This study aimed to identify the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) in the rollout of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign in India.

The internal and external attributes affecting the vaccination rollout identifed by reviewing the scientific literature, government guidelines, and press statements, along with media reports, were categorized into the SWOT matrix.

The existing immunization program, indigenous vaccine production, setting up of the National Expert Group on Vaccine Administration for COVID-19, updated guidelines, and training followed by dry runs were identified as strengths. The weaknesses identified in the program were knowledge gap about vaccines, apprehensions, lack of temperature loggers and vaccine vial monitors, space contraints in health care set up, demand supply gap, and digital divide. The experience of conducting the general elections, intersectoral coordination forged during the pandemic response, Information Technology platform, and vaccine eagerness present opportunities to strengthen the program. The emergence of virus variants, commercial interests, laxity in COVID-19 appropriate behavior, and receding wave of the pandemic can pose significant threats to the implementation of the vaccination campaign.

The study identified factors that can aid designing effective measures and countermeasures for the COVID-19 vaccination rollout. This SWOT analysis is relevant to low- and middle-income countries planning to implement the COVID-19 vaccination in the near future.

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic negatively impacted global healthcare. Consequences in Pediatric and Congenital Heart Surgery programmes and mortality of congenital heart patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-Cov-2) is still to be determined.

To study the COVID-19 pandemic implications in Brazilian Pediatric and Congenital Heart Surgery programmes.

We conducted a national online survey covering all states that perform Pediatric and Congenital Heart Surgery from 10 November to 22 November, 2020, using a Google forms questionnaire. We formulated questions related to impact on surgical volume, case-mix, and mortality. Then we asked about short-term post-operative COVID-19 infection and outcomes.

We received responses from 46 centres representing all states where there were a Pediatric and Congenital Heart Surgery programme and all high-volume centres across the country. All but one centre experienced a significant decrease in surgical volume, and 23.9% of the responders revealed less than one-quarter of volume decrement. On the other hand, in over 70% of the centres, there was a significant surgical volume reduction. In addition to this, there was a shift in case-mix in 41 centres (89.1%) towards more complex cases. More than one-third of the responders revealed increased mortality in 2020 compared to previous years, and 43.5% of the programmes (20 centres) had at least one patient contaminated by SARS-Cov-2, accounting for 48 patients. Mortality in post-operative infected patients was 45.8% (22 patients).

In general, Brazilian Pediatric and Congenital Heart Surgery programmes were severely affected by decreased surgical volume, unbalanced case-mix towards more complex cases, and increased mortality. Almost half of the programmes related post-operative COVID-19 contamination with high mortality.

We evaluated the risk of patients contracting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during their hospital stay to inform the safety of hospitalization for a non–COVID-19 indication during this pandemic.

A case series of adult patients hospitalized for 2 or more nights from May 15 to June 15, 2020 at large tertiary-care hospital in the midwestern United States was reviewed. All patients were screened at admission with the severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test. Selected adult patients were also tested by IgG serology. After dismissal, patients with negative serology and PCR at admission were asked to undergo repeat serologic testing at 14–21 days after discharge. The primary outcome was healthcare-associated COVID-19 defined as a new positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test on or after day 4 of hospital stay or within 7 days of hospital dismissal, or seroconversion in patients previously established as seronegative.

Of the 2,068 eligible adult patients, 1,778 (86.0%) completed admission PCR testing, while 1,339 (64.7%) also completed admission serology testing. Of the 1,310 (97.8%) who were both PCR and seronegative, 445 (34.0%) repeated postdischarge serology testing. No healthcare-associated COVID-19 cases were detected during the study period. Of 1,310 eligible PCR and seronegative adults, no patients tested PCR positive during hospital admission (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.0%–0.3%). Of the 445 (34.0%) who completed postdischarge serology testing, no patients seroconverted (0.0%; 95% CI, 0.0%–0.9%).

We found low likelihood of hospital-associated COVID-19 with strict adherence to universal masking, physical distancing, and hand hygiene along with limited visitors and screening of admissions with PCR.

To examine the psychological and social impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and its associated restrictions on a cohort of patients with severe and enduring mental illness treated with clozapine.

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 63 individuals attending a clozapine clinic within the Galway–Roscommon Mental Health Services to determine the impact of COVID-19 restrictions on anxiety and depressive symptoms, social and occupational functioning and quality of life, by utilising Likert scale data. The Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) were additionally utilised to measure anxiety symptoms cross-sectionally.

Anxiety symptoms were low with a median BAI score of 4.0 and HAM-A score of 4.0. Likert scale measurements recorded only a modest adverse impact of COVID-19 restrictions on anxiety and depressive symptoms, quality of life and occupational and social functioning. Free-text comments from patients (n = 55), were grouped into five themes: neutral impact (n = 22), negative psychological impact (n = 13), negative social impact (n = 11), positive psychological impact (n = 5) and media coverage inducing anxiety (n = 4).

Three months into the COVID-19 pandemic and its restrictions, the impact on individuals with treatment-resistant psychotic disorders attending a clozapine clinic has been modest, with preliminary evidence demonstrating minimal increases in subjective symptoms of anxiety and reduced social functioning. Reduced social engagements and supports attainable both within the community and from mental health services were noted by some participants.

It is important to maintain the psychological well-being of front-line healthcare staff during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

To examine COVID-19-related stress and its immediate psychological impact on healthcare staff.

All healthcare staff working in the fever clinic, from 20 January 2020 to 26 March 2020, of a tertiary general hospital were enrolled. Stress management procedures were in place to alleviate concerns about the respondents’ own health and the health of their families, to help them adjust their work and to provide psychological support via a hotline. Qualitative interviews were undertaken and the Sources of Distress and the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) were administered.

Among the 102 participants (25 males; median age 30 years, interquartile range (IQR) = 27–36), the median IES-R total score was 3 (IQR = 0–8), and 6 participants (6.0%) scored above the cut-off on the IES-R (≥20). Safety and security were acceptable or better for 92 (90.2%) participants. The top four sources of distress were worry about the health of one's family/others at 0.88 (IQR = 0.25–1.25), worry about the virus spread at 0.50 (IQR = 0.00–1.00), worry about changes in work at 0.50 (IQR = 0.00–1.00) and worry about one's own health at 0.25 (IQR = 0.25–0.75). There was a moderate correlation between the IES-R score and the Sources of Distress score (rho = 0.501, P = 0.001).

The stress levels of healthcare staff in the fever clinic during the COVID-19 epidemic were not elevated. Physio-psychosocial interventions, including fulfilment of basic needs, activation of self-efficacy and psychological support, are helpful and worth recommending in fighting COVID-19.

To examine if the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with a differential effect over time in relation to its psychological and social impact on patients with established anxiety disorders.

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 24 individuals attending the Galway–Roscommon Mental Health Services with an International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 diagnosis of an anxiety disorder at two time points (six months apart) to determine the impact of the COVID-19 restrictions on anxiety and depressive symptoms, social and occupational functioning and quality of life.

No statistical difference in symptomatology was noted between the two time points in relation to anxiety symptoms as measured by utilising psychometric rating scales (BAI and HARS) or utilising a Likert scale. The greatest impact of COVID-19 at both time points is related to social functioning and quality of life. Significant variability was noted for individual participants. Qualitative analysis noted social isolation, concern for the participants’ future and increased difficulty managing anxiety with ongoing restrictions.

No significant overall change in symptomatology or functioning over time was noted for individuals with pre-existing anxiety disorders. Variability was, however, demonstrated between individuals, with some individuals describing ongoing anxiety, social isolation and concern for their future. Identifying those with ongoing symptoms or distress and providing multidisciplinary support to this cohort is suggested.

Pregnant women may be especially susceptible to negative events (i.e. adversity) related to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and negative affective responses to these events (i.e. stress). We examined the latent structure of stress and adversity related to the COVID-19 pandemic among pregnant women, potential antecedents of COVID-19-related stress and adversity in this population, and associations with prenatal depressive symptoms.

We surveyed 725 pregnant women residing in the San Francisco Bay Area in March−May 2020, 343 of whom provided addresses that were geocoded and matched by census tract to measures of community-level risk. We compared their self-reported depressive symptoms to women matched on demographic factors and history of mental health difficulties who were pregnant prior to the pandemic.

Women who were pregnant during the pandemic were nearly twice as likely to have possible depression than were matched women who were pregnant prior to the pandemic. Individual- and community-level factors tied to socioeconomic inequality were associated with latent factors of COVID-19-related stress and adversity. Beyond objective adversity, subjective stress responses were strongly associated with depressive symptoms during the pandemic.

Highlighting the role of subjective responses in vulnerability to prenatal depression and factors that influence susceptibility to COVID-19-related stress, these findings inform the allocation of resources to support recovery from this pandemic and future disease outbreaks. In addition to policies that mitigate disruptions to the environment due to the pandemic, treatments that focus on cognitions about the self and the environment may help to alleviate depressive symptoms in pregnant women.

To assess extent of a healthcare-associated outbreak of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and to evaluate the effectiveness of infection control measures, including universal masking.

Outbreak investigation including 4 large-scale point-prevalence surveys.

Integrated VA healthcare system with 2 facilities and 330 beds.

Index patient and 250 exposed patients and staff.

We identified exposed patients and staff and classified them as probable and confirmed cases based on symptoms and testing. We performed a field investigation and an assessment of patient and staff interactions to develop probable transmission routes. Infection prevention interventions included droplet and contact precautions, employee quarantine, and universal masking with medical and cloth face masks. We conducted 4 point-prevalence surveys of patient and staff subsets using real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction for SARS-CoV-2.

Among 250 potentially exposed patients and staff, 14 confirmed cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were identified. Patient roommates and staff with prolonged patient contact were most likely to be infected. The last potential date of transmission from staff to patient was day 22, the day universal masking was implemented. Subsequent point-prevalence surveys in 126 patients and 234 staff identified 0 patient cases and 5 staff cases of COVID-19, without evidence of healthcare-associated transmission.

Universal masking with medical face masks was effective in preventing further spread of SARS-CoV-2 in our facility in conjunction with other traditional infection prevention measures.