Understanding characteristics of healthcare personnel (HCP) with SARS-CoV-2 infection supports the development and prioritization of interventions to protect this important workforce. We report detailed characteristics of HCP who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 from April 20, 2020 through December 31, 2021.

CDC collaborated with Emerging Infections Program sites in 10 states to interview HCP with SARS-CoV-2 infection (case-HCP) about their demographics, underlying medical conditions, healthcare roles, exposures, personal protective equipment (PPE) use, and COVID-19 vaccination status. We grouped case-HCP by healthcare role. To describe residential social vulnerability, we merged geocoded HCP residential addresses with CDC/ATSDR Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) values at the census tract level. We defined highest and lowest SVI quartiles as high and low social vulnerability, respectively.

Our analysis included 7,531 case-HCP. Most case-HCP with roles as certified nursing assistant (CNA) (444, 61.3%), medical assistant (252, 65.3%), or home healthcare worker (HHW) (225, 59.5%) reported their race and ethnicity as either non-Hispanic Black or Hispanic. More than one third of HHWs (166, 45.2%), CNAs (283, 41.7%), and medical assistants (138, 37.9%) reported a residential address in the high social vulnerability category. The proportion of case-HCP who reported using recommended PPE at all times when caring for patients with COVID-19 was lowest among HHWs compared with other roles.

To mitigate SARS-CoV-2 infection risk in healthcare settings, infection prevention, and control interventions should be specific to HCP roles and educational backgrounds. Additional interventions are needed to address high social vulnerability among HHWs, CNAs, and medical assistants.

1. To evaluate demand, capacity and flow of an integrated community learning disability service in a peri- and post-COVID-19 pandemic setting. 2. To improve flow of a community learning disability service. 3. To improve staff and service user satisfaction by engaging them and identifying common priorities.

We collected demand and capacity data of all disciplines in a community learning disability service for 2021–2022.

We carried out focus groups with service users and their carers (N = 5) and surveyed them with a questionnaire consisting of 6 quantitative and 2 qualitative questions (N = 63), investigating the impact of waiting times on service user experience.

We surveyed staff from all disciplines (N = 20) with a questionnaire consisting of 3 qualitative questions, to identify their views on waiting times and areas to optimise.

We performed thematic analysis on all qualitative responses. We analysed quantitative data with descriptive statistics.

From 2021–22, the number of accepted referrals to individual disciplines increased: for example referrals to psychiatry increased by 51.6% and referrals to OT increased by 32%.

With regard to flow, the ratio of discharges to accepted referrals in the psychiatry discipline decreased from 1.5:1 to 0.6:1.

A significant proportion of service users reported waiting months (31%) or years (16%) to be seen by the learning disability team. 28% of service users reported additional problems while waiting to be seen. 31% were unaware whether they were on a waiting list or not. Quantitative data showed average waiting times for psychiatry services did not change from 2021–2022 (23.1 and 23.3 days respectively).

Thematic analysis from service users’ responses revealed an anxiety about needs not being met; a feeling of problems deteriorating while waiting; and communication issues.

Staff responses revealed desires to intervene sooner to prevent unnecessary deteriorations; and to increase team working between disciplines.

Quantitative data analysis suggests a greatly increased demand for our service following the COVID-19 pandemic.

Our thematic analysis identifies concern of deterioration secondary to prolonged waiting times. It also highlights that communication could be improved.

As a result of this mixed-methods approach, the following change ideas were generated and are now being tested:

1. 1. Improve communication with patients on waiting lists by testing an accessible customisable letter.

2. 2. Organise more joint assessments and reviews of service users with multiple disciplines.

3. 3. Short-term allocation of more urgent casework via a new integrated health and social care duty system.

Intensive support teams (ISTs) are recommended for individuals with intellectual disabilities who display behaviours that challenge. However, there is currently little evidence about the clinical and cost-effectiveness of IST models operating in England.

To investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of IST models.

We carried out a cohort study to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of two previously identified IST models (independent and enhanced) in England. Adult participants (n = 226) from 21 ISTs (ten independent and 11 enhanced) were enrolled. The primary outcome was change in challenging behaviour between baseline and 9 months as measured by the Aberrant Behaviour Checklist-Community version 2.

We found no statistically significant differences between models for the primary outcome (adjusted β = 4.27; 95% CI −6.34 to 14.87; P = 0.430) or any secondary outcomes. Quality-adjusted life-years (0.0158; 95% CI: −0.0088 to 0.0508) and costs (£3409.95; 95% CI −£9957.92 to £4039.89) of the two models were comparable.

The study provides evidence that both models were associated with clinical improvement for similar costs at follow-up. We recommend that the choice of service model should rest with local services. Further research should investigate the critical components of IST care to inform the development of fidelity criteria, and policy makers should consider whether roll out of such teams should be mandated.

Current psychiatric diagnoses, although heritable, have not been clearly mapped onto distinct underlying pathogenic processes. The same symptoms often occur in multiple disorders, and a substantial proportion of both genetic and environmental risk factors are shared across disorders. However, the relationship between shared symptoms and shared genetic liability is still poorly understood.

Well-characterised, cross-disorder samples are needed to investigate this matter, but few currently exist. Our aim is to develop procedures to purposely curate and aggregate genotypic and phenotypic data in psychiatric research.

As part of the Cardiff MRC Mental Health Data Pathfinder initiative, we have curated and harmonised phenotypic and genetic information from 15 studies to create a new data repository, DRAGON-Data. To date, DRAGON-Data includes over 45 000 individuals: adults and children with neurodevelopmental or psychiatric diagnoses, affected probands within collected families and individuals who carry a known neurodevelopmental risk copy number variant.

We have processed the available phenotype information to derive core variables that can be reliably analysed across groups. In addition, all data-sets with genotype information have undergone rigorous quality control, imputation, copy number variant calling and polygenic score generation.

DRAGON-Data combines genetic and non-genetic information, and is available as a resource for research across traditional psychiatric diagnostic categories. Algorithms and pipelines used for data harmonisation are currently publicly available for the scientific community, and an appropriate data-sharing protocol will be developed as part of ongoing projects (DATAMIND) in partnership with Health Data Research UK.

Approximately 18% of adults with intellectual disabilities living in the community display behaviours that challenge. Intensive support teams (ISTs) have been recommended to provide high-quality responsive care aimed at avoiding unnecessary admissions and reducing lengthy in-patient stays.

To identify and describe the geographical distribution and characteristics of ISTs, and to develop a typology of IST service models in England.

We undertook a national cross-sectional survey of 73 ISTs. A hierarchical cluster analysis was performed based on six prespecified grouping factors (mode of referrals, size of case-load, use of outcome measures, staff composition, hours of operation and setting of service). A simplified form of thematic analysis was used to explore free-text responses.

Cluster analysis identified two models of IST provision: (a) independent and (b) enhanced provision based around a community intellectual disability service. ISTs aspire to adopt person-centred care, mostly use the framework of positive behaviour support for behaviour that challenges, and report concerns about organisational and wider context issues.

This is the first study to examine the delivery of intensive support to people with intellectual disability and behaviour that challenges. A two-cluster model of ISTs was found to have statistical validity and clinical utility. The clinical heterogeneity indicates that further evaluation of these service models is needed to establish their clinical and cost-effectiveness.

Behaviour that challenges in people with intellectual disability is associated with higher healthcare, social care and societal costs. Although behavioural therapies are widely used, there is limited evidence regarding the cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).

We aimed to assess the incremental cost per QALY gained of therapist training in positive behaviour support (PBS) and treatment as usual (TAU) compared with TAU using data from a cluster randomised controlled trial (Clinical Trials.gov registration: NCT01680276).

We conducted a cost-utility analysis (cost per QALY gained) of 23 teams randomised to PBS or TAU, with a total of 246 participants followed up over 36 months. The primary analysis was from a healthcare cost perspective with a secondary analysis from a societal cost perspective.

Over 36 months the intervention resulted in an additional 0.175 QALYs (discounted and adjusted 95% CI −0.068 to 0.418). The total cost of training in and delivery of PBS is £1598 per participant plus an additional cost of healthcare of £399 (discounted and adjusted 95% CI −603 to 1724). From a healthcare cost perspective there is an 85% probability that the intervention is cost-effective compared with TAU at a £30 000 willingness to pay for a QALY threshold.

There was a high probability that training in PBS is cost-effective as the cost of training and delivery of PBS is balanced out by modest improvements in quality of life. However, staff training in PBS is not supported given we found no evidence for clinical effectiveness.