craft a more equitable, accessible, and efficient clinical research system that protects patient safety, ensures scientific integrity, and maintains data quality,” the authors explained.
Dr. Flaherty and colleagues further underscore the importance of focusing on improvements going forward.
“Guided by lessons learned, many of the remote assessments and trial efficiencies deployed during the pandemic can be preserved and improved upon. We strongly encourage use of these streamlined procedures where appropriate in future prospectively designed cancer clinical trials,” they wrote.
Dr. Flaherty reported receiving personal fees from numerous pharmaceutical companies. Dr. Ribas reported receiving grants from Agilent and Bristol Myers Squibb.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Many of the changes to cancer clinical trials forced through by the COVID-19 pandemic should remain, as they have made trials “more patient centered and efficient,” according to a group of thought leaders in oncology.
Among the potential improvements were more efficient study enrollment through secure electronic platforms, direct shipment of oral drugs to patients, remote assessment of adverse events, and streamlined data collection.
These changes should be implemented on a permanent basis, the group argues in a commentary published online July 21, 2021, in Cancer Discovery, a journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.
“The ability to distribute oral investigational drugs by mail to patients at their home has probably been the single most impactful change to clinical trial conduct, linked with virtual visits with patients to assess side effects and symptoms,” commented lead author Keith Flaherty, MD, who is director of clinical research at Massachusetts General Hospital, a professor at Harvard Medical School, Boston, and a member of the AACR board of directors.
“This has made it more feasible for patients for whom participation in clinical trials poses a disruption of their ability to work or provide care for family members to participate in trials,” he added in a press statement issued by the AACR.
Pandemic halted many clinical trials
A survey of cancer programs in early 2020 showed that nearly 60% halted screening and/or enrollment for at least some trials because of COVID-19.
“In the spring of 2020, clinical trial conduct halted and then restarted focusing on the bare minimum procedures that first allowed patients continued access to their experimental therapies, and then allowed clinical trial sites and sponsors to collect information on the effects of the therapies,” the authors said.
“The COVID-19–induced changes to clinical trials were a big challenge, probably the largest change in clinical trial conduct since the start of modern oncology clinical testing,” they commented.
“But it also represents an opportunity to rethink the key aspects of clinical trial conduct that are strictly necessary to reach the goal of testing the effectiveness of cancer therapies, and which others are dispensable or provide only minor additional contributions,” they added.
As previously reported at the time by this news organization, efforts to find alternative approaches to conducting trials amid the pandemic led to the emergence of a few “silver linings.”
Key adaptations made to clinical trials and highlighted by the authors include:
- Uptake of remote consenting and telemedicine
- Use of alternative laboratories and imaging centers
- Delivery or administration of investigational drugs at patients’ homes or local clinics
- Commercial attainment of study drugs already approved for other indications
Indeed, the restrictions encountered during the pandemic underscore the importance of designing patient-centered trials versus study site–centered trials, added Antoni Ribas, MD, commentary coauthor and immediate past president of the AACR.
Many of the changes implemented during the pandemic could help increase access for patients living in underserved communities who are underrepresented in clinical trials, he explained.
Harnessing the lessons learned
The authors also recommended the following additional adaptations, which they believe will enhance efficiency and further expand access to clinical trials:
- Incorporating patient-reported outcomes and alternative endpoints in efficacy assessments
- Aiming for 100% remote drug infusions and monitoring
- Increasing funding for clinical trials conducted in underserved communities
- Expanding clinical trial eligibility to include patients with a wide range of comorbidities
- Reducing collection of low-grade adverse events and allowing minor protocol deviations
The group’s recommendations are based on discussions by the AACR COVID-19 and Cancer Task Force, in which they participated.
The American Society of Clinical Oncology is also working to leverage pandemic-related lessons to streamline care and trial planning.
ASCO’s “Road to Recovery” recommendations, published in December 2020, aim to “ensure lessons learned from the COVID-19 experience are used to craft a more equitable, accessible, and efficient clinical research system that protects patient safety, ensures scientific integrity, and maintains data quality,” the authors explained.
Dr. Flaherty and colleagues further underscore the importance of focusing on improvements going forward.
“Guided by lessons learned, many of the remote assessments and trial efficiencies deployed during the pandemic can be preserved and improved upon. We strongly encourage use of these streamlined procedures where appropriate in future prospectively designed cancer clinical trials,” they wrote.
Dr. Flaherty reported receiving personal fees from numerous pharmaceutical companies. Dr. Ribas reported receiving grants from Agilent and Bristol Myers Squibb.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Many of the changes to cancer clinical trials forced through by the COVID-19 pandemic should remain, as they have made trials “more patient centered and efficient,” according to a group of thought leaders in oncology.
Among the potential improvements were more efficient study enrollment through secure electronic platforms, direct shipment of oral drugs to patients, remote assessment of adverse events, and streamlined data collection.
These changes should be implemented on a permanent basis, the group argues in a commentary published online July 21, 2021, in Cancer Discovery, a journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.
“The ability to distribute oral investigational drugs by mail to patients at their home has probably been the single most impactful change to clinical trial conduct, linked with virtual visits with patients to assess side effects and symptoms,” commented lead author Keith Flaherty, MD, who is director of clinical research at Massachusetts General Hospital, a professor at Harvard Medical School, Boston, and a member of the AACR board of directors.
“This has made it more feasible for patients for whom participation in clinical trials poses a disruption of their ability to work or provide care for family members to participate in trials,” he added in a press statement issued by the AACR.
Pandemic halted many clinical trials
A survey of cancer programs in early 2020 showed that nearly 60% halted screening and/or enrollment for at least some trials because of COVID-19.
“In the spring of 2020, clinical trial conduct halted and then restarted focusing on the bare minimum procedures that first allowed patients continued access to their experimental therapies, and then allowed clinical trial sites and sponsors to collect information on the effects of the therapies,” the authors said.
“The COVID-19–induced changes to clinical trials were a big challenge, probably the largest change in clinical trial conduct since the start of modern oncology clinical testing,” they commented.
“But it also represents an opportunity to rethink the key aspects of clinical trial conduct that are strictly necessary to reach the goal of testing the effectiveness of cancer therapies, and which others are dispensable or provide only minor additional contributions,” they added.
As previously reported at the time by this news organization, efforts to find alternative approaches to conducting trials amid the pandemic led to the emergence of a few “silver linings.”
Key adaptations made to clinical trials and highlighted by the authors include:
- Uptake of remote consenting and telemedicine
- Use of alternative laboratories and imaging centers
- Delivery or administration of investigational drugs at patients’ homes or local clinics
- Commercial attainment of study drugs already approved for other indications
Indeed, the restrictions encountered during the pandemic underscore the importance of designing patient-centered trials versus study site–centered trials, added Antoni Ribas, MD, commentary coauthor and immediate past president of the AACR.
Many of the changes implemented during the pandemic could help increase access for patients living in underserved communities who are underrepresented in clinical trials, he explained.
Harnessing the lessons learned
The authors also recommended the following additional adaptations, which they believe will enhance efficiency and further expand access to clinical trials:
- Incorporating patient-reported outcomes and alternative endpoints in efficacy assessments
- Aiming for 100% remote drug infusions and monitoring
- Increasing funding for clinical trials conducted in underserved communities
- Expanding clinical trial eligibility to include patients with a wide range of comorbidities
- Reducing collection of low-grade adverse events and allowing minor protocol deviations
The group’s recommendations are based on discussions by the AACR COVID-19 and Cancer Task Force, in which they participated.
The American Society of Clinical Oncology is also working to leverage pandemic-related lessons to streamline care and trial planning.
ASCO’s “Road to Recovery” recommendations, published in December 2020, aim to “ensure lessons learned from the COVID-19 experience are used to craft a more equitable, accessible, and efficient clinical research system that protects patient safety, ensures scientific integrity, and maintains data quality,” the authors explained.
Dr. Flaherty and colleagues further underscore the importance of focusing on improvements going forward.
“Guided by lessons learned, many of the remote assessments and trial efficiencies deployed during the pandemic can be preserved and improved upon. We strongly encourage use of these streamlined procedures where appropriate in future prospectively designed cancer clinical trials,” they wrote.
Dr. Flaherty reported receiving personal fees from numerous pharmaceutical companies. Dr. Ribas reported receiving grants from Agilent and Bristol Myers Squibb.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
CDC calls for masks in schools, hard-hit areas, even if vaccinated
The agency has called for masks in K-12 school settings and in areas of the United States experiencing high or substantial SARS-CoV-2 transmission, even for the fully vaccinated.
The move reverses a controversial announcement the agency made in May 2021 that fully vaccinated Americans could skip wearing a mask in most settings.
Unlike the increasing vaccination rates and decreasing case numbers reported in May, however, some regions of the United States are now reporting large jumps in COVID-19 case numbers. And the Delta variant as well as new evidence of transmission from breakthrough cases are largely driving these changes.
“Today we have new science related to the [D]elta variant that requires us to update the guidance on what you can do when you are fully vaccinated,” CDC Director Rochelle Walensky, MD, MPH, said during a media briefing July 27.
New evidence has emerged on breakthrough-case transmission risk, for example. “Information on the [D]elta variant from several states and other countries indicates that in rare cases, some people infected with the [D]elta variant after vaccination may be contagious and spread virus to others,” Dr. Walensky said, adding that the viral loads appear to be about the same in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals.
“This new science is worrisome,” she said.
Even though unvaccinated people represent the vast majority of cases of transmission, Dr. Walensky said, “we thought it was important for [vaccinated] people to understand they have the potential to transmit the virus to others.”
As a result, in addition to continuing to strongly encourage everyone to get vaccinated, the CDC recommends that fully vaccinated people wear masks in public indoor settings to help prevent the spread of the Delta variant in areas with substantial or high transmission, Dr. Walensky said. “This includes schools.”
Masks in schools
The CDC is now recommending universal indoor masking for all teachers, staff, students, and visitors to K-12 schools, regardless of vaccination status. Their goal is to optimize safety and allow children to return to full-time in-person learning in the fall.
The CDC tracks substantial and high transmission rates through the agency’s COVID Data Tracker site. Substantial transmission means between 50 and 100 cases per 100,000 people reported over 7 days and high means more than 100 cases per 100,000 people.
The B.1.617.2, or Delta, variant is believed to be responsible for COVID-19 cases increasing more than 300% nationally from June 19 to July 23, 2021.
“A prudent move”
“I think it’s a prudent move. Given the dominance of the [D]elta variant and the caseloads that we are seeing rising in many locations across the United States, including in my backyard here in San Francisco,” Joe DeRisi, PhD, copresident of the Chan Zuckerberg Biohub and professor of biochemistry and biophysics at the University of California San Francisco, said in an interview.
Dr. DeRisi said he was not surprised that vaccinated people with breakthrough infections could be capable of transmitting the virus. He added that clinical testing done by the Biohub and UCSF produced a lot of data on viral load levels, “and they cover an enormous range.”
What was unexpected to him was the rapid rise of the dominant variant. “The rise of the [D]elta strain is astonishing. It’s happened so fast,” he said.
“I know it’s difficult”
Reacting to the news, Colleen Kraft, MD, said, “One of the things that we’re learning is that if we’re going to have low vaccine uptake or we have a number of people that can’t be vaccinated yet, such as children, that we really need to go back to stopping transmission, which involves mask wearing.”
“I know that it’s very difficult and people feel like we’re sliding backward,” Dr. Kraft said during a media briefing sponsored by Emory University held shortly after the CDC announcement.
She added that the CDC updated guidance seems appropriate. “I don’t think any of us really want to be in this position or want to go back to masking but…we’re finding ourselves in the same place we were a year ago, in July 2020.
“In general we just don’t want anybody to be infected even if there’s a small chance for you to be infected and there’s a small chance for you to transmit it,” said Dr. Kraft, who’s an assistant professor in the department of pathology and associate professor in the department of medicine, division of infectious diseases at Emory University School of Medicine in Atlanta.
Breakthrough transmissions
“The good news is you’re still unlikely to get critically ill if you’re vaccinated. But what has changed with the [D]elta variant is instead of being 90% plus protected from getting the virus at all, you’re probably more in the 70% to 80% range,” James T. McDeavitt, MD, told this news organization.
“So we’re seeing breakthrough infections,” said Dr. McDeavitt, executive vice president and dean of clinical affairs at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston. “We are starting to see [such people] are potentially infectious.” Even if a vaccinated person is individually much less likely to experience serious COVID-19 outcomes, “they can spread it to someone else who spreads it to someone else who is more vulnerable. It puts the more at-risk populations at further risk.”
It breaks down to individual and public health concerns. “I am fully vaccinated. I am very confident I am not going to end up in a hospital,” he said. “Now if I were unvaccinated, with the prevalence of the virus around the country, I’m probably in more danger than I’ve ever been in the course of the pandemic. The unvaccinated are really at risk right now.”
IDSA and AMA support mask change
The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) has released a statement supporting the new CDC recommendations. “To stay ahead of the spread of the highly transmissible Delta variant, IDSA also urges that in communities with moderate transmission rates, all individuals, even those who are vaccinated, wear masks in indoor public places,” stated IDSA President Barbara D. Alexander, MD, MHS.
“IDSA also supports CDC’s guidance recommending universal indoor masking for all teachers, staff, students, and visitors to K-12 schools, regardless of vaccination status, until vaccines are authorized and widely available to all children and vaccination rates are sufficient to control transmission.”
“Mask wearing will help reduce infections, prevent serious illnesses and death, limit strain on local hospitals and stave off the development of even more troubling variants,” she added.
The American Medical Association (AMA) also released a statement supporting the CDC’s policy changes.
“According to the CDC, emerging data indicates that vaccinated individuals infected with the Delta variant have similar viral loads as those who are unvaccinated and are capable of transmission,” AMA President Gerald E. Harmon, MD said in the statement.
“However, the science remains clear, the authorized vaccines remain safe and effective in preventing severe complications from COVID-19, including hospitalization and death,” he stated. “We strongly support the updated recommendations, which call for universal masking in areas of high or substantial COVID-19 transmission and in K-12 schools, to help reduce transmission of the virus. Wearing a mask is a small but important protective measure that can help us all stay safer.”
“The highest spread of cases and [most] severe outcomes are happening in places with low vaccination rates and among unvaccinated people,” Dr. Walensky said. “With the [D]elta variant, vaccinating more Americans now is more urgent than ever.”
“This moment, and the associated suffering, illness, and death, could have been avoided with higher vaccination coverage in this country,” she said.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The agency has called for masks in K-12 school settings and in areas of the United States experiencing high or substantial SARS-CoV-2 transmission, even for the fully vaccinated.
The move reverses a controversial announcement the agency made in May 2021 that fully vaccinated Americans could skip wearing a mask in most settings.
Unlike the increasing vaccination rates and decreasing case numbers reported in May, however, some regions of the United States are now reporting large jumps in COVID-19 case numbers. And the Delta variant as well as new evidence of transmission from breakthrough cases are largely driving these changes.
“Today we have new science related to the [D]elta variant that requires us to update the guidance on what you can do when you are fully vaccinated,” CDC Director Rochelle Walensky, MD, MPH, said during a media briefing July 27.
New evidence has emerged on breakthrough-case transmission risk, for example. “Information on the [D]elta variant from several states and other countries indicates that in rare cases, some people infected with the [D]elta variant after vaccination may be contagious and spread virus to others,” Dr. Walensky said, adding that the viral loads appear to be about the same in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals.
“This new science is worrisome,” she said.
Even though unvaccinated people represent the vast majority of cases of transmission, Dr. Walensky said, “we thought it was important for [vaccinated] people to understand they have the potential to transmit the virus to others.”
As a result, in addition to continuing to strongly encourage everyone to get vaccinated, the CDC recommends that fully vaccinated people wear masks in public indoor settings to help prevent the spread of the Delta variant in areas with substantial or high transmission, Dr. Walensky said. “This includes schools.”
Masks in schools
The CDC is now recommending universal indoor masking for all teachers, staff, students, and visitors to K-12 schools, regardless of vaccination status. Their goal is to optimize safety and allow children to return to full-time in-person learning in the fall.
The CDC tracks substantial and high transmission rates through the agency’s COVID Data Tracker site. Substantial transmission means between 50 and 100 cases per 100,000 people reported over 7 days and high means more than 100 cases per 100,000 people.
The B.1.617.2, or Delta, variant is believed to be responsible for COVID-19 cases increasing more than 300% nationally from June 19 to July 23, 2021.
“A prudent move”
“I think it’s a prudent move. Given the dominance of the [D]elta variant and the caseloads that we are seeing rising in many locations across the United States, including in my backyard here in San Francisco,” Joe DeRisi, PhD, copresident of the Chan Zuckerberg Biohub and professor of biochemistry and biophysics at the University of California San Francisco, said in an interview.
Dr. DeRisi said he was not surprised that vaccinated people with breakthrough infections could be capable of transmitting the virus. He added that clinical testing done by the Biohub and UCSF produced a lot of data on viral load levels, “and they cover an enormous range.”
What was unexpected to him was the rapid rise of the dominant variant. “The rise of the [D]elta strain is astonishing. It’s happened so fast,” he said.
“I know it’s difficult”
Reacting to the news, Colleen Kraft, MD, said, “One of the things that we’re learning is that if we’re going to have low vaccine uptake or we have a number of people that can’t be vaccinated yet, such as children, that we really need to go back to stopping transmission, which involves mask wearing.”
“I know that it’s very difficult and people feel like we’re sliding backward,” Dr. Kraft said during a media briefing sponsored by Emory University held shortly after the CDC announcement.
She added that the CDC updated guidance seems appropriate. “I don’t think any of us really want to be in this position or want to go back to masking but…we’re finding ourselves in the same place we were a year ago, in July 2020.
“In general we just don’t want anybody to be infected even if there’s a small chance for you to be infected and there’s a small chance for you to transmit it,” said Dr. Kraft, who’s an assistant professor in the department of pathology and associate professor in the department of medicine, division of infectious diseases at Emory University School of Medicine in Atlanta.
Breakthrough transmissions
“The good news is you’re still unlikely to get critically ill if you’re vaccinated. But what has changed with the [D]elta variant is instead of being 90% plus protected from getting the virus at all, you’re probably more in the 70% to 80% range,” James T. McDeavitt, MD, told this news organization.
“So we’re seeing breakthrough infections,” said Dr. McDeavitt, executive vice president and dean of clinical affairs at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston. “We are starting to see [such people] are potentially infectious.” Even if a vaccinated person is individually much less likely to experience serious COVID-19 outcomes, “they can spread it to someone else who spreads it to someone else who is more vulnerable. It puts the more at-risk populations at further risk.”
It breaks down to individual and public health concerns. “I am fully vaccinated. I am very confident I am not going to end up in a hospital,” he said. “Now if I were unvaccinated, with the prevalence of the virus around the country, I’m probably in more danger than I’ve ever been in the course of the pandemic. The unvaccinated are really at risk right now.”
IDSA and AMA support mask change
The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) has released a statement supporting the new CDC recommendations. “To stay ahead of the spread of the highly transmissible Delta variant, IDSA also urges that in communities with moderate transmission rates, all individuals, even those who are vaccinated, wear masks in indoor public places,” stated IDSA President Barbara D. Alexander, MD, MHS.
“IDSA also supports CDC’s guidance recommending universal indoor masking for all teachers, staff, students, and visitors to K-12 schools, regardless of vaccination status, until vaccines are authorized and widely available to all children and vaccination rates are sufficient to control transmission.”
“Mask wearing will help reduce infections, prevent serious illnesses and death, limit strain on local hospitals and stave off the development of even more troubling variants,” she added.
The American Medical Association (AMA) also released a statement supporting the CDC’s policy changes.
“According to the CDC, emerging data indicates that vaccinated individuals infected with the Delta variant have similar viral loads as those who are unvaccinated and are capable of transmission,” AMA President Gerald E. Harmon, MD said in the statement.
“However, the science remains clear, the authorized vaccines remain safe and effective in preventing severe complications from COVID-19, including hospitalization and death,” he stated. “We strongly support the updated recommendations, which call for universal masking in areas of high or substantial COVID-19 transmission and in K-12 schools, to help reduce transmission of the virus. Wearing a mask is a small but important protective measure that can help us all stay safer.”
“The highest spread of cases and [most] severe outcomes are happening in places with low vaccination rates and among unvaccinated people,” Dr. Walensky said. “With the [D]elta variant, vaccinating more Americans now is more urgent than ever.”
“This moment, and the associated suffering, illness, and death, could have been avoided with higher vaccination coverage in this country,” she said.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The agency has called for masks in K-12 school settings and in areas of the United States experiencing high or substantial SARS-CoV-2 transmission, even for the fully vaccinated.
The move reverses a controversial announcement the agency made in May 2021 that fully vaccinated Americans could skip wearing a mask in most settings.
Unlike the increasing vaccination rates and decreasing case numbers reported in May, however, some regions of the United States are now reporting large jumps in COVID-19 case numbers. And the Delta variant as well as new evidence of transmission from breakthrough cases are largely driving these changes.
“Today we have new science related to the [D]elta variant that requires us to update the guidance on what you can do when you are fully vaccinated,” CDC Director Rochelle Walensky, MD, MPH, said during a media briefing July 27.
New evidence has emerged on breakthrough-case transmission risk, for example. “Information on the [D]elta variant from several states and other countries indicates that in rare cases, some people infected with the [D]elta variant after vaccination may be contagious and spread virus to others,” Dr. Walensky said, adding that the viral loads appear to be about the same in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals.
“This new science is worrisome,” she said.
Even though unvaccinated people represent the vast majority of cases of transmission, Dr. Walensky said, “we thought it was important for [vaccinated] people to understand they have the potential to transmit the virus to others.”
As a result, in addition to continuing to strongly encourage everyone to get vaccinated, the CDC recommends that fully vaccinated people wear masks in public indoor settings to help prevent the spread of the Delta variant in areas with substantial or high transmission, Dr. Walensky said. “This includes schools.”
Masks in schools
The CDC is now recommending universal indoor masking for all teachers, staff, students, and visitors to K-12 schools, regardless of vaccination status. Their goal is to optimize safety and allow children to return to full-time in-person learning in the fall.
The CDC tracks substantial and high transmission rates through the agency’s COVID Data Tracker site. Substantial transmission means between 50 and 100 cases per 100,000 people reported over 7 days and high means more than 100 cases per 100,000 people.
The B.1.617.2, or Delta, variant is believed to be responsible for COVID-19 cases increasing more than 300% nationally from June 19 to July 23, 2021.
“A prudent move”
“I think it’s a prudent move. Given the dominance of the [D]elta variant and the caseloads that we are seeing rising in many locations across the United States, including in my backyard here in San Francisco,” Joe DeRisi, PhD, copresident of the Chan Zuckerberg Biohub and professor of biochemistry and biophysics at the University of California San Francisco, said in an interview.
Dr. DeRisi said he was not surprised that vaccinated people with breakthrough infections could be capable of transmitting the virus. He added that clinical testing done by the Biohub and UCSF produced a lot of data on viral load levels, “and they cover an enormous range.”
What was unexpected to him was the rapid rise of the dominant variant. “The rise of the [D]elta strain is astonishing. It’s happened so fast,” he said.
“I know it’s difficult”
Reacting to the news, Colleen Kraft, MD, said, “One of the things that we’re learning is that if we’re going to have low vaccine uptake or we have a number of people that can’t be vaccinated yet, such as children, that we really need to go back to stopping transmission, which involves mask wearing.”
“I know that it’s very difficult and people feel like we’re sliding backward,” Dr. Kraft said during a media briefing sponsored by Emory University held shortly after the CDC announcement.
She added that the CDC updated guidance seems appropriate. “I don’t think any of us really want to be in this position or want to go back to masking but…we’re finding ourselves in the same place we were a year ago, in July 2020.
“In general we just don’t want anybody to be infected even if there’s a small chance for you to be infected and there’s a small chance for you to transmit it,” said Dr. Kraft, who’s an assistant professor in the department of pathology and associate professor in the department of medicine, division of infectious diseases at Emory University School of Medicine in Atlanta.
Breakthrough transmissions
“The good news is you’re still unlikely to get critically ill if you’re vaccinated. But what has changed with the [D]elta variant is instead of being 90% plus protected from getting the virus at all, you’re probably more in the 70% to 80% range,” James T. McDeavitt, MD, told this news organization.
“So we’re seeing breakthrough infections,” said Dr. McDeavitt, executive vice president and dean of clinical affairs at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston. “We are starting to see [such people] are potentially infectious.” Even if a vaccinated person is individually much less likely to experience serious COVID-19 outcomes, “they can spread it to someone else who spreads it to someone else who is more vulnerable. It puts the more at-risk populations at further risk.”
It breaks down to individual and public health concerns. “I am fully vaccinated. I am very confident I am not going to end up in a hospital,” he said. “Now if I were unvaccinated, with the prevalence of the virus around the country, I’m probably in more danger than I’ve ever been in the course of the pandemic. The unvaccinated are really at risk right now.”
IDSA and AMA support mask change
The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) has released a statement supporting the new CDC recommendations. “To stay ahead of the spread of the highly transmissible Delta variant, IDSA also urges that in communities with moderate transmission rates, all individuals, even those who are vaccinated, wear masks in indoor public places,” stated IDSA President Barbara D. Alexander, MD, MHS.
“IDSA also supports CDC’s guidance recommending universal indoor masking for all teachers, staff, students, and visitors to K-12 schools, regardless of vaccination status, until vaccines are authorized and widely available to all children and vaccination rates are sufficient to control transmission.”
“Mask wearing will help reduce infections, prevent serious illnesses and death, limit strain on local hospitals and stave off the development of even more troubling variants,” she added.
The American Medical Association (AMA) also released a statement supporting the CDC’s policy changes.
“According to the CDC, emerging data indicates that vaccinated individuals infected with the Delta variant have similar viral loads as those who are unvaccinated and are capable of transmission,” AMA President Gerald E. Harmon, MD said in the statement.
“However, the science remains clear, the authorized vaccines remain safe and effective in preventing severe complications from COVID-19, including hospitalization and death,” he stated. “We strongly support the updated recommendations, which call for universal masking in areas of high or substantial COVID-19 transmission and in K-12 schools, to help reduce transmission of the virus. Wearing a mask is a small but important protective measure that can help us all stay safer.”
“The highest spread of cases and [most] severe outcomes are happening in places with low vaccination rates and among unvaccinated people,” Dr. Walensky said. “With the [D]elta variant, vaccinating more Americans now is more urgent than ever.”
“This moment, and the associated suffering, illness, and death, could have been avoided with higher vaccination coverage in this country,” she said.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The VA, California, and NYC requiring employee vaccinations
-- or, in the case of California and New York City, undergo regular testing.
The VA becomes the first federal agency to mandate COVID vaccinations for workers. In a news release, VA Secretary Denis McDonough said the mandate is “the best way to keep Veterans safe, especially as the Delta variant spreads across the country.”
VA health care personnel -- including doctors, dentists, podiatrists, optometrists, registered nurses, physician assistants, and chiropractors -- have 8 weeks to become fully vaccinated, the news release said. The New York Times reported that about 115,000 workers will be affected.
The trifecta of federal-state-municipal vaccine requirements arrived as the nation searches for ways to get more people vaccinated to tamp down the Delta variant.
Some organizations, including the military, have already said vaccinations will be required as soon as the Food and Drug Administration formally approves the vaccines, which are now given under emergency use authorizations. The FDA has said the Pfizer vaccine could receive full approval within months.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom said the requirements he announced July 27 were the first in the nation on the state level.
“As the state’s largest employer, we are leading by example and requiring all state and health care workers to show proof of vaccination or be tested regularly, and we are encouraging local governments and businesses to do the same,” he said in a news release.
California employees must provide proof of vaccination or get tested at least once a week. The policy starts Aug. 2 for state employees and Aug. 9 for state health care workers and employees of congregate facilities, such as jails or homeless shelters.
California, especially the southern part of the state, is grappling with a COVID-19 surge. The state’s daily case rate more than quadrupled, from a low of 1.9 cases per 100,000 in May to at least 9.5 cases per 100,000 today, the release said.
In New York City, Mayor Bill de Blasio had previously announced that city health and hospital employees and those working in Department of Health and Mental Hygiene clinical settings would be required to provide proof of vaccination or have regular testing.
On July 27 he expanded the rule to cover all city employees, with a Sept. 13 deadline for most of them, according to a news release.
“This is what it takes to continue our recovery for all of us while fighting back the Delta variant,” Mayor de Blasio said. “It’s going to take all of us to finally end the fight against COVID-19.”
“We have a moral responsibility to take every precaution possible to ensure we keep ourselves, our colleagues and loved ones safe,” NYC Health + Hospitals President and CEO Mitchell Katz, MD, said in the release. “Our city’s new testing requirement for city workers provides more [peace] of mind until more people get their safe and effective COVID-19 vaccine.”
NBC News reported the plan would affect about 340,000 employees.
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
-- or, in the case of California and New York City, undergo regular testing.
The VA becomes the first federal agency to mandate COVID vaccinations for workers. In a news release, VA Secretary Denis McDonough said the mandate is “the best way to keep Veterans safe, especially as the Delta variant spreads across the country.”
VA health care personnel -- including doctors, dentists, podiatrists, optometrists, registered nurses, physician assistants, and chiropractors -- have 8 weeks to become fully vaccinated, the news release said. The New York Times reported that about 115,000 workers will be affected.
The trifecta of federal-state-municipal vaccine requirements arrived as the nation searches for ways to get more people vaccinated to tamp down the Delta variant.
Some organizations, including the military, have already said vaccinations will be required as soon as the Food and Drug Administration formally approves the vaccines, which are now given under emergency use authorizations. The FDA has said the Pfizer vaccine could receive full approval within months.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom said the requirements he announced July 27 were the first in the nation on the state level.
“As the state’s largest employer, we are leading by example and requiring all state and health care workers to show proof of vaccination or be tested regularly, and we are encouraging local governments and businesses to do the same,” he said in a news release.
California employees must provide proof of vaccination or get tested at least once a week. The policy starts Aug. 2 for state employees and Aug. 9 for state health care workers and employees of congregate facilities, such as jails or homeless shelters.
California, especially the southern part of the state, is grappling with a COVID-19 surge. The state’s daily case rate more than quadrupled, from a low of 1.9 cases per 100,000 in May to at least 9.5 cases per 100,000 today, the release said.
In New York City, Mayor Bill de Blasio had previously announced that city health and hospital employees and those working in Department of Health and Mental Hygiene clinical settings would be required to provide proof of vaccination or have regular testing.
On July 27 he expanded the rule to cover all city employees, with a Sept. 13 deadline for most of them, according to a news release.
“This is what it takes to continue our recovery for all of us while fighting back the Delta variant,” Mayor de Blasio said. “It’s going to take all of us to finally end the fight against COVID-19.”
“We have a moral responsibility to take every precaution possible to ensure we keep ourselves, our colleagues and loved ones safe,” NYC Health + Hospitals President and CEO Mitchell Katz, MD, said in the release. “Our city’s new testing requirement for city workers provides more [peace] of mind until more people get their safe and effective COVID-19 vaccine.”
NBC News reported the plan would affect about 340,000 employees.
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
-- or, in the case of California and New York City, undergo regular testing.
The VA becomes the first federal agency to mandate COVID vaccinations for workers. In a news release, VA Secretary Denis McDonough said the mandate is “the best way to keep Veterans safe, especially as the Delta variant spreads across the country.”
VA health care personnel -- including doctors, dentists, podiatrists, optometrists, registered nurses, physician assistants, and chiropractors -- have 8 weeks to become fully vaccinated, the news release said. The New York Times reported that about 115,000 workers will be affected.
The trifecta of federal-state-municipal vaccine requirements arrived as the nation searches for ways to get more people vaccinated to tamp down the Delta variant.
Some organizations, including the military, have already said vaccinations will be required as soon as the Food and Drug Administration formally approves the vaccines, which are now given under emergency use authorizations. The FDA has said the Pfizer vaccine could receive full approval within months.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom said the requirements he announced July 27 were the first in the nation on the state level.
“As the state’s largest employer, we are leading by example and requiring all state and health care workers to show proof of vaccination or be tested regularly, and we are encouraging local governments and businesses to do the same,” he said in a news release.
California employees must provide proof of vaccination or get tested at least once a week. The policy starts Aug. 2 for state employees and Aug. 9 for state health care workers and employees of congregate facilities, such as jails or homeless shelters.
California, especially the southern part of the state, is grappling with a COVID-19 surge. The state’s daily case rate more than quadrupled, from a low of 1.9 cases per 100,000 in May to at least 9.5 cases per 100,000 today, the release said.
In New York City, Mayor Bill de Blasio had previously announced that city health and hospital employees and those working in Department of Health and Mental Hygiene clinical settings would be required to provide proof of vaccination or have regular testing.
On July 27 he expanded the rule to cover all city employees, with a Sept. 13 deadline for most of them, according to a news release.
“This is what it takes to continue our recovery for all of us while fighting back the Delta variant,” Mayor de Blasio said. “It’s going to take all of us to finally end the fight against COVID-19.”
“We have a moral responsibility to take every precaution possible to ensure we keep ourselves, our colleagues and loved ones safe,” NYC Health + Hospitals President and CEO Mitchell Katz, MD, said in the release. “Our city’s new testing requirement for city workers provides more [peace] of mind until more people get their safe and effective COVID-19 vaccine.”
NBC News reported the plan would affect about 340,000 employees.
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
Children and COVID: Vaccinations, new cases both rising
COVID-19 vaccine initiations rose in U.S. children for the second consecutive week, but new pediatric cases jumped by 64% in just 1 week, according to new data.
the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Children’s Hospital Association said in their weekly COVID-19 report.
“After decreases in weekly reported cases over the past couple of months, in July we have seen steady increases in cases added to the cumulative total,” the AAP noted. In this latest reversal of COVID fortunes, the steady increase in new cases is in its fourth consecutive week since hitting a low of 8,447 in late June.
As of July 22, the total number of reported cases was over 4.12 million in 49 states, the District of Columbia, New York City, Puerto Rico, and Guam, and there have been 349 deaths in children in the 46 jurisdictions reporting age distributions of COVID-19 deaths, the AAP and CHA said in their report.
Meanwhile, over 9.3 million children received at least one dose of COVID vaccine as of July 26, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Vaccine initiation rose for the second week in a row after falling for several weeks as 301,000 children aged 12-15 years and almost 115,000 children aged 16-17 got their first dose during the week ending July 26. Children aged 12-15 represented 14.1% (up from 13.5% a week before) of all first vaccinations and 16- to 17-year-olds were 5.4% (up from 5.1%) of all vaccine initiators, according to the CDC’s COVID Data Tracker.
Just over 37% of all 12- to 15-year-olds have received at least one dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine since the CDC approved its use for children under age 16 in May, and almost 28% are fully vaccinated. Use in children aged 16-17 started earlier (December 2020), and 48% of that age group have received a first dose and over 39% have completed the vaccine regimen, the CDC said.
COVID-19 vaccine initiations rose in U.S. children for the second consecutive week, but new pediatric cases jumped by 64% in just 1 week, according to new data.
the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Children’s Hospital Association said in their weekly COVID-19 report.
“After decreases in weekly reported cases over the past couple of months, in July we have seen steady increases in cases added to the cumulative total,” the AAP noted. In this latest reversal of COVID fortunes, the steady increase in new cases is in its fourth consecutive week since hitting a low of 8,447 in late June.
As of July 22, the total number of reported cases was over 4.12 million in 49 states, the District of Columbia, New York City, Puerto Rico, and Guam, and there have been 349 deaths in children in the 46 jurisdictions reporting age distributions of COVID-19 deaths, the AAP and CHA said in their report.
Meanwhile, over 9.3 million children received at least one dose of COVID vaccine as of July 26, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Vaccine initiation rose for the second week in a row after falling for several weeks as 301,000 children aged 12-15 years and almost 115,000 children aged 16-17 got their first dose during the week ending July 26. Children aged 12-15 represented 14.1% (up from 13.5% a week before) of all first vaccinations and 16- to 17-year-olds were 5.4% (up from 5.1%) of all vaccine initiators, according to the CDC’s COVID Data Tracker.
Just over 37% of all 12- to 15-year-olds have received at least one dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine since the CDC approved its use for children under age 16 in May, and almost 28% are fully vaccinated. Use in children aged 16-17 started earlier (December 2020), and 48% of that age group have received a first dose and over 39% have completed the vaccine regimen, the CDC said.
COVID-19 vaccine initiations rose in U.S. children for the second consecutive week, but new pediatric cases jumped by 64% in just 1 week, according to new data.
the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Children’s Hospital Association said in their weekly COVID-19 report.
“After decreases in weekly reported cases over the past couple of months, in July we have seen steady increases in cases added to the cumulative total,” the AAP noted. In this latest reversal of COVID fortunes, the steady increase in new cases is in its fourth consecutive week since hitting a low of 8,447 in late June.
As of July 22, the total number of reported cases was over 4.12 million in 49 states, the District of Columbia, New York City, Puerto Rico, and Guam, and there have been 349 deaths in children in the 46 jurisdictions reporting age distributions of COVID-19 deaths, the AAP and CHA said in their report.
Meanwhile, over 9.3 million children received at least one dose of COVID vaccine as of July 26, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Vaccine initiation rose for the second week in a row after falling for several weeks as 301,000 children aged 12-15 years and almost 115,000 children aged 16-17 got their first dose during the week ending July 26. Children aged 12-15 represented 14.1% (up from 13.5% a week before) of all first vaccinations and 16- to 17-year-olds were 5.4% (up from 5.1%) of all vaccine initiators, according to the CDC’s COVID Data Tracker.
Just over 37% of all 12- to 15-year-olds have received at least one dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine since the CDC approved its use for children under age 16 in May, and almost 28% are fully vaccinated. Use in children aged 16-17 started earlier (December 2020), and 48% of that age group have received a first dose and over 39% have completed the vaccine regimen, the CDC said.
COVID-19 vaccination does not increase risk of flare in patients with lupus
COVID-19 vaccinations appear to be well tolerated in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and come with a low risk of flare, according to the results of a global, web-based survey.
“Disseminating these reassuring data might prove crucial to increasing vaccine coverage in patients with SLE,” wrote lead author Renaud Felten, MD, of Strasbourg (France) University Hospital. Their results were published as a comment in Lancet Rheumatology.
To assess vaccine tolerability among lupus patients, the cross-sectional Tolerance and Consequences of Vaccination Against COVID-19 in Lupus Patients (VACOLUP) study analyzed a 43-question survey of 696 participants with a self-reported, medically confirmed diagnosis of SLE from 30 countries between March 22, 2021, and May 17, 2021. The cohort was 96% women, and their median age was 42 (interquartile range, 34-51). Nearly 36% of respondents were from Italy, 27% were from Chile, 13% were from France, and just under 9% were Americans. All participants received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine, and 49% received a second dose. The most common vaccines were Pfizer-BioNTech (57%), Sinovac (22%), AstraZeneca (10%), and Moderna (8%).
Only 21 participants (3%) reported a medically confirmed SLE flare after a median of 3 days (IQR, 0-29) post COVID vaccination, with most experiencing musculoskeletal symptoms (90%) and fatigue (86%). Of the 21 cases, 15 reported a subsequent change in SLE treatment and 4 were admitted to the hospital. A previous flare that occurred within a year before vaccination was associated with an increased risk of flare post vaccination (relative risk, 5.52; 95% confidence interval, 2.17-14.03; P < .0001).
Side effects – including swelling, soreness, fever, chills, fatigue, joint and muscle pain, nausea, and headache – were reported in 45% of participants (n = 316) after their first dose and in 53% of the 343 participants who received a second dose. There was no notable difference in the likelihood of side effects across gender and age or in patients who received mRNA vaccines, compared with vaccines with other modes of action. Patients who reported side effects after the first dose were more likely to also report them after the second, compared with those who reported none (109 [81%] of 135 vs. 72 [35%] of 205; RR, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.88-2.82; P < .0001).
In the majority of cases (2,232 of 2,683), the side effects were of minor or moderate intensity and did not affect the participants’ ability to perform daily tasks. The study found no significant association between side effects and a SLE flare and SLE medications or previous SLE disease manifestations.
When asked to comment on the study, Amit Saxena, MD, of the Lupus Center at New York University Langone Health, said: “What we are seeing is pretty mild to moderate in terms of follow-up side effects or lupus-related activity. Several studies have shown this amongst our autoimmune rheumatology cohort, as well as what I’ve seen clinically in my own patients. More than anything else, numbers are the most important, and this is a large study.”
He acknowledged the benefits of going directly to patients to gauge their responses and reactions, giving them the opportunity to share concerns that physicians may not think about.
“As rheumatologists, we tend to focus on certain things that might not necessarily be what the patients themselves focus on,” he said. “I think the fact that this questionnaire dealt with a lot of what people complain about – fatigue, sore arm, things that we know are part of getting the vaccine – they aren’t necessarily things we capture with tools that screen for lupus flares, for example.”
More than anything, Dr. Saxena commended the study’s timeliness. “Patients are constantly asking us about the vaccine, and there’s so much misinformation,” he said. “People say, ‘Because I have lupus, I was told not to get vaccinated.’ I don’t know where they get that information from; we are telling everyone to get it, especially our lupus patients.”
The authors recognized their study’s main limitation as the self-reported and subjective nature of the survey, which they attempted to mitigate by asking for medically confirmed flares only. They noted, however, that the short median time between vaccination and flare onset could be caused by patients confusing expected side effects for something more serious, meaning the 3% figure “could be an overestimation of the actual flare rate.”
“Vaccination is recommended for patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases according to the American College of Rheumatology,” they added, “irrespective of disease activity and severity.”
Several authors reported potential conflicts of interest, including receiving consultancy fees and grants from Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, AbbVie, and Janssen, all unrelated to the study.
COVID-19 vaccinations appear to be well tolerated in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and come with a low risk of flare, according to the results of a global, web-based survey.
“Disseminating these reassuring data might prove crucial to increasing vaccine coverage in patients with SLE,” wrote lead author Renaud Felten, MD, of Strasbourg (France) University Hospital. Their results were published as a comment in Lancet Rheumatology.
To assess vaccine tolerability among lupus patients, the cross-sectional Tolerance and Consequences of Vaccination Against COVID-19 in Lupus Patients (VACOLUP) study analyzed a 43-question survey of 696 participants with a self-reported, medically confirmed diagnosis of SLE from 30 countries between March 22, 2021, and May 17, 2021. The cohort was 96% women, and their median age was 42 (interquartile range, 34-51). Nearly 36% of respondents were from Italy, 27% were from Chile, 13% were from France, and just under 9% were Americans. All participants received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine, and 49% received a second dose. The most common vaccines were Pfizer-BioNTech (57%), Sinovac (22%), AstraZeneca (10%), and Moderna (8%).
Only 21 participants (3%) reported a medically confirmed SLE flare after a median of 3 days (IQR, 0-29) post COVID vaccination, with most experiencing musculoskeletal symptoms (90%) and fatigue (86%). Of the 21 cases, 15 reported a subsequent change in SLE treatment and 4 were admitted to the hospital. A previous flare that occurred within a year before vaccination was associated with an increased risk of flare post vaccination (relative risk, 5.52; 95% confidence interval, 2.17-14.03; P < .0001).
Side effects – including swelling, soreness, fever, chills, fatigue, joint and muscle pain, nausea, and headache – were reported in 45% of participants (n = 316) after their first dose and in 53% of the 343 participants who received a second dose. There was no notable difference in the likelihood of side effects across gender and age or in patients who received mRNA vaccines, compared with vaccines with other modes of action. Patients who reported side effects after the first dose were more likely to also report them after the second, compared with those who reported none (109 [81%] of 135 vs. 72 [35%] of 205; RR, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.88-2.82; P < .0001).
In the majority of cases (2,232 of 2,683), the side effects were of minor or moderate intensity and did not affect the participants’ ability to perform daily tasks. The study found no significant association between side effects and a SLE flare and SLE medications or previous SLE disease manifestations.
When asked to comment on the study, Amit Saxena, MD, of the Lupus Center at New York University Langone Health, said: “What we are seeing is pretty mild to moderate in terms of follow-up side effects or lupus-related activity. Several studies have shown this amongst our autoimmune rheumatology cohort, as well as what I’ve seen clinically in my own patients. More than anything else, numbers are the most important, and this is a large study.”
He acknowledged the benefits of going directly to patients to gauge their responses and reactions, giving them the opportunity to share concerns that physicians may not think about.
“As rheumatologists, we tend to focus on certain things that might not necessarily be what the patients themselves focus on,” he said. “I think the fact that this questionnaire dealt with a lot of what people complain about – fatigue, sore arm, things that we know are part of getting the vaccine – they aren’t necessarily things we capture with tools that screen for lupus flares, for example.”
More than anything, Dr. Saxena commended the study’s timeliness. “Patients are constantly asking us about the vaccine, and there’s so much misinformation,” he said. “People say, ‘Because I have lupus, I was told not to get vaccinated.’ I don’t know where they get that information from; we are telling everyone to get it, especially our lupus patients.”
The authors recognized their study’s main limitation as the self-reported and subjective nature of the survey, which they attempted to mitigate by asking for medically confirmed flares only. They noted, however, that the short median time between vaccination and flare onset could be caused by patients confusing expected side effects for something more serious, meaning the 3% figure “could be an overestimation of the actual flare rate.”
“Vaccination is recommended for patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases according to the American College of Rheumatology,” they added, “irrespective of disease activity and severity.”
Several authors reported potential conflicts of interest, including receiving consultancy fees and grants from Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, AbbVie, and Janssen, all unrelated to the study.
COVID-19 vaccinations appear to be well tolerated in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and come with a low risk of flare, according to the results of a global, web-based survey.
“Disseminating these reassuring data might prove crucial to increasing vaccine coverage in patients with SLE,” wrote lead author Renaud Felten, MD, of Strasbourg (France) University Hospital. Their results were published as a comment in Lancet Rheumatology.
To assess vaccine tolerability among lupus patients, the cross-sectional Tolerance and Consequences of Vaccination Against COVID-19 in Lupus Patients (VACOLUP) study analyzed a 43-question survey of 696 participants with a self-reported, medically confirmed diagnosis of SLE from 30 countries between March 22, 2021, and May 17, 2021. The cohort was 96% women, and their median age was 42 (interquartile range, 34-51). Nearly 36% of respondents were from Italy, 27% were from Chile, 13% were from France, and just under 9% were Americans. All participants received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine, and 49% received a second dose. The most common vaccines were Pfizer-BioNTech (57%), Sinovac (22%), AstraZeneca (10%), and Moderna (8%).
Only 21 participants (3%) reported a medically confirmed SLE flare after a median of 3 days (IQR, 0-29) post COVID vaccination, with most experiencing musculoskeletal symptoms (90%) and fatigue (86%). Of the 21 cases, 15 reported a subsequent change in SLE treatment and 4 were admitted to the hospital. A previous flare that occurred within a year before vaccination was associated with an increased risk of flare post vaccination (relative risk, 5.52; 95% confidence interval, 2.17-14.03; P < .0001).
Side effects – including swelling, soreness, fever, chills, fatigue, joint and muscle pain, nausea, and headache – were reported in 45% of participants (n = 316) after their first dose and in 53% of the 343 participants who received a second dose. There was no notable difference in the likelihood of side effects across gender and age or in patients who received mRNA vaccines, compared with vaccines with other modes of action. Patients who reported side effects after the first dose were more likely to also report them after the second, compared with those who reported none (109 [81%] of 135 vs. 72 [35%] of 205; RR, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.88-2.82; P < .0001).
In the majority of cases (2,232 of 2,683), the side effects were of minor or moderate intensity and did not affect the participants’ ability to perform daily tasks. The study found no significant association between side effects and a SLE flare and SLE medications or previous SLE disease manifestations.
When asked to comment on the study, Amit Saxena, MD, of the Lupus Center at New York University Langone Health, said: “What we are seeing is pretty mild to moderate in terms of follow-up side effects or lupus-related activity. Several studies have shown this amongst our autoimmune rheumatology cohort, as well as what I’ve seen clinically in my own patients. More than anything else, numbers are the most important, and this is a large study.”
He acknowledged the benefits of going directly to patients to gauge their responses and reactions, giving them the opportunity to share concerns that physicians may not think about.
“As rheumatologists, we tend to focus on certain things that might not necessarily be what the patients themselves focus on,” he said. “I think the fact that this questionnaire dealt with a lot of what people complain about – fatigue, sore arm, things that we know are part of getting the vaccine – they aren’t necessarily things we capture with tools that screen for lupus flares, for example.”
More than anything, Dr. Saxena commended the study’s timeliness. “Patients are constantly asking us about the vaccine, and there’s so much misinformation,” he said. “People say, ‘Because I have lupus, I was told not to get vaccinated.’ I don’t know where they get that information from; we are telling everyone to get it, especially our lupus patients.”
The authors recognized their study’s main limitation as the self-reported and subjective nature of the survey, which they attempted to mitigate by asking for medically confirmed flares only. They noted, however, that the short median time between vaccination and flare onset could be caused by patients confusing expected side effects for something more serious, meaning the 3% figure “could be an overestimation of the actual flare rate.”
“Vaccination is recommended for patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases according to the American College of Rheumatology,” they added, “irrespective of disease activity and severity.”
Several authors reported potential conflicts of interest, including receiving consultancy fees and grants from Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, AbbVie, and Janssen, all unrelated to the study.
FROM THE LANCET RHEUMATOLOGY
AMA, 55 other groups urge health care vax mandate
As COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths mount again across the country, the American Medical Association (AMA), the American Nursing Association, and 54 other
This injunction, issued July 26, covers everyone in healthcare, Emanuel Ezekiel, MD, PhD, chair of the department of medical ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and the organizer of the joint statement, said in an interview.
That includes not only hospitals, but also physician offices, ambulatory surgery centers, home care agencies, skilled nursing facilities, pharmacies, laboratories, and imaging centers, he said.
The exhortation to get vaccinated also extends to federal and state healthcare facilities, including those of the military health system — TRICARE and the Department of Veterans Affairs — which instituted a mandate the same day.
The American Hospital Association (AHA) and other hospital groups recently said they supported hospitals and health systems that required their personnel to get vaccinated. Several dozen healthcare organizations have already done so, including some of the nation’s largest health systems.
A substantial fraction of U.S. healthcare workers have not yet gotten vaccinated, although how many are unvaccinated is unclear. An analysis by WebMD and Medscape Medical News estimated that 25% of hospital workers who had contact with patients were unvaccinated at the end of May.
More than 38% of nursing workers were not fully vaccinated by July 11, according to an analysis of Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services data by LeadingAge, which was cited by the Washington Post. And more than 40% of nursing home employees have not been fully vaccinated, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The joint statement did not give any indication of how many employees of physician practices have failed to get COVID shots. However, a recent AMA survey shows that 96% of physicians have been fully vaccinated.
Ethical commitment
The main reason for vaccine mandates, according to the healthcare associations’ statement, is “the ethical commitment to put patients as well as residents of long-term care facilities first and take all steps necessary to ensure their health and well-being.”
In addition, the statement noted, vaccination can protect healthcare workers and their families from getting COVID-19.
The statement also pointed out that many healthcare and long-term care organizations already require vaccinations for influenza, hepatitis B, and pertussis.
Workers who have certain medical conditions should be exempt from the vaccination mandates, the statement added.
While recognizing the “historical mistrust of health care institutions” among some healthcare workers, the statement said, “We must continue to address workers’ concerns, engage with marginalized populations, and work with trusted messengers to improve vaccine acceptance.”
There has been some skepticism about the legality of requiring healthcare workers to get vaccinated as a condition of employment, partly because the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has not yet fully authorized any of the COVID-19 vaccines.
But in June, a federal judge turned down a legal challenge to Houston Methodist’s vaccination mandate.
“It is critical that all people in the health care workforce get vaccinated against COVID-19 for the safety of our patients and our colleagues. With more than 300 million doses administered in the United States and nearly 4 billion doses administered worldwide, we know the vaccines are safe and highly effective at preventing severe illness and death from COVID-19.
“Increased vaccinations among health care personnel will not only reduce the spread of COVID-19 but also reduce the harmful toll this virus is taking within the health care workforce and those we are striving to serve,” Susan Bailey, MD, immediate past president of the AMA, said in a news release.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
As COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths mount again across the country, the American Medical Association (AMA), the American Nursing Association, and 54 other
This injunction, issued July 26, covers everyone in healthcare, Emanuel Ezekiel, MD, PhD, chair of the department of medical ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and the organizer of the joint statement, said in an interview.
That includes not only hospitals, but also physician offices, ambulatory surgery centers, home care agencies, skilled nursing facilities, pharmacies, laboratories, and imaging centers, he said.
The exhortation to get vaccinated also extends to federal and state healthcare facilities, including those of the military health system — TRICARE and the Department of Veterans Affairs — which instituted a mandate the same day.
The American Hospital Association (AHA) and other hospital groups recently said they supported hospitals and health systems that required their personnel to get vaccinated. Several dozen healthcare organizations have already done so, including some of the nation’s largest health systems.
A substantial fraction of U.S. healthcare workers have not yet gotten vaccinated, although how many are unvaccinated is unclear. An analysis by WebMD and Medscape Medical News estimated that 25% of hospital workers who had contact with patients were unvaccinated at the end of May.
More than 38% of nursing workers were not fully vaccinated by July 11, according to an analysis of Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services data by LeadingAge, which was cited by the Washington Post. And more than 40% of nursing home employees have not been fully vaccinated, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The joint statement did not give any indication of how many employees of physician practices have failed to get COVID shots. However, a recent AMA survey shows that 96% of physicians have been fully vaccinated.
Ethical commitment
The main reason for vaccine mandates, according to the healthcare associations’ statement, is “the ethical commitment to put patients as well as residents of long-term care facilities first and take all steps necessary to ensure their health and well-being.”
In addition, the statement noted, vaccination can protect healthcare workers and their families from getting COVID-19.
The statement also pointed out that many healthcare and long-term care organizations already require vaccinations for influenza, hepatitis B, and pertussis.
Workers who have certain medical conditions should be exempt from the vaccination mandates, the statement added.
While recognizing the “historical mistrust of health care institutions” among some healthcare workers, the statement said, “We must continue to address workers’ concerns, engage with marginalized populations, and work with trusted messengers to improve vaccine acceptance.”
There has been some skepticism about the legality of requiring healthcare workers to get vaccinated as a condition of employment, partly because the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has not yet fully authorized any of the COVID-19 vaccines.
But in June, a federal judge turned down a legal challenge to Houston Methodist’s vaccination mandate.
“It is critical that all people in the health care workforce get vaccinated against COVID-19 for the safety of our patients and our colleagues. With more than 300 million doses administered in the United States and nearly 4 billion doses administered worldwide, we know the vaccines are safe and highly effective at preventing severe illness and death from COVID-19.
“Increased vaccinations among health care personnel will not only reduce the spread of COVID-19 but also reduce the harmful toll this virus is taking within the health care workforce and those we are striving to serve,” Susan Bailey, MD, immediate past president of the AMA, said in a news release.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
As COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths mount again across the country, the American Medical Association (AMA), the American Nursing Association, and 54 other
This injunction, issued July 26, covers everyone in healthcare, Emanuel Ezekiel, MD, PhD, chair of the department of medical ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and the organizer of the joint statement, said in an interview.
That includes not only hospitals, but also physician offices, ambulatory surgery centers, home care agencies, skilled nursing facilities, pharmacies, laboratories, and imaging centers, he said.
The exhortation to get vaccinated also extends to federal and state healthcare facilities, including those of the military health system — TRICARE and the Department of Veterans Affairs — which instituted a mandate the same day.
The American Hospital Association (AHA) and other hospital groups recently said they supported hospitals and health systems that required their personnel to get vaccinated. Several dozen healthcare organizations have already done so, including some of the nation’s largest health systems.
A substantial fraction of U.S. healthcare workers have not yet gotten vaccinated, although how many are unvaccinated is unclear. An analysis by WebMD and Medscape Medical News estimated that 25% of hospital workers who had contact with patients were unvaccinated at the end of May.
More than 38% of nursing workers were not fully vaccinated by July 11, according to an analysis of Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services data by LeadingAge, which was cited by the Washington Post. And more than 40% of nursing home employees have not been fully vaccinated, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The joint statement did not give any indication of how many employees of physician practices have failed to get COVID shots. However, a recent AMA survey shows that 96% of physicians have been fully vaccinated.
Ethical commitment
The main reason for vaccine mandates, according to the healthcare associations’ statement, is “the ethical commitment to put patients as well as residents of long-term care facilities first and take all steps necessary to ensure their health and well-being.”
In addition, the statement noted, vaccination can protect healthcare workers and their families from getting COVID-19.
The statement also pointed out that many healthcare and long-term care organizations already require vaccinations for influenza, hepatitis B, and pertussis.
Workers who have certain medical conditions should be exempt from the vaccination mandates, the statement added.
While recognizing the “historical mistrust of health care institutions” among some healthcare workers, the statement said, “We must continue to address workers’ concerns, engage with marginalized populations, and work with trusted messengers to improve vaccine acceptance.”
There has been some skepticism about the legality of requiring healthcare workers to get vaccinated as a condition of employment, partly because the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has not yet fully authorized any of the COVID-19 vaccines.
But in June, a federal judge turned down a legal challenge to Houston Methodist’s vaccination mandate.
“It is critical that all people in the health care workforce get vaccinated against COVID-19 for the safety of our patients and our colleagues. With more than 300 million doses administered in the United States and nearly 4 billion doses administered worldwide, we know the vaccines are safe and highly effective at preventing severe illness and death from COVID-19.
“Increased vaccinations among health care personnel will not only reduce the spread of COVID-19 but also reduce the harmful toll this virus is taking within the health care workforce and those we are striving to serve,” Susan Bailey, MD, immediate past president of the AMA, said in a news release.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Vaccine breakthrough cases rising with Delta: Here’s what that means
At a recent town hall meeting in Cincinnati, President Joe Biden was asked about COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths rising in response to the Delta variant.
Touting the importance of vaccination, “We have a pandemic for those who haven’t gotten a vaccination. It’s that basic, that simple,” President Biden said at the event, which was broadcast live on CNN.
“If you’re vaccinated, you’re not going to be hospitalized, not going to the ICU unit, and not going to die,” he said, adding “you’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations.”
Unfortunately, it’s not so simple. Fully vaccinated people continue to be well protected against severe disease and death, even with Delta, Because of that, many experts continue to advise caution, even if fully vaccinated.
“I was disappointed,” Leana Wen, MD, MSc, an emergency physician and visiting professor of health policy and management at George Washington University’s Milken School of Public Health in Washington, told CNN in response to the president’s statement.
“I actually thought he was answering questions as if it were a month ago. He’s not really meeting the realities of what’s happening on the ground,” she said. “I think he may have led people astray.”
Vaccines still work
Recent cases support Dr. Wen’s claim. Fully vaccinated Olympic athletes, wedding guests, healthcare workers, and even White House staff have recently tested positive. So what gives?
The vast majority of these illnesses are mild, and public health officials say they are to be expected.
“The vaccines were designed to keep us out of the hospital and to keep us from dying. That was the whole purpose of the vaccine and they’re even more successful than we anticipated,” says William Schaffner, MD, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University in Nashville.
As good as they are, these shots aren’t perfect. Their protection differs from person to person depending on age and underlying health. People with immune function that’s weakened because of age or a health condition can still become seriously ill, and, in very rare cases, die after vaccination.
When people are infected with Delta, they carry approximately 1,000 times more virus compared with previous versions of the virus, according to a recent study. All that virus can overwhelm even the strong protection from the vaccines.
“Three months ago, breakthroughs didn’t occur nearly at this rate because there was just so much less virus exposure in the community,” said Michael Osterholm, PhD, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis.
Breakthroughs by the numbers
In Los Angeles County, where 69% of residents over age 12 have been fully vaccinated, COVID-19 cases are rising, and so, too, are cases that break through the protection of the vaccine.
In June, fully vaccinated people accounted for 20%, or 1 in 5, COVID cases in the county, which is the most populous in the United States. The increase mirrors Delta’s rise. The proportion of breakthrough cases is up from 11% in May, 5% in April, and 2% in March, according to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health.
In the United Kingdom, which is collecting the best information on infections caused by variants, the estimated effectiveness of the vaccines to prevent an illness that causes symptoms dropped by about 10 points against Delta compared with Alpha (or B.1.1.7).
After two doses, vaccines prevent symptomatic infection about 79% of the time against Delta, according to data compiled by Public Health England. They are still highly effective at preventing hospitalization, 96% after two doses.
Out of 229,218 COVID infections in the United Kingdom between February and July 19, 28,773 — or 12.5% — were in fully vaccinated people. Of those breakthrough infections, 1,101, or 3.8%, required a visit to an emergency room, according to Public Health England. Just 474, or 2.9%, of fully vaccinated people required hospital admission, and 229, or less than 1%, died.
Unanswered questions
One of the biggest questions about breakthrough cases is how often people who have it may pass the virus to others.
“We know the vaccine reduces the likelihood of carrying the virus and the amount of virus you would carry,” Dr. Wen told CNN. But we don’t yet know whether a vaccinated person with a breakthrough infection may still be contagious to others.
For that reason, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says that fully vaccinated people still need to be tested if they have symptoms and shouldn’t be out in public for at least 10 days after a positive test.
How should fully vaccinated people behave? That depends a lot on their underlying health and whether or not they have vulnerable people around them.
If you’re older or immunocompromised, Dr. Schaffner recommends what he calls the “belt-and-suspenders approach,” in other words, do everything you can to stay safe.
“Get vaccinated for sure, but since we can’t be absolutely certain that the vaccines are going to be optimally protective and you are particularly susceptible to serious disease, you would be well advised to adopt at least one and perhaps more of the other mitigation measures,” he said.
These include wearing a mask, social distancing, making sure your spaces are well ventilated, and not spending prolonged periods of time indoors in crowded places.
Taking young children to visit vaccinated, elderly grandparents demands extra caution, again, with Delta circulating, particularly as they go back to school and start mixing with other kids.
Dr. Schaffner recommends explaining the ground rules before the visit: Hugs around the waist. No kissing. Wearing a mask while indoors with them.
Other important unanswered questions are whether breakthrough infections can lead to prolonged symptoms, or “long covid.” Most experts think that’s less likely in vaccinated people.
And Dr. Osterholm said it will be important to see whether there’s anything unusual about the breakthrough cases happening in the community.
“I think some of us have been challenged by the number of clusters that we’ve seen,” he said. “I think that really needs to be examined more.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
At a recent town hall meeting in Cincinnati, President Joe Biden was asked about COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths rising in response to the Delta variant.
Touting the importance of vaccination, “We have a pandemic for those who haven’t gotten a vaccination. It’s that basic, that simple,” President Biden said at the event, which was broadcast live on CNN.
“If you’re vaccinated, you’re not going to be hospitalized, not going to the ICU unit, and not going to die,” he said, adding “you’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations.”
Unfortunately, it’s not so simple. Fully vaccinated people continue to be well protected against severe disease and death, even with Delta, Because of that, many experts continue to advise caution, even if fully vaccinated.
“I was disappointed,” Leana Wen, MD, MSc, an emergency physician and visiting professor of health policy and management at George Washington University’s Milken School of Public Health in Washington, told CNN in response to the president’s statement.
“I actually thought he was answering questions as if it were a month ago. He’s not really meeting the realities of what’s happening on the ground,” she said. “I think he may have led people astray.”
Vaccines still work
Recent cases support Dr. Wen’s claim. Fully vaccinated Olympic athletes, wedding guests, healthcare workers, and even White House staff have recently tested positive. So what gives?
The vast majority of these illnesses are mild, and public health officials say they are to be expected.
“The vaccines were designed to keep us out of the hospital and to keep us from dying. That was the whole purpose of the vaccine and they’re even more successful than we anticipated,” says William Schaffner, MD, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University in Nashville.
As good as they are, these shots aren’t perfect. Their protection differs from person to person depending on age and underlying health. People with immune function that’s weakened because of age or a health condition can still become seriously ill, and, in very rare cases, die after vaccination.
When people are infected with Delta, they carry approximately 1,000 times more virus compared with previous versions of the virus, according to a recent study. All that virus can overwhelm even the strong protection from the vaccines.
“Three months ago, breakthroughs didn’t occur nearly at this rate because there was just so much less virus exposure in the community,” said Michael Osterholm, PhD, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis.
Breakthroughs by the numbers
In Los Angeles County, where 69% of residents over age 12 have been fully vaccinated, COVID-19 cases are rising, and so, too, are cases that break through the protection of the vaccine.
In June, fully vaccinated people accounted for 20%, or 1 in 5, COVID cases in the county, which is the most populous in the United States. The increase mirrors Delta’s rise. The proportion of breakthrough cases is up from 11% in May, 5% in April, and 2% in March, according to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health.
In the United Kingdom, which is collecting the best information on infections caused by variants, the estimated effectiveness of the vaccines to prevent an illness that causes symptoms dropped by about 10 points against Delta compared with Alpha (or B.1.1.7).
After two doses, vaccines prevent symptomatic infection about 79% of the time against Delta, according to data compiled by Public Health England. They are still highly effective at preventing hospitalization, 96% after two doses.
Out of 229,218 COVID infections in the United Kingdom between February and July 19, 28,773 — or 12.5% — were in fully vaccinated people. Of those breakthrough infections, 1,101, or 3.8%, required a visit to an emergency room, according to Public Health England. Just 474, or 2.9%, of fully vaccinated people required hospital admission, and 229, or less than 1%, died.
Unanswered questions
One of the biggest questions about breakthrough cases is how often people who have it may pass the virus to others.
“We know the vaccine reduces the likelihood of carrying the virus and the amount of virus you would carry,” Dr. Wen told CNN. But we don’t yet know whether a vaccinated person with a breakthrough infection may still be contagious to others.
For that reason, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says that fully vaccinated people still need to be tested if they have symptoms and shouldn’t be out in public for at least 10 days after a positive test.
How should fully vaccinated people behave? That depends a lot on their underlying health and whether or not they have vulnerable people around them.
If you’re older or immunocompromised, Dr. Schaffner recommends what he calls the “belt-and-suspenders approach,” in other words, do everything you can to stay safe.
“Get vaccinated for sure, but since we can’t be absolutely certain that the vaccines are going to be optimally protective and you are particularly susceptible to serious disease, you would be well advised to adopt at least one and perhaps more of the other mitigation measures,” he said.
These include wearing a mask, social distancing, making sure your spaces are well ventilated, and not spending prolonged periods of time indoors in crowded places.
Taking young children to visit vaccinated, elderly grandparents demands extra caution, again, with Delta circulating, particularly as they go back to school and start mixing with other kids.
Dr. Schaffner recommends explaining the ground rules before the visit: Hugs around the waist. No kissing. Wearing a mask while indoors with them.
Other important unanswered questions are whether breakthrough infections can lead to prolonged symptoms, or “long covid.” Most experts think that’s less likely in vaccinated people.
And Dr. Osterholm said it will be important to see whether there’s anything unusual about the breakthrough cases happening in the community.
“I think some of us have been challenged by the number of clusters that we’ve seen,” he said. “I think that really needs to be examined more.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
At a recent town hall meeting in Cincinnati, President Joe Biden was asked about COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths rising in response to the Delta variant.
Touting the importance of vaccination, “We have a pandemic for those who haven’t gotten a vaccination. It’s that basic, that simple,” President Biden said at the event, which was broadcast live on CNN.
“If you’re vaccinated, you’re not going to be hospitalized, not going to the ICU unit, and not going to die,” he said, adding “you’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations.”
Unfortunately, it’s not so simple. Fully vaccinated people continue to be well protected against severe disease and death, even with Delta, Because of that, many experts continue to advise caution, even if fully vaccinated.
“I was disappointed,” Leana Wen, MD, MSc, an emergency physician and visiting professor of health policy and management at George Washington University’s Milken School of Public Health in Washington, told CNN in response to the president’s statement.
“I actually thought he was answering questions as if it were a month ago. He’s not really meeting the realities of what’s happening on the ground,” she said. “I think he may have led people astray.”
Vaccines still work
Recent cases support Dr. Wen’s claim. Fully vaccinated Olympic athletes, wedding guests, healthcare workers, and even White House staff have recently tested positive. So what gives?
The vast majority of these illnesses are mild, and public health officials say they are to be expected.
“The vaccines were designed to keep us out of the hospital and to keep us from dying. That was the whole purpose of the vaccine and they’re even more successful than we anticipated,” says William Schaffner, MD, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University in Nashville.
As good as they are, these shots aren’t perfect. Their protection differs from person to person depending on age and underlying health. People with immune function that’s weakened because of age or a health condition can still become seriously ill, and, in very rare cases, die after vaccination.
When people are infected with Delta, they carry approximately 1,000 times more virus compared with previous versions of the virus, according to a recent study. All that virus can overwhelm even the strong protection from the vaccines.
“Three months ago, breakthroughs didn’t occur nearly at this rate because there was just so much less virus exposure in the community,” said Michael Osterholm, PhD, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis.
Breakthroughs by the numbers
In Los Angeles County, where 69% of residents over age 12 have been fully vaccinated, COVID-19 cases are rising, and so, too, are cases that break through the protection of the vaccine.
In June, fully vaccinated people accounted for 20%, or 1 in 5, COVID cases in the county, which is the most populous in the United States. The increase mirrors Delta’s rise. The proportion of breakthrough cases is up from 11% in May, 5% in April, and 2% in March, according to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health.
In the United Kingdom, which is collecting the best information on infections caused by variants, the estimated effectiveness of the vaccines to prevent an illness that causes symptoms dropped by about 10 points against Delta compared with Alpha (or B.1.1.7).
After two doses, vaccines prevent symptomatic infection about 79% of the time against Delta, according to data compiled by Public Health England. They are still highly effective at preventing hospitalization, 96% after two doses.
Out of 229,218 COVID infections in the United Kingdom between February and July 19, 28,773 — or 12.5% — were in fully vaccinated people. Of those breakthrough infections, 1,101, or 3.8%, required a visit to an emergency room, according to Public Health England. Just 474, or 2.9%, of fully vaccinated people required hospital admission, and 229, or less than 1%, died.
Unanswered questions
One of the biggest questions about breakthrough cases is how often people who have it may pass the virus to others.
“We know the vaccine reduces the likelihood of carrying the virus and the amount of virus you would carry,” Dr. Wen told CNN. But we don’t yet know whether a vaccinated person with a breakthrough infection may still be contagious to others.
For that reason, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says that fully vaccinated people still need to be tested if they have symptoms and shouldn’t be out in public for at least 10 days after a positive test.
How should fully vaccinated people behave? That depends a lot on their underlying health and whether or not they have vulnerable people around them.
If you’re older or immunocompromised, Dr. Schaffner recommends what he calls the “belt-and-suspenders approach,” in other words, do everything you can to stay safe.
“Get vaccinated for sure, but since we can’t be absolutely certain that the vaccines are going to be optimally protective and you are particularly susceptible to serious disease, you would be well advised to adopt at least one and perhaps more of the other mitigation measures,” he said.
These include wearing a mask, social distancing, making sure your spaces are well ventilated, and not spending prolonged periods of time indoors in crowded places.
Taking young children to visit vaccinated, elderly grandparents demands extra caution, again, with Delta circulating, particularly as they go back to school and start mixing with other kids.
Dr. Schaffner recommends explaining the ground rules before the visit: Hugs around the waist. No kissing. Wearing a mask while indoors with them.
Other important unanswered questions are whether breakthrough infections can lead to prolonged symptoms, or “long covid.” Most experts think that’s less likely in vaccinated people.
And Dr. Osterholm said it will be important to see whether there’s anything unusual about the breakthrough cases happening in the community.
“I think some of us have been challenged by the number of clusters that we’ve seen,” he said. “I think that really needs to be examined more.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Church-based services may help close gaps in mental health care
Black individuals who received mental health services through a church-based program reported high levels of satisfaction, data from a small, qualitative study show.
“This model of providing mental health services adjacent to or supported by a trusted institution, with providers who may have a more nuanced and intimate knowledge of the experiences of and perceptions held by community members, may facilitate important therapy-mediating factors, such as trust,” wrote Angela Coombs, MD, of Columbia University, New York, and colleagues.
Black Americans continue to face barriers to mental health services, and fewer than one-third of Black Americans with a mental health condition receive formal mental health care, Dr. Coombs and colleagues reported. Barriers to treatment include stigma and distrust of medical institutions, and strategies are needed to address these barriers to improve access. Consequently, “one approach includes the development of mental health programming and supports with trusted institutions, such as churches,” they said. Data are limited, however, on the perspectives of individuals who have used church-based services.
In the study, published in Psychiatric Services, Dr. Coombs and colleagues recruited 15 adults aged 27-69 years who were receiving or had received mental health services at the HOPE (Healing On Purpose and Evolving) Center, a freestanding mental health clinic affiliated with the First Corinthian Baptist Church in Harlem, New York. At the time of the study in 2019, those attending the center (referred to as “innovators” rather than patients or clients to reduce stigma) received 10 free sessions of evidence-based psychotherapy.
Treatment included cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), religiously integrated CBT, and interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) to individuals, couples, and families. Group psychotherapy also was an option. Clinicians at the HOPE Center included licensed social workers with doctoral and master’s-level degrees, as well as supervised social work student interns.
Study participants took part in a 30-minute interview, in person or by phone, with a female psychiatrist who was not employed by the HOPE Center or involved in treating the patients. There were 15 participants: 13 women and 2 men, with mean ages of 48 and 51 years, respectively; 14 identified as Black, non-Hispanic. Most (13 individuals) identified as heterosexual, 11 had never married, and 14 had some college or technical school education.
Notably, 11 participants reported attending church once a week, and 13 said they considered religion or spirituality highly important. Participants “reported that services that could integrate their spiritual beliefs with their current mental health challenges enhanced the therapeutic experience,” the researchers said.
Positive messaging about mental health care from the church and senior pastor also encouraged the participants to take advantage of the HOPE Center services.
As one participant said, “I’ve always believed that I can handle my own issues ... but listening to the pastor always talking about the [HOPE] Center and not to be ashamed if you have weaknesses, that’s when I said, ‘You know what, let me just start seeking mental health services because I really need [them].’ ”
, including recognizing cycles of unproductive behavior, processing traumatic experiences and learning self-love, and embracing meditation at home.
“A common theme among participants was that the HOPE Center provided them with tools to destress, process trauma, and manage anxiety,” the researchers wrote. In particular, several participants cited group sessions on teaching and practicing mindfulness as their favorite services. They described the HOPE Center as a positive, peaceful, and welcoming environment where they felt safe.
Cost issues were important as well. Participants noted that the HOPE Center’s ability to provide services that were free made it easier for them to attend. “Although participants said that it was helpful that the HOPE Center provided referrals to external providers and agencies for additional services, some said they wished that the HOPE Center would provide long-term therapy,” the researchers noted.
Overall, “most participants said that establishing more mental health resources within faith-based spaces could accelerate normalization of seeking and receiving mental health care within religious Black communities,” they said.
The study findings were limited by the absence of clinical data – and data on participants’ frequency and location of church attendance, the researchers noted. In addition, the positive results could be tied to selection bias, Dr. Coombs and colleagues said. Another possible limitation is the overrepresentation of cisgender women among the participants. Still, “the perspectives shared by participants suggest that this model of care may address several important barriers to care faced by some Black American populations,” the researchers wrote.
Bridging gap between spirituality and mental health
In an interview, Atasha Jordan, MD, said Black Americans with mental illnesses have long lacked equal access to mental health services. “However, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, published studies have shown that rates of mental illness increased concurrently with a rise in spirituality and faith. That said, we currently live in a time where mental health and spirituality are more likely to intersect,” noted Dr. Jordan, of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
She said it is not surprising that the study participants felt more comfortable receiving mental health services at a clinic that was church affiliated.
“We have known for years that people of faith are more likely to seek comfort for psychological distress from clergy, rather than mental health professionals. Providing a more familiar entry point to mental health services through a church-affiliated mental health clinic helps to bridge the existing gap between spirituality and mental health,” Dr. Jordan said. “For many Black Americans, spirituality is a central component of culturally-informed mental health care.
“Mental health providers may find improved service utilization and outcomes for their patients by collaborating with faith-based organizations or investing time to learn spiritually-based psychotherapies.”
Recently published data, notably a study published May 1, 2021, in Psychiatric Services, continue to support the existing knowledge “that many patients with psychiatric illnesses want increased attention paid to spirituality during their mental health care,” Dr. Jordan noted. “Moreover, they showed that nonreligious clinicians may be more apt than religious clinicians to provide objective, spiritually-oriented mental health care. In this vein, further research aimed at understanding the most effective methods to address spiritual health in times of mental distress can help all mental health providers better meet their patients’ psychiatric and psychological needs.”
Overcoming stigma, mistrust
During the pandemic, clinicians have seen an increase in mental health distress in the form of anxiety, depression, and trauma symptoms, Lorenzo Norris, MD, of George Washington University, Washington, said in an interview.
“Historically, African Americans have faced numerous barriers to mental health care, including stigma and mistrust of medical institutions,” Dr. Norris said. “At this time, perhaps more than in recent decades, novel ways of eliminating and navigating these barriers must be explored in an evidence-based fashion that will inform future interventions.”
Dr. Norris also found that the study findings make sense.
“Historically, the Black church has been a central institution in the community,” he said. “In my personal experience, the church served in a variety of roles, including but not limited to advocacy, employment, social services, peer support, and notably a trusted source of advice pertaining to health. In addition, Black churches may be in an ideal position to serve as culturally sensitive facilitators to build trust,” he said.
The study’s message for clinicians, according to Dr. Norris, is to “carefully consider partnering with faith-based organizations and community leaders if you want to supplement your efforts at decreasing mental health care disparities in the African American community.”
He pointed out, however, that in addition to the small number of participants, the study did not examine clinical outcomes. “So we must be careful how much we take from the initial conclusions,” Dr. Norris said.
Additional research is needed on a much larger scale to add support to the study findings, he said. “This study focused on one church and its particular program,” Dr. Norris noted. “There is likely a great deal of heterogeneity with Black churches and definitely among church members they serve,” he said. “Although it may be tempting to go with an ‘of course it will work’ approach, it is best to have additional qualitative and quantitative research of a much larger scale, with clinical controls that examine the ability of Black churches to address barriers African Americans face in receiving and utilizing mental health services,” he concluded.
Dr. Jordan disclosed receiving a 2021-2022 American Psychiatric Association/Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Minority Fellowship Program grant to study mental health literacy in the Black church. Dr. Norris disclosed serving as CEO of the Cleveland Clergy Alliance, a nonprofit organization providing outreach assistance as a mechanism to help seniors and the disabled population through community programming. The study authors reported no disclosures.
Black individuals who received mental health services through a church-based program reported high levels of satisfaction, data from a small, qualitative study show.
“This model of providing mental health services adjacent to or supported by a trusted institution, with providers who may have a more nuanced and intimate knowledge of the experiences of and perceptions held by community members, may facilitate important therapy-mediating factors, such as trust,” wrote Angela Coombs, MD, of Columbia University, New York, and colleagues.
Black Americans continue to face barriers to mental health services, and fewer than one-third of Black Americans with a mental health condition receive formal mental health care, Dr. Coombs and colleagues reported. Barriers to treatment include stigma and distrust of medical institutions, and strategies are needed to address these barriers to improve access. Consequently, “one approach includes the development of mental health programming and supports with trusted institutions, such as churches,” they said. Data are limited, however, on the perspectives of individuals who have used church-based services.
In the study, published in Psychiatric Services, Dr. Coombs and colleagues recruited 15 adults aged 27-69 years who were receiving or had received mental health services at the HOPE (Healing On Purpose and Evolving) Center, a freestanding mental health clinic affiliated with the First Corinthian Baptist Church in Harlem, New York. At the time of the study in 2019, those attending the center (referred to as “innovators” rather than patients or clients to reduce stigma) received 10 free sessions of evidence-based psychotherapy.
Treatment included cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), religiously integrated CBT, and interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) to individuals, couples, and families. Group psychotherapy also was an option. Clinicians at the HOPE Center included licensed social workers with doctoral and master’s-level degrees, as well as supervised social work student interns.
Study participants took part in a 30-minute interview, in person or by phone, with a female psychiatrist who was not employed by the HOPE Center or involved in treating the patients. There were 15 participants: 13 women and 2 men, with mean ages of 48 and 51 years, respectively; 14 identified as Black, non-Hispanic. Most (13 individuals) identified as heterosexual, 11 had never married, and 14 had some college or technical school education.
Notably, 11 participants reported attending church once a week, and 13 said they considered religion or spirituality highly important. Participants “reported that services that could integrate their spiritual beliefs with their current mental health challenges enhanced the therapeutic experience,” the researchers said.
Positive messaging about mental health care from the church and senior pastor also encouraged the participants to take advantage of the HOPE Center services.
As one participant said, “I’ve always believed that I can handle my own issues ... but listening to the pastor always talking about the [HOPE] Center and not to be ashamed if you have weaknesses, that’s when I said, ‘You know what, let me just start seeking mental health services because I really need [them].’ ”
, including recognizing cycles of unproductive behavior, processing traumatic experiences and learning self-love, and embracing meditation at home.
“A common theme among participants was that the HOPE Center provided them with tools to destress, process trauma, and manage anxiety,” the researchers wrote. In particular, several participants cited group sessions on teaching and practicing mindfulness as their favorite services. They described the HOPE Center as a positive, peaceful, and welcoming environment where they felt safe.
Cost issues were important as well. Participants noted that the HOPE Center’s ability to provide services that were free made it easier for them to attend. “Although participants said that it was helpful that the HOPE Center provided referrals to external providers and agencies for additional services, some said they wished that the HOPE Center would provide long-term therapy,” the researchers noted.
Overall, “most participants said that establishing more mental health resources within faith-based spaces could accelerate normalization of seeking and receiving mental health care within religious Black communities,” they said.
The study findings were limited by the absence of clinical data – and data on participants’ frequency and location of church attendance, the researchers noted. In addition, the positive results could be tied to selection bias, Dr. Coombs and colleagues said. Another possible limitation is the overrepresentation of cisgender women among the participants. Still, “the perspectives shared by participants suggest that this model of care may address several important barriers to care faced by some Black American populations,” the researchers wrote.
Bridging gap between spirituality and mental health
In an interview, Atasha Jordan, MD, said Black Americans with mental illnesses have long lacked equal access to mental health services. “However, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, published studies have shown that rates of mental illness increased concurrently with a rise in spirituality and faith. That said, we currently live in a time where mental health and spirituality are more likely to intersect,” noted Dr. Jordan, of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
She said it is not surprising that the study participants felt more comfortable receiving mental health services at a clinic that was church affiliated.
“We have known for years that people of faith are more likely to seek comfort for psychological distress from clergy, rather than mental health professionals. Providing a more familiar entry point to mental health services through a church-affiliated mental health clinic helps to bridge the existing gap between spirituality and mental health,” Dr. Jordan said. “For many Black Americans, spirituality is a central component of culturally-informed mental health care.
“Mental health providers may find improved service utilization and outcomes for their patients by collaborating with faith-based organizations or investing time to learn spiritually-based psychotherapies.”
Recently published data, notably a study published May 1, 2021, in Psychiatric Services, continue to support the existing knowledge “that many patients with psychiatric illnesses want increased attention paid to spirituality during their mental health care,” Dr. Jordan noted. “Moreover, they showed that nonreligious clinicians may be more apt than religious clinicians to provide objective, spiritually-oriented mental health care. In this vein, further research aimed at understanding the most effective methods to address spiritual health in times of mental distress can help all mental health providers better meet their patients’ psychiatric and psychological needs.”
Overcoming stigma, mistrust
During the pandemic, clinicians have seen an increase in mental health distress in the form of anxiety, depression, and trauma symptoms, Lorenzo Norris, MD, of George Washington University, Washington, said in an interview.
“Historically, African Americans have faced numerous barriers to mental health care, including stigma and mistrust of medical institutions,” Dr. Norris said. “At this time, perhaps more than in recent decades, novel ways of eliminating and navigating these barriers must be explored in an evidence-based fashion that will inform future interventions.”
Dr. Norris also found that the study findings make sense.
“Historically, the Black church has been a central institution in the community,” he said. “In my personal experience, the church served in a variety of roles, including but not limited to advocacy, employment, social services, peer support, and notably a trusted source of advice pertaining to health. In addition, Black churches may be in an ideal position to serve as culturally sensitive facilitators to build trust,” he said.
The study’s message for clinicians, according to Dr. Norris, is to “carefully consider partnering with faith-based organizations and community leaders if you want to supplement your efforts at decreasing mental health care disparities in the African American community.”
He pointed out, however, that in addition to the small number of participants, the study did not examine clinical outcomes. “So we must be careful how much we take from the initial conclusions,” Dr. Norris said.
Additional research is needed on a much larger scale to add support to the study findings, he said. “This study focused on one church and its particular program,” Dr. Norris noted. “There is likely a great deal of heterogeneity with Black churches and definitely among church members they serve,” he said. “Although it may be tempting to go with an ‘of course it will work’ approach, it is best to have additional qualitative and quantitative research of a much larger scale, with clinical controls that examine the ability of Black churches to address barriers African Americans face in receiving and utilizing mental health services,” he concluded.
Dr. Jordan disclosed receiving a 2021-2022 American Psychiatric Association/Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Minority Fellowship Program grant to study mental health literacy in the Black church. Dr. Norris disclosed serving as CEO of the Cleveland Clergy Alliance, a nonprofit organization providing outreach assistance as a mechanism to help seniors and the disabled population through community programming. The study authors reported no disclosures.
Black individuals who received mental health services through a church-based program reported high levels of satisfaction, data from a small, qualitative study show.
“This model of providing mental health services adjacent to or supported by a trusted institution, with providers who may have a more nuanced and intimate knowledge of the experiences of and perceptions held by community members, may facilitate important therapy-mediating factors, such as trust,” wrote Angela Coombs, MD, of Columbia University, New York, and colleagues.
Black Americans continue to face barriers to mental health services, and fewer than one-third of Black Americans with a mental health condition receive formal mental health care, Dr. Coombs and colleagues reported. Barriers to treatment include stigma and distrust of medical institutions, and strategies are needed to address these barriers to improve access. Consequently, “one approach includes the development of mental health programming and supports with trusted institutions, such as churches,” they said. Data are limited, however, on the perspectives of individuals who have used church-based services.
In the study, published in Psychiatric Services, Dr. Coombs and colleagues recruited 15 adults aged 27-69 years who were receiving or had received mental health services at the HOPE (Healing On Purpose and Evolving) Center, a freestanding mental health clinic affiliated with the First Corinthian Baptist Church in Harlem, New York. At the time of the study in 2019, those attending the center (referred to as “innovators” rather than patients or clients to reduce stigma) received 10 free sessions of evidence-based psychotherapy.
Treatment included cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), religiously integrated CBT, and interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) to individuals, couples, and families. Group psychotherapy also was an option. Clinicians at the HOPE Center included licensed social workers with doctoral and master’s-level degrees, as well as supervised social work student interns.
Study participants took part in a 30-minute interview, in person or by phone, with a female psychiatrist who was not employed by the HOPE Center or involved in treating the patients. There were 15 participants: 13 women and 2 men, with mean ages of 48 and 51 years, respectively; 14 identified as Black, non-Hispanic. Most (13 individuals) identified as heterosexual, 11 had never married, and 14 had some college or technical school education.
Notably, 11 participants reported attending church once a week, and 13 said they considered religion or spirituality highly important. Participants “reported that services that could integrate their spiritual beliefs with their current mental health challenges enhanced the therapeutic experience,” the researchers said.
Positive messaging about mental health care from the church and senior pastor also encouraged the participants to take advantage of the HOPE Center services.
As one participant said, “I’ve always believed that I can handle my own issues ... but listening to the pastor always talking about the [HOPE] Center and not to be ashamed if you have weaknesses, that’s when I said, ‘You know what, let me just start seeking mental health services because I really need [them].’ ”
, including recognizing cycles of unproductive behavior, processing traumatic experiences and learning self-love, and embracing meditation at home.
“A common theme among participants was that the HOPE Center provided them with tools to destress, process trauma, and manage anxiety,” the researchers wrote. In particular, several participants cited group sessions on teaching and practicing mindfulness as their favorite services. They described the HOPE Center as a positive, peaceful, and welcoming environment where they felt safe.
Cost issues were important as well. Participants noted that the HOPE Center’s ability to provide services that were free made it easier for them to attend. “Although participants said that it was helpful that the HOPE Center provided referrals to external providers and agencies for additional services, some said they wished that the HOPE Center would provide long-term therapy,” the researchers noted.
Overall, “most participants said that establishing more mental health resources within faith-based spaces could accelerate normalization of seeking and receiving mental health care within religious Black communities,” they said.
The study findings were limited by the absence of clinical data – and data on participants’ frequency and location of church attendance, the researchers noted. In addition, the positive results could be tied to selection bias, Dr. Coombs and colleagues said. Another possible limitation is the overrepresentation of cisgender women among the participants. Still, “the perspectives shared by participants suggest that this model of care may address several important barriers to care faced by some Black American populations,” the researchers wrote.
Bridging gap between spirituality and mental health
In an interview, Atasha Jordan, MD, said Black Americans with mental illnesses have long lacked equal access to mental health services. “However, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, published studies have shown that rates of mental illness increased concurrently with a rise in spirituality and faith. That said, we currently live in a time where mental health and spirituality are more likely to intersect,” noted Dr. Jordan, of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
She said it is not surprising that the study participants felt more comfortable receiving mental health services at a clinic that was church affiliated.
“We have known for years that people of faith are more likely to seek comfort for psychological distress from clergy, rather than mental health professionals. Providing a more familiar entry point to mental health services through a church-affiliated mental health clinic helps to bridge the existing gap between spirituality and mental health,” Dr. Jordan said. “For many Black Americans, spirituality is a central component of culturally-informed mental health care.
“Mental health providers may find improved service utilization and outcomes for their patients by collaborating with faith-based organizations or investing time to learn spiritually-based psychotherapies.”
Recently published data, notably a study published May 1, 2021, in Psychiatric Services, continue to support the existing knowledge “that many patients with psychiatric illnesses want increased attention paid to spirituality during their mental health care,” Dr. Jordan noted. “Moreover, they showed that nonreligious clinicians may be more apt than religious clinicians to provide objective, spiritually-oriented mental health care. In this vein, further research aimed at understanding the most effective methods to address spiritual health in times of mental distress can help all mental health providers better meet their patients’ psychiatric and psychological needs.”
Overcoming stigma, mistrust
During the pandemic, clinicians have seen an increase in mental health distress in the form of anxiety, depression, and trauma symptoms, Lorenzo Norris, MD, of George Washington University, Washington, said in an interview.
“Historically, African Americans have faced numerous barriers to mental health care, including stigma and mistrust of medical institutions,” Dr. Norris said. “At this time, perhaps more than in recent decades, novel ways of eliminating and navigating these barriers must be explored in an evidence-based fashion that will inform future interventions.”
Dr. Norris also found that the study findings make sense.
“Historically, the Black church has been a central institution in the community,” he said. “In my personal experience, the church served in a variety of roles, including but not limited to advocacy, employment, social services, peer support, and notably a trusted source of advice pertaining to health. In addition, Black churches may be in an ideal position to serve as culturally sensitive facilitators to build trust,” he said.
The study’s message for clinicians, according to Dr. Norris, is to “carefully consider partnering with faith-based organizations and community leaders if you want to supplement your efforts at decreasing mental health care disparities in the African American community.”
He pointed out, however, that in addition to the small number of participants, the study did not examine clinical outcomes. “So we must be careful how much we take from the initial conclusions,” Dr. Norris said.
Additional research is needed on a much larger scale to add support to the study findings, he said. “This study focused on one church and its particular program,” Dr. Norris noted. “There is likely a great deal of heterogeneity with Black churches and definitely among church members they serve,” he said. “Although it may be tempting to go with an ‘of course it will work’ approach, it is best to have additional qualitative and quantitative research of a much larger scale, with clinical controls that examine the ability of Black churches to address barriers African Americans face in receiving and utilizing mental health services,” he concluded.
Dr. Jordan disclosed receiving a 2021-2022 American Psychiatric Association/Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Minority Fellowship Program grant to study mental health literacy in the Black church. Dr. Norris disclosed serving as CEO of the Cleveland Clergy Alliance, a nonprofit organization providing outreach assistance as a mechanism to help seniors and the disabled population through community programming. The study authors reported no disclosures.
FROM PSYCHIATRIC SERVICES
CDC panel updates info on rare side effect after J&J vaccine
Despite recent reports of Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) after the Johnson & Johnson vaccine,
The company also presented new data suggesting that the shots generate strong immune responses against circulating variants and that antibodies generated by the vaccine stay elevated for at least 8 months.
Members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) did not vote, but discussed and affirmed their support for recent decisions by the Food and Drug Administration and CDC to update patient information about the very low risk of GBS that appears to be associated with the vaccine, but to continue offering the vaccine to people in the United States.
The Johnson & Johnson shot has been a minor player in the U.S. vaccination campaign, accounting for less than 4% of all vaccine doses given in this country. Still, the single-dose inoculation, which doesn’t require ultra-cold storage, has been important for reaching people in rural areas, through mobile clinics, at colleges and primary care offices, and in vulnerable populations – those who are incarcerated or homeless.
The FDA says it has received reports of 100 cases of GBS after the Johnson & Johnson vaccine in its Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System database through the end of June. The cases are still under investigation.
To date, more than 12 million doses of the vaccine have been administered, making the rate of GBS 8.1 cases for every million doses administered.
Although it is still extremely rare, that’s above the expected background rate of GBS of 1.6 cases for every million people, said Grace Lee, MD, a Stanford, Calif., pediatrician who chairs the ACIP’s Vaccine Safety Technical Work Group.
So far, most GBS cases (61%) have been among men. The midpoint age of the cases was 57 years. The average time to onset was 14 days, and 98% of cases occurred within 42 days of the shot. Facial paralysis has been associated with an estimated 30%-50% of cases. One person, who had heart failure, high blood pressure, and diabetes, has died.
Still, the benefits of the vaccine far outweigh its risks. For every million doses given to people over age 50, the vaccine prevents nearly 7,500 COVID-19 hospitalizations and nearly 100 deaths in women, and more than 13,000 COVID-19 hospitalizations and more than 2,400 deaths in men.
Rates of GBS after the mRNA vaccines made by Pfizer and Moderna were around 1 case for every 1 million doses given, which is not above the rate that would be expected without vaccination.
The link to the Johnson & Johnson vaccine prompted the FDA to add a warning to the vaccine’s patient safety information on July 12.
Also in July, the European Medicines Agency recommended a similar warning for the product information of the AstraZeneca vaccine Vaxzevria, which relies on similar technology.
Good against variants
Johnson & Johnson also presented new information showing its vaccine maintained high levels of neutralizing antibodies against four of the so-called “variants of concern” – Alpha, Gamma, Beta, and Delta. The protection generated by the vaccine lasted for at least 8 months after the shot, the company said.
“We’re still learning about the duration of protection and the breadth of coverage against this evolving variant landscape for each of the authorized vaccines,” said Mathai Mammen, MD, PhD, global head of research and development at Janssen, the company that makes the vaccine for J&J.
The company also said that its vaccine generated very strong T-cell responses. T cells destroy infected cells and, along with antibodies, are an important part of the body’s immune response.
Antibody levels and T-cell responses are markers for immunity. Measuring these levels isn’t the same as proving that shots can fend off an infection.
It’s still unclear exactly which component of the immune response is most important for fighting off COVID-19.
Dr. Mammen said the companies are still gathering that clinical data, and would present it soon.
“We will have a better view of the clinical efficacy in the coming weeks,” he said.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Despite recent reports of Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) after the Johnson & Johnson vaccine,
The company also presented new data suggesting that the shots generate strong immune responses against circulating variants and that antibodies generated by the vaccine stay elevated for at least 8 months.
Members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) did not vote, but discussed and affirmed their support for recent decisions by the Food and Drug Administration and CDC to update patient information about the very low risk of GBS that appears to be associated with the vaccine, but to continue offering the vaccine to people in the United States.
The Johnson & Johnson shot has been a minor player in the U.S. vaccination campaign, accounting for less than 4% of all vaccine doses given in this country. Still, the single-dose inoculation, which doesn’t require ultra-cold storage, has been important for reaching people in rural areas, through mobile clinics, at colleges and primary care offices, and in vulnerable populations – those who are incarcerated or homeless.
The FDA says it has received reports of 100 cases of GBS after the Johnson & Johnson vaccine in its Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System database through the end of June. The cases are still under investigation.
To date, more than 12 million doses of the vaccine have been administered, making the rate of GBS 8.1 cases for every million doses administered.
Although it is still extremely rare, that’s above the expected background rate of GBS of 1.6 cases for every million people, said Grace Lee, MD, a Stanford, Calif., pediatrician who chairs the ACIP’s Vaccine Safety Technical Work Group.
So far, most GBS cases (61%) have been among men. The midpoint age of the cases was 57 years. The average time to onset was 14 days, and 98% of cases occurred within 42 days of the shot. Facial paralysis has been associated with an estimated 30%-50% of cases. One person, who had heart failure, high blood pressure, and diabetes, has died.
Still, the benefits of the vaccine far outweigh its risks. For every million doses given to people over age 50, the vaccine prevents nearly 7,500 COVID-19 hospitalizations and nearly 100 deaths in women, and more than 13,000 COVID-19 hospitalizations and more than 2,400 deaths in men.
Rates of GBS after the mRNA vaccines made by Pfizer and Moderna were around 1 case for every 1 million doses given, which is not above the rate that would be expected without vaccination.
The link to the Johnson & Johnson vaccine prompted the FDA to add a warning to the vaccine’s patient safety information on July 12.
Also in July, the European Medicines Agency recommended a similar warning for the product information of the AstraZeneca vaccine Vaxzevria, which relies on similar technology.
Good against variants
Johnson & Johnson also presented new information showing its vaccine maintained high levels of neutralizing antibodies against four of the so-called “variants of concern” – Alpha, Gamma, Beta, and Delta. The protection generated by the vaccine lasted for at least 8 months after the shot, the company said.
“We’re still learning about the duration of protection and the breadth of coverage against this evolving variant landscape for each of the authorized vaccines,” said Mathai Mammen, MD, PhD, global head of research and development at Janssen, the company that makes the vaccine for J&J.
The company also said that its vaccine generated very strong T-cell responses. T cells destroy infected cells and, along with antibodies, are an important part of the body’s immune response.
Antibody levels and T-cell responses are markers for immunity. Measuring these levels isn’t the same as proving that shots can fend off an infection.
It’s still unclear exactly which component of the immune response is most important for fighting off COVID-19.
Dr. Mammen said the companies are still gathering that clinical data, and would present it soon.
“We will have a better view of the clinical efficacy in the coming weeks,” he said.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Despite recent reports of Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) after the Johnson & Johnson vaccine,
The company also presented new data suggesting that the shots generate strong immune responses against circulating variants and that antibodies generated by the vaccine stay elevated for at least 8 months.
Members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) did not vote, but discussed and affirmed their support for recent decisions by the Food and Drug Administration and CDC to update patient information about the very low risk of GBS that appears to be associated with the vaccine, but to continue offering the vaccine to people in the United States.
The Johnson & Johnson shot has been a minor player in the U.S. vaccination campaign, accounting for less than 4% of all vaccine doses given in this country. Still, the single-dose inoculation, which doesn’t require ultra-cold storage, has been important for reaching people in rural areas, through mobile clinics, at colleges and primary care offices, and in vulnerable populations – those who are incarcerated or homeless.
The FDA says it has received reports of 100 cases of GBS after the Johnson & Johnson vaccine in its Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System database through the end of June. The cases are still under investigation.
To date, more than 12 million doses of the vaccine have been administered, making the rate of GBS 8.1 cases for every million doses administered.
Although it is still extremely rare, that’s above the expected background rate of GBS of 1.6 cases for every million people, said Grace Lee, MD, a Stanford, Calif., pediatrician who chairs the ACIP’s Vaccine Safety Technical Work Group.
So far, most GBS cases (61%) have been among men. The midpoint age of the cases was 57 years. The average time to onset was 14 days, and 98% of cases occurred within 42 days of the shot. Facial paralysis has been associated with an estimated 30%-50% of cases. One person, who had heart failure, high blood pressure, and diabetes, has died.
Still, the benefits of the vaccine far outweigh its risks. For every million doses given to people over age 50, the vaccine prevents nearly 7,500 COVID-19 hospitalizations and nearly 100 deaths in women, and more than 13,000 COVID-19 hospitalizations and more than 2,400 deaths in men.
Rates of GBS after the mRNA vaccines made by Pfizer and Moderna were around 1 case for every 1 million doses given, which is not above the rate that would be expected without vaccination.
The link to the Johnson & Johnson vaccine prompted the FDA to add a warning to the vaccine’s patient safety information on July 12.
Also in July, the European Medicines Agency recommended a similar warning for the product information of the AstraZeneca vaccine Vaxzevria, which relies on similar technology.
Good against variants
Johnson & Johnson also presented new information showing its vaccine maintained high levels of neutralizing antibodies against four of the so-called “variants of concern” – Alpha, Gamma, Beta, and Delta. The protection generated by the vaccine lasted for at least 8 months after the shot, the company said.
“We’re still learning about the duration of protection and the breadth of coverage against this evolving variant landscape for each of the authorized vaccines,” said Mathai Mammen, MD, PhD, global head of research and development at Janssen, the company that makes the vaccine for J&J.
The company also said that its vaccine generated very strong T-cell responses. T cells destroy infected cells and, along with antibodies, are an important part of the body’s immune response.
Antibody levels and T-cell responses are markers for immunity. Measuring these levels isn’t the same as proving that shots can fend off an infection.
It’s still unclear exactly which component of the immune response is most important for fighting off COVID-19.
Dr. Mammen said the companies are still gathering that clinical data, and would present it soon.
“We will have a better view of the clinical efficacy in the coming weeks,” he said.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Exploring your fishpond: Steps toward managing anxiety in the age of COVID
COVID-19’s ever-changing trajectory has led to a notable rise in anxiety-related disorders in the United States. The average share of U.S. adults reporting symptoms of anxiety and or depressive disorder rose from 11% in 2019 to more than 41% in January 2021, according to a report from the Kaiser Family Foundation.
With the arrival of vaccines, Elspeth Cameron Ritchie, MD, MPH, chair of psychiatry at Medstar Washington (D.C.) Hospital Center, has noticed a shift in patients’ fears and concerns. In an interview, she explained how anxiety in patients has evolved along with the pandemic. She also offered strategies for gaining control, engaging with community, and managing anxiety.
Question: When you see patients at this point in the pandemic, what do you ask them?
Answer: I ask them how the pandemic has affected them. Responses have changed over time. In the beginning, I saw a lot of fear, dread of the unknown, a lot of frustration about being in lockdown. As the vaccines have come in and taken hold, there is both a sense of relief, but still a lot of anxiety. Part of that is we’re getting different messages and very much changing messages over time. Then there’s the people who are unvaccinated, and we’re also seeing the Delta variant taking hold in the rest of the world. There’s a lot of anxiety, fear, and some depression, although that’s gotten better with the vaccine.
Q: How do we distinguish between reasonable or rational anxiety and excessive or irrational anxiety?
A: There’s not a bright line between them. What’s rational for one person is not rational for another. What we’ve seen is a spectrum. A rational anxiety is: “I’m not ready to go to a party.” Irrational represents all these crazy theories that are made up, such as putting a microchip into your arm with the vaccine so that the government can track you.
Q: How do you talk to these people thinking irrational thoughts?
A: You must listen to them and not just shut them down. Work with them. Many people with irrational thoughts, or believe in conspiracy theories, may not want to go near a psychiatrist. But there’s also the patients in the psychiatric ward who believe COVID doesn’t exist and there’s government plots. Like any other delusional material, we work with this by talking to these patients and using medication as appropriate.
Q: Do you support prescribing medication for those patients who continue to experience anxiety that is irrational?
A: Patients based in inpatient psychiatry are usually delusional. The medication we usually prescribe for these patients is antipsychotics. If it’s an outpatient who’s anxious about COVID, but has rational anxiety, we usually use antidepressants or antianxiety agents such as Zoloft, Paxil, or Lexapro.
Q: What other strategies can psychiatrists share with patients?
A: What I’ve seen throughout COVID is often an overwhelming sense of dread and inability to control the situation. I tell patients to do things they can control. You can go out and get exercise. Especially during the winter, I recommend that people take a walk and get some sunshine.
It also helps with anxiety to reach out and help someone else. Is there a neighbor you’re concerned about? By and large, this is something many communities have done well. The challenge is we’ve been avoiding each other physically for a long time. So, some of the standard ways of helping each other out, like volunteering at a food bank, have been a little problematic. But there are ways to have minimal people on staff to reduce exposure.
One thing I recommend with any type of anxiety is to learn how to control your breathing. Take breaths through the nose several times a day and teach yourself how to slow down. Another thing that helps many people is contact with animals – especially horses, dogs, and cats. You may not be able to adopt an animal, but you could work at a rescue shelter or other facilities. People can benefit from the nonverbal cues of an animal. A friend of mine got a shelter cat. It sleeps with her and licks her when she feels anxious.
Meditation and yoga are also useful. This is not for everyone, but it’s a way to turn down the level of “buzz” or anxiety. Don’t overdo it on caffeine or other things that increase anxiety. I would stay away from illicit drugs, as they increase anxiety.
Q: What do you say to patients to give them a sense of hope?
A: A lot of people aren’t ready to return to normal; they want to keep the social isolation, the masks, the working from home. We need to show patients what they have control over to minimize their own risk. For example, if they want to wear a mask, then they should wear one. Patients also really like the option of telehealth appointments.
Another way to cope is to identify what’s better about the way things are now and concentrate on those improvements. Here in Maryland, the traffic is so much better in the morning than it once was. There are things I don’t miss, like going to the airport and waiting 5 hours for a flight.
Q: What advice can you give psychiatrists who are experiencing anxiety?
A: We must manage our own anxiety so we can help our patients. Strategies I’ve mentioned are also helpful to psychiatrists or other health care professionals (such as) taking a walk, getting exercise, controlling what you can control. For me, it’s getting dressed, going to work, seeing patients. Having a daily structure, a routine, is important. Many people struggled with this at first. They were working from home and didn’t get much done; they did too much videogaming. It helps to set regular appointments if you’re working from home.
Pre-COVID, many of us got a lot out of our professional meetings. We saw friends there. Now they’re either canceled or we’re doing them virtually, which isn’t the same thing. I think our profession could do a better job of reaching out to each other. We’re used to seeing each other once or twice a year at conventions. I’ve since found it hard to reach out to my colleagues via email. And everyone is tired of Zoom.
If they’re local, ask them to do a safe outdoor activity, a happy hour, a walk. If they’re not, maybe engage with them through a postcard or a phone call.
My colleagues and I go for walks at lunch. There’s a fishpond nearby and we talk to the fish and get a little silly. We sometimes take fish nets with us. People ask what the fish nets are for and we’ll say, “we’re chasing COVID away.”
Dr. Ritchie reported no conflicts of interest.
COVID-19’s ever-changing trajectory has led to a notable rise in anxiety-related disorders in the United States. The average share of U.S. adults reporting symptoms of anxiety and or depressive disorder rose from 11% in 2019 to more than 41% in January 2021, according to a report from the Kaiser Family Foundation.
With the arrival of vaccines, Elspeth Cameron Ritchie, MD, MPH, chair of psychiatry at Medstar Washington (D.C.) Hospital Center, has noticed a shift in patients’ fears and concerns. In an interview, she explained how anxiety in patients has evolved along with the pandemic. She also offered strategies for gaining control, engaging with community, and managing anxiety.
Question: When you see patients at this point in the pandemic, what do you ask them?
Answer: I ask them how the pandemic has affected them. Responses have changed over time. In the beginning, I saw a lot of fear, dread of the unknown, a lot of frustration about being in lockdown. As the vaccines have come in and taken hold, there is both a sense of relief, but still a lot of anxiety. Part of that is we’re getting different messages and very much changing messages over time. Then there’s the people who are unvaccinated, and we’re also seeing the Delta variant taking hold in the rest of the world. There’s a lot of anxiety, fear, and some depression, although that’s gotten better with the vaccine.
Q: How do we distinguish between reasonable or rational anxiety and excessive or irrational anxiety?
A: There’s not a bright line between them. What’s rational for one person is not rational for another. What we’ve seen is a spectrum. A rational anxiety is: “I’m not ready to go to a party.” Irrational represents all these crazy theories that are made up, such as putting a microchip into your arm with the vaccine so that the government can track you.
Q: How do you talk to these people thinking irrational thoughts?
A: You must listen to them and not just shut them down. Work with them. Many people with irrational thoughts, or believe in conspiracy theories, may not want to go near a psychiatrist. But there’s also the patients in the psychiatric ward who believe COVID doesn’t exist and there’s government plots. Like any other delusional material, we work with this by talking to these patients and using medication as appropriate.
Q: Do you support prescribing medication for those patients who continue to experience anxiety that is irrational?
A: Patients based in inpatient psychiatry are usually delusional. The medication we usually prescribe for these patients is antipsychotics. If it’s an outpatient who’s anxious about COVID, but has rational anxiety, we usually use antidepressants or antianxiety agents such as Zoloft, Paxil, or Lexapro.
Q: What other strategies can psychiatrists share with patients?
A: What I’ve seen throughout COVID is often an overwhelming sense of dread and inability to control the situation. I tell patients to do things they can control. You can go out and get exercise. Especially during the winter, I recommend that people take a walk and get some sunshine.
It also helps with anxiety to reach out and help someone else. Is there a neighbor you’re concerned about? By and large, this is something many communities have done well. The challenge is we’ve been avoiding each other physically for a long time. So, some of the standard ways of helping each other out, like volunteering at a food bank, have been a little problematic. But there are ways to have minimal people on staff to reduce exposure.
One thing I recommend with any type of anxiety is to learn how to control your breathing. Take breaths through the nose several times a day and teach yourself how to slow down. Another thing that helps many people is contact with animals – especially horses, dogs, and cats. You may not be able to adopt an animal, but you could work at a rescue shelter or other facilities. People can benefit from the nonverbal cues of an animal. A friend of mine got a shelter cat. It sleeps with her and licks her when she feels anxious.
Meditation and yoga are also useful. This is not for everyone, but it’s a way to turn down the level of “buzz” or anxiety. Don’t overdo it on caffeine or other things that increase anxiety. I would stay away from illicit drugs, as they increase anxiety.
Q: What do you say to patients to give them a sense of hope?
A: A lot of people aren’t ready to return to normal; they want to keep the social isolation, the masks, the working from home. We need to show patients what they have control over to minimize their own risk. For example, if they want to wear a mask, then they should wear one. Patients also really like the option of telehealth appointments.
Another way to cope is to identify what’s better about the way things are now and concentrate on those improvements. Here in Maryland, the traffic is so much better in the morning than it once was. There are things I don’t miss, like going to the airport and waiting 5 hours for a flight.
Q: What advice can you give psychiatrists who are experiencing anxiety?
A: We must manage our own anxiety so we can help our patients. Strategies I’ve mentioned are also helpful to psychiatrists or other health care professionals (such as) taking a walk, getting exercise, controlling what you can control. For me, it’s getting dressed, going to work, seeing patients. Having a daily structure, a routine, is important. Many people struggled with this at first. They were working from home and didn’t get much done; they did too much videogaming. It helps to set regular appointments if you’re working from home.
Pre-COVID, many of us got a lot out of our professional meetings. We saw friends there. Now they’re either canceled or we’re doing them virtually, which isn’t the same thing. I think our profession could do a better job of reaching out to each other. We’re used to seeing each other once or twice a year at conventions. I’ve since found it hard to reach out to my colleagues via email. And everyone is tired of Zoom.
If they’re local, ask them to do a safe outdoor activity, a happy hour, a walk. If they’re not, maybe engage with them through a postcard or a phone call.
My colleagues and I go for walks at lunch. There’s a fishpond nearby and we talk to the fish and get a little silly. We sometimes take fish nets with us. People ask what the fish nets are for and we’ll say, “we’re chasing COVID away.”
Dr. Ritchie reported no conflicts of interest.
COVID-19’s ever-changing trajectory has led to a notable rise in anxiety-related disorders in the United States. The average share of U.S. adults reporting symptoms of anxiety and or depressive disorder rose from 11% in 2019 to more than 41% in January 2021, according to a report from the Kaiser Family Foundation.
With the arrival of vaccines, Elspeth Cameron Ritchie, MD, MPH, chair of psychiatry at Medstar Washington (D.C.) Hospital Center, has noticed a shift in patients’ fears and concerns. In an interview, she explained how anxiety in patients has evolved along with the pandemic. She also offered strategies for gaining control, engaging with community, and managing anxiety.
Question: When you see patients at this point in the pandemic, what do you ask them?
Answer: I ask them how the pandemic has affected them. Responses have changed over time. In the beginning, I saw a lot of fear, dread of the unknown, a lot of frustration about being in lockdown. As the vaccines have come in and taken hold, there is both a sense of relief, but still a lot of anxiety. Part of that is we’re getting different messages and very much changing messages over time. Then there’s the people who are unvaccinated, and we’re also seeing the Delta variant taking hold in the rest of the world. There’s a lot of anxiety, fear, and some depression, although that’s gotten better with the vaccine.
Q: How do we distinguish between reasonable or rational anxiety and excessive or irrational anxiety?
A: There’s not a bright line between them. What’s rational for one person is not rational for another. What we’ve seen is a spectrum. A rational anxiety is: “I’m not ready to go to a party.” Irrational represents all these crazy theories that are made up, such as putting a microchip into your arm with the vaccine so that the government can track you.
Q: How do you talk to these people thinking irrational thoughts?
A: You must listen to them and not just shut them down. Work with them. Many people with irrational thoughts, or believe in conspiracy theories, may not want to go near a psychiatrist. But there’s also the patients in the psychiatric ward who believe COVID doesn’t exist and there’s government plots. Like any other delusional material, we work with this by talking to these patients and using medication as appropriate.
Q: Do you support prescribing medication for those patients who continue to experience anxiety that is irrational?
A: Patients based in inpatient psychiatry are usually delusional. The medication we usually prescribe for these patients is antipsychotics. If it’s an outpatient who’s anxious about COVID, but has rational anxiety, we usually use antidepressants or antianxiety agents such as Zoloft, Paxil, or Lexapro.
Q: What other strategies can psychiatrists share with patients?
A: What I’ve seen throughout COVID is often an overwhelming sense of dread and inability to control the situation. I tell patients to do things they can control. You can go out and get exercise. Especially during the winter, I recommend that people take a walk and get some sunshine.
It also helps with anxiety to reach out and help someone else. Is there a neighbor you’re concerned about? By and large, this is something many communities have done well. The challenge is we’ve been avoiding each other physically for a long time. So, some of the standard ways of helping each other out, like volunteering at a food bank, have been a little problematic. But there are ways to have minimal people on staff to reduce exposure.
One thing I recommend with any type of anxiety is to learn how to control your breathing. Take breaths through the nose several times a day and teach yourself how to slow down. Another thing that helps many people is contact with animals – especially horses, dogs, and cats. You may not be able to adopt an animal, but you could work at a rescue shelter or other facilities. People can benefit from the nonverbal cues of an animal. A friend of mine got a shelter cat. It sleeps with her and licks her when she feels anxious.
Meditation and yoga are also useful. This is not for everyone, but it’s a way to turn down the level of “buzz” or anxiety. Don’t overdo it on caffeine or other things that increase anxiety. I would stay away from illicit drugs, as they increase anxiety.
Q: What do you say to patients to give them a sense of hope?
A: A lot of people aren’t ready to return to normal; they want to keep the social isolation, the masks, the working from home. We need to show patients what they have control over to minimize their own risk. For example, if they want to wear a mask, then they should wear one. Patients also really like the option of telehealth appointments.
Another way to cope is to identify what’s better about the way things are now and concentrate on those improvements. Here in Maryland, the traffic is so much better in the morning than it once was. There are things I don’t miss, like going to the airport and waiting 5 hours for a flight.
Q: What advice can you give psychiatrists who are experiencing anxiety?
A: We must manage our own anxiety so we can help our patients. Strategies I’ve mentioned are also helpful to psychiatrists or other health care professionals (such as) taking a walk, getting exercise, controlling what you can control. For me, it’s getting dressed, going to work, seeing patients. Having a daily structure, a routine, is important. Many people struggled with this at first. They were working from home and didn’t get much done; they did too much videogaming. It helps to set regular appointments if you’re working from home.
Pre-COVID, many of us got a lot out of our professional meetings. We saw friends there. Now they’re either canceled or we’re doing them virtually, which isn’t the same thing. I think our profession could do a better job of reaching out to each other. We’re used to seeing each other once or twice a year at conventions. I’ve since found it hard to reach out to my colleagues via email. And everyone is tired of Zoom.
If they’re local, ask them to do a safe outdoor activity, a happy hour, a walk. If they’re not, maybe engage with them through a postcard or a phone call.
My colleagues and I go for walks at lunch. There’s a fishpond nearby and we talk to the fish and get a little silly. We sometimes take fish nets with us. People ask what the fish nets are for and we’ll say, “we’re chasing COVID away.”
Dr. Ritchie reported no conflicts of interest.