Shade Agboola, Director of Public Health gave
a presentation to the Committee, which had also been provided to
the Covid19 member engagement board held the previous week. This
outlined the Outbreak Control Plan, its aim, the
eight key priorities and respective roles of national and local
government especially in regard to contact tracing. The
presentation included Covid19 case number estimates, the
sub-regional response arrangements and the governance structure for
Warwickshire. Detail was then provided on each of the eight
priority areas:
·
Community engagement to build trust and
participation
·
Preventing Infection
·
High risk settings and communities
·
Vulnerable People
·
Testing Capacity
·
Contract Tracing
·
Data: dynamic surveillance and
integration
·
Deployment of capabilities including
enforcement
The presentation concluded with
resource requirements and priorities. The following
questions and statements were submitted, with answers provided as
indicated:
- People who were infectious but not
symptomatic. Currently only people with symptoms could request to
be tested. Work was ongoing with Public Health England (PHE) to see
how this could be addressed, so those who potentially could be
contagious were tested.
- It was planned to provide pillar two
test data to elected members along with the pillar one
information. Sharing this data
periodically with the public would help to ensure appropriate
behaviours. It was asked if this data could be disaggregated for
each district/borough area. Officers confirmed that the numbers of
cases were small.
- The number of cases at the George
Eliot Hospital (GEH) seemed disproportionately high. It was
questioned if these were community acquired cases or could have
been transmitted at the hospital. The number of cases at GEH was
reducing. Research had shown a mixed picture with some cases being
transmitted in hospital. A postcode breakdown was awaited on the
location of residents who had acquired covid in the
community.
- A comparison was sought on the
proportion of cases acquired at GEH to those in other hospitals.
Frequent and detailed information was provided, which confirmed
that the rate at GEH was higher. A video had been posted on the
County Council’s website to show the measures implemented to
control infection at GEH.
- In response to a related question
about the four wards involved at GEH, the DPH stressed that people
should not be discouraged from going into hospital.
- Decisions about local lockdowns and
how they would be triggered. It would be crucial to give the
correct messages to the public and elected members, as community
leaders would be able to provide information in their locality. It
was expected that lockdowns would be required, but the size of the
lockdown area was presently unknown. The DPH advised that this was
currently not under the control of the local authority.
- It was questioned if plans were
being put in place in anticipation of such powers being granted.
Lockdown action plans would be developed for each part of the
beacon area.
- Arrangements for the rollout of
antibody testing were questioned. It was available to NHS and some
social care staff. However, this was not the solution as it did not
give a clear guide to how long the immunity would last for or if it
would be effective if the virus mutated. It did help with managing
workforce pressures though. It was important that people did not
become complacent. Monitoring of staff who had returned to work
after receiving a positive antibody test for further symptoms was a
further point raised.
- It was questioned why the
nightingale hospitals had not been used to provide capacity at
existing acute trusts and to isolate covid patients. The DPH agreed
to take this point away and report back.
The Chair thanked Dr Shade Agboola for the
extensive work being undertaken and for the information provided to
members at the meeting.
Resolved
That the Committee notes the report.