Message for Carlaw and Leonard: New Zealand’s care homes did not expect asymptomatic cases to be tested but THEY were expected to isolate them for 14 days

The Editor takes full responsibility for the headline.

By stewartb:

‘ROLL UP, ROLL UP …. GET YOUR ‘PERSPECTIVE’ HERE!

Covid-19 testing, care homes and New Zealand

For anyone following media reports and the comments of some opposition politicians in Scotland, you could be persuaded that Scottish Government ministers aided by Scotland’s public health institutions, Scottish Government officials and independent advisors must have all got this ‘Covid-19 testing in care homes’ issue so wrong – exceptionally and uniquely, even wilfully, wrong – by implementing an approach that is completely at odds with international practice.

Is this justified? This is where ‘perspective’ is needed. Unfortunately, ‘perspective’, like that other thing contributors to the TuSC harp on about, ‘context’, is in short supply in Scotland.

Where to look?

‘New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has said her country has “done what few countries have been able to do” and contained the community spread of Covid-19 and can start easing its lockdown measures. As the BBC’s Shaimaa Khalil writes, the country’s success – and Ardern’s leadership – have won it global attention.”

Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-52344299

So is NZ exhibiting a ‘gold standard’? If the BBC’s praise is justified – and it is the BBC after all –  it must be worthwhile learning from that country’s experience including in particular its experience dealing with Covid-19 in care homes.

What can we learn?

The impact to date of Coronavirus on NZ – which has been much less severe than in many parts of the world, including Scotland – is the result of that country’s distinctive ‘system level’ response.  

However, for a perspective on the challenges in its care homes during the pandemic, the views of a group of New Zealand academic experts from the Te Ārai Palliative Care and End of Life Research Group, School of Nursing at the University of Auckland are informative. Their opinion piece entitled ‘Covid-19 and care homes: the myths and realities’ was amplified internationally by publication on msn.com  on 3 May, 2020.

Source: https://tearairesearchgroup.org/2020/05/04/covid-19-and-care-homes-the-myths-and-realities/  

The nub of these NZ’s researchers’ views are contained in three quotes (with my emphasis): 

(1) “To date all the people who have died of Covid-19 in New Zealand have been more than 60 years old, and more than half lived in aged residential care. Care homes account for almost a third of the disease clusters. We have seen that once the virus invades these homes, it spreads like wildfire, not only to other residents but also to caregivers and nurses.”

So in NZ, a country being praised for its successful management of this public health emergency, there has also been a severe negative and differential impact of the virus spreading in care homes relative to other settings.

(Note: on disease clusters: a significant Covid-19 cluster in NZ is when there are ten or more cases connected through transmission and who are not all part of the same household. The cluster includes both confirmed and probable cases.)

These NZ researchers acknowledge that the challenging issues around care homes faced in NZ are far, far from being unique.

(2) “Worldwide, Covid-19 death statistics for older people in care homes are staggering. In Europe, official counts indicate people living in care homes account for 54 percent of all Covid-19 deaths. However, many care home deaths have not been included in official tolls and it is estimated the real toll of Covid-19 deaths may be up to five times higher.”

(Do we think the NZ sources forget to highlight the ‘Scotland case’, that exceptionally, uniquely awful one …that international outlier?)

(3) “Covid-19 has laid bare the negative impact of undervaluing aged residential care and positioning these facilities outside normal healthcare services.”

Policy and politics

The two points in the last quote surely important ones. For many Western-style democracies, these points probably come closest to a general truth that needs to be addressed! Are ALL Scotland’s politicians capable of finding a way to come together to ensure step-change improvement in this situation and soon?  Hopefully!

However, right now narrow attempts at point scoring by partisan hacks and allied opposition politicians in Scotland, keen to demonstrate their exceptional hindsight, seems the priority. Do they lack awareness of the mounting international evidence on Covid-19 and its differential impact on care residents in many (most) countries – even the evidence from somewhere like New Zealand that has dealt very effectively with the pandemic? Or are they deliberately ignoring the mounting evidence for political ends?

New Zealand’s pro-active care home sector

It is useful to get further insight specifically on testing of care home residents in NZ for Covid-19. This is from the NZ Herald on 4 April, 2020:

Source: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12322501

“Aged Care Association chief executive Simon Wallace said rest homes until now had been accepting new admissions without testing but placing them in isolation for 14 days. Now, every admission will need to be tested first. If they test negative, the resident will be admitted but will be put into isolation for 14 days.” The newspaper report adds: “The Ministry of Health had been advised (i.e. by the ACE) of the new policy.”

The Aged Care Association (ACE) is a not-for-profit national membership organisation representing the residential care sector in NZ. It was the ACE that decided to introduce a change to the admissions policy for its members’ homes. It was the ACE that informed the NZ government of this change, i.e. the ACE took responsibility for assessing the risk to its clients and it was proactive in implementing a tighter admissions regime than had been required by government guidance. This proactive decision is on top of the ACE’s confidence that: “Rest homes are used to managing illness and the staff know how to prevent the spread of infectious diseases.”

New Zealand government’s response

Following the decision taken by the ACE members to tighten their admission criteria, the NZ Department of Health wrote a letter to the ACE’s CEO on 8 April. I’ll leave you to read its contents (below): they provide valuable insight into the situation concerning Covid-19 and care homes in another country – a ‘gold standard’ country.

Source: https://nzaca.org.nz/assets/COVID-19/8-April-2020-letter-from-Dr-Ashley-Bloomfield.pdf   

New Zealand’s testing regime

For information, NZ began testing for Covid-19 on 22 January 2020. The graph below shows the official figures for the number of tests per day for Covid-19 in NZ.

Source: https://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/diseases-and-conditions/covid-19-novel-coronavirus/covid-19-current-situation/covid-19-current-cases#lab

So the experiences of NZ, including the occurrence of Covid-19 clusters and the relatively high proportion of Covid-19 deaths both associated with care homes, happened in a country with a substantial track record on testing.

Final thoughts on the value of  ‘perspective’

It is not a solution in itself; it is not promoted here as a way to distract or to minimise, or to limit proper accountability; it is not offered to bolster complacency or denial or justify inaction. But ‘perspective’ provides balance, deepens understanding; maintains realism; and can add justification either for adverse criticism or praise. And as we form personal judgements on important issues at this time, and as we have to decide who to trust to make big decisions on our behalf, ‘perspective’ helps by improving the standard of public debate.

Media that choose to bring ‘perspective’ will serve the ‘public interest’. And the BBC may even agree – at least on paper! This is from its editorial guidelines:

“There is no single definition of public interest, but it includes freedom of expression; providing information that assists people to better comprehend or make decisions on matters of public importance; preventing people being misled by the statements or actions of individuals or organisations.” 

Source: https://www.bbc.com/editorialguidelines/guidelines/editorial-standards

If only BBC Scotland at least lived up to this!

12 thoughts on “Message for Carlaw and Leonard: New Zealand’s care homes did not expect asymptomatic cases to be tested but THEY were expected to isolate them for 14 days

  1. Perspective?

    For the Brit Nats and their tame media, perspective is a pane of see-through plastic.

    Context is a message sent by Jackdaw Carlot, or one of the other dancing poodles.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. John,

    The link below is to an article in the BMJ about testing for covid19. It sets out how clinicians approach the interpretation of a test and the limitations of testing and potential bias in clinicians. The whole article is worth a read. I have copied some of the opening paragraphs. Feel free to dispose of it.

    Carlaw and Jackson are making something about the number of tests being done, particularly in care homes. Testing residents in care homes is not likely to be easy. The sensitivity

    https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1808

    How accurate are test results?
    No test gives a 100% accurate result; tests need to be evaluated to determine their sensitivity and specificity, ideally by comparison with a “gold standard.” The lack of such a clear-cut “gold-standard” for covid-19 testing makes evaluation of test accuracy challenging.

    A systematic review of the accuracy of covid-19 tests reported false negative rates of between 2% and 29% (equating to sensitivity of 71-98%), based on negative RT-PCR tests which were positive on repeat testing.6 The use of repeat RT-PCR testing as gold standard is likely to underestimate the true rate of false negatives, as not all patients in the included studies received repeat testing and those with clinically diagnosed covid-19 were not considered as actually having covid-19.6

    Accuracy of viral RNA swabs in clinical practice varies depending on the site and quality of sampling. In one study, sensitivity of RT-PCR in 205 patients varied, at 93% for broncho-alveolar lavage, 72% for sputum, 63% for nasal swabs, and only 32% for throat swabs.7 Accuracy is also likely to vary depending on stage of disease8 and degree of viral multiplication or clearance.9 Higher sensitivities are reported depending on which gene targets are used, and whether multiple gene tests are used in combination.310 Reported accuracies are much higher for in vitro studies, which measure performance of primers using coronavirus cell culture in carefully controlled conditions.2

    The lack of a clear-cut “gold-standard” is a challenge for evaluating covid-19 tests; pragmatically, clinical adjudication may be the best available “gold standard,” based on repeat swabs, history, and contact with patients known to have covid-19, chest radiographs, and computed tomography scans. Inevitably this introduces some incorporation bias, where the test being evaluated forms part of the reference standard, and this would tend to inflate the measured sensitivity of these tests.11 Disease prevalence can also affect estimates of accuracy: tests developed and evaluated in populations with high prevalence (eg, secondary care) may have lower sensitivity when applied in a lower prevalence setting (eg, primary care).11

    One community based study of 4653 close contacts of patients with covid-19 tested RT-PCR throat swabs every 48 hours during a 14 day quarantine period. Of 129 eventually diagnosed with covid-19 by RT-PCR, 92 (71.3%) had a positive test on the first throat swab, equating to a sensitivity of 71% in this lower prevalence, community setting.12

    Further evidence and independent validation of covid-19 tests are needed.13 As current studies show marked variation and are likely to overestimate sensitivity, we will use the lower end of current estimates from systematic reviews,6 with the approximate numbers of 70% for sensitivity and 95% for specificity for illustrative purposes.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. The key word to me is responsibility. It’s not just care homes and the NHS that need to take responsibility in this situation. It’s the media and politicians too.

    I can’t think why Richard Leonard would tell the First Minister repeatedly that deaths in care homes are signs of ‘government failure’, when that is obviously not the case. Either he wants to score political points or is utterly ignorant of the way Covid-19 has developed over the past 3 months.

    And I can’t think why STV would tonight give a clearly distraught daughter extended airtime to complain that she needs to get into the care home to see her aged, demented mother, when the TV channel must know that would be totally the wrong thing to do and tantamount to signing the mother’s death certificate.

    I won’t even start on the media’s responsibility to tell the public 85% of care homes are privately owned and tell them that the death rate is higher there than in council or charity-run homes – and then ask why?

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I see an article has appeared on the Couriers fb page today, it’s quoting Tony Banks founder of Balhousie Care Homes saying, Scottish Government has betrayed care homes, it’ll likey turn up the P&Js fb as well.

    Like

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.