Talk:Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on long-term care facilities

Unused resources

If you find an article relevant to this topic, but don't have the opportunity to add the information, paste it below. -- Zanimum (talk) 14:39, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-52147861 https://www.ontariohealthcoalition.ca/index.php/update-hospital-and-long-term-care-health-care-workers-long-term-care-residents-infected-with-covid-19-2/

Requested move 19 April 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:56, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

---

Impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on long-term care facilities → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in long-term care facilities – More natural and concise name which also more precisely describes what article is about: it's not about the impact that it's having on the homes or the industry, but rather the epidemic as it unfolds there: cases, deaths, etc. Compare 2020 coronavirus pandemic on cruise ships. 2020 is better because I don't believe there were cases in long term care in 2019. buidhe 12:18, 19 April 2020 (UTC)—Relisted. – Ammarpad (talk) 14:13, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Support in ordinance with other articles that have consistent title (2020 coronavirus pandemic in X), plus the coronavirus pandemic in home-care facilities wasn't happened in 2019, it only happens in 2020. 114.125.230.86 (talk) 15:27, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Support per nominator suggest above. Because it was more natural and concise name which also more precisely describes what article is about. 36.77.93.154 (talk) 00:15, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Oppose - The new title does not make it clear what the article is talking about. It is not WP:PRECISE. By adding Impact of, the title is now clear what it is about. Interstellarity (talk) 17:44, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Oppose: A better title would instead be Impact of the 2020 coronavirus pandemic on long-term care facilities. The proposed title suggests how the pandemic unfolded in long-term care facilities. However, this article in question is regarding the impact the pandemic had on them.--Shawnqual (talk) 00:18, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Note the discussion at Talk:2019–20_coronavirus_pandemic#Requested_move_26_April_2020. Such a request being supported, per WP:CONSISTENT, will make the name of this article “Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on long-term care facilities”

Oppose: per Interstellarity. Andrew nyr (talk, contribs) 05:51, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Oppose per the outcome of the recent group RFC (see above) the title of this article will have to be renamed into "Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on long-term care facilities" instead. If that doesn't fit the topic of the article, another RM (keeping within the bounds of the RFC) might be started from there. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 14:12, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

British Columbia entirely wrong

Removed just now from the Canada section:

In British Columbia, the number of cases in long-term care facilities jumped from 9 to 235, including 143 residents and 92 staff.

References

Actual sentence in source:

The number of cases linked to long-term care and assisted living facilities climbed by nine to 235 on Thursday.

There's actual a lot to say about BC, because the pandemic in BC started early in long-term care, and it was managed aggressively, quite unlike Quebec and Ontario.

From the same citation:

As of Thursday, a previously-announced public health order barring health-care staff from working in multiple facilities took effect across the province.

Health Minister Adrian Dix said a plan had been negotiated with both unions and public and private employers that will ensure an estimated 4,200 health-care workers get a fair wage and scheduling stability.

Limiting health-care workers to a single site is expected to cost the province about $10 million per month, said Dix.

This for a province with a population of about 5.1 million people.

That's not quite the same story as a sudden spike of 220 new long-term cases in one daily reporting cycle.

Dr Bonnie Henry likely enacted one of the most proactive mitigations or risk involving long-term care the world over. — MaxEnt 19:08, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Fixing British Columbia, a model long-term care recovery

Here's the core passage (May 30) from a source that gets the story about British Columbia right, adapted to bullet points (one quote moved to do so):

British Columbia, population 5 million, has seen 164 COVID-19 deaths, 112 of them at its acute and long-term care facilities.

Quebec, population 8.5 million, has suffered 4,363 deaths, Canada's worst record by far. At last count, 2,786 fatalities have been residents of the province's long-term care centres, known as CHSLDs. Another 908 deaths have been residents of private care facilities, for a total of 3,694 deaths so far.

Vancouver's Coastal Health department reacted swiftly.

• Contact tracing revealed staff were the carriers, so on March 18 the department barred employees from working in more than one residence.
• A $10-million program was set up to cover their lost wages.
• Salaries at Lynn Valley were doubled and protective gear supplied to ensure frightened staff stayed.
• It helped that B.C. had ordered protective equipment early.
• Any patient transferred to a long-term care centre was quarantined in a single room for 14 days.
• Those who tested positive were moved to a separate institution or hospital ward. This happened regularly.
• Even though testing materials were lacking, care centres were prioritized and authorities tested aggressively.
• Where infection was suspected, inspectors tested entire floors or institutions, often turning up several cases among asymptomatic patients and staff.
• All contacts were screened.

"If we hadn't put that policy in place, every time there was an outbreak at a facility, you wouldn't have had any staff," medical health officer Mark Lysyshyn said.

"If anyone tells you that massive and deadly COVID-19 outbreaks in long-term care are 'inevitable,' please tell them otherwise," health officer Michael Schwandt wrote on Twitter in early May. "We've managed 17 (long-term care) outbreaks in Vancouver Coastal Health."

So, why, then, is the picture tragically different in Quebec, where outbreaks have hit more than 400 centres, in some cases infecting every resident, while B.C. saw flare-ups in only 44 centres, and mostly controlled them?

Source

References

Note especially the date of the order to restrict workers to a single facility: March 18. That's a mere week after the WHO declared official pandemic status. By this point BC had already established (on actual data obtained from an aggressive test program) that long-term care workers were actively spreading the disease.

Vancouver Coastal Health discussed above is one of five regional health authorities in the province, the most exclusively urban.

Two of the five health authorities (just under a million people each) have basically reached zero Covid status.

The Vancouver Island Health authority (780,000 people) hasn't reported a single new case since 7 May 2020. Interior is almost as good. Almost all of the recent outbreaks have been in the Frasier Valley health authority, including a hospital outbreak (now declared over), a prison, many long-term care homes, some migrant worker in the agricultural sector, and two meat processors. Outside of these outbreaks and immediate circles (most contained quickly) there has been almost negligible levels of community transmission.

Here's background on how early Covid struck long-term care in BC:

• Timeline: Every case of COVID-19 identified in British Columbia — 9 March 2020

The first case in British Columbia was reported on 28 January 2020. At this point, it's only people who have travelled abroad.

5 March 2020

Case 21: B.C.'s first recorded case of community transmission, meaning the patient has not recently travelled to COVID-19 affected countries or come into contact with known carriers of the virus. She is a woman in her 50s who is a health worker at the Lynn Valley Care Centre in North Vancouver.

7 March 2020

Case 26: A resident of Lynn Valley Care Centre where Case 21 works.

Case 27: The first person in Canada to die after contracting COVID-19. He was a man in his 80s who also lived at the Lynn Valley Care Centre.

9 March 2020

Case 28: A male teenager from the Fraser Health region who is a close contact of Case 21, the health worker from Lynn Valley Care Centre.

Case 29: A man in his 50s from the Fraser Health region who is also a close contact of Case 21.

Case 30: A woman in her 40s from the Fraser Health region who is also a health worker at Lynn Valley Care Centre in North Vancouver.

10 March 2020

Case 33: A woman in her 40s who works at the Lynn Valley Care Centre.

Case 34: A woman in her 50s who works at the Lynn Valley Care Centre.

11 March 2020

Case 40: A man in his 20s who lives in the Vancouver Coastal Health region and works at the Lynn Valley Care Centre.

12 March 2020

Cases 48 and 49: A man and woman who are health care workers at both Hollyburn House and Lynn Valley Care Centre. They are both in their 40s and live in the Fraser Health region.

Six days after the Hollyburn vector, a $10 million/month program is announced to prevent that from ever happening again. (Hollyburn might not be the only one they observed, but reported after this data became less detailed.)

I'm presently in a state of Wikipedia fatigue, so I'll leave for some other edit to adapt into article text. — MaxEnt 19:54, 3 June 2020 (UTC)