The prevalence of metabolic conditions before and during the COVID-19 pandemic and its association with health and sociodemographic factors.

BACKGROUND: There is a dearth of evidence on the relationship between COVID-19 and metabolic conditions among the general U.S. population. We examined the prevalence and association of metabolic conditions with health and sociodemographic factors before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Data were drawn from the 2019 (N = 5,359) and 2020 (N = 3,830) Health Information National Trends Surveys on adults to compare observations before (2019) and during (2020) the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted weighted descriptive and multivariable logistic regression analyses to assess the study objective. RESULTS: During the pandemic, compared to pre-pandemic, the prevalence of diabetes (18.10% vs. 17.28%) has increased, while the prevalence of hypertension (36.38% vs. 36.36%) and obesity (34.68% vs. 34.18%) has remained similar. In general, the prevalence of metabolic conditions was higher during the pandemic (56.09%) compared to pre-pandemic (54.96%). Compared to never smokers, former smokers had higher odds of metabolic conditions (AOR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.01, 1.87 and AOR = 1.57, 95% CI = 1.10, 2.25) before and during the pandemic, respectively. People with mild anxiety/depression symptoms (before: AOR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.06, 2.19 and during: AOR = 1.55, 95% CI = 1.01, 2.38) had higher odds of metabolic conditions relative to those with no anxiety/depression symptoms. CONCLUSION: This study found increased odds of metabolic conditions among certain subgroups of US adults during the pandemic. We recommend further studies and proper allocation of public health resources to address these conditions.

Assessment scores of remote and in-person learning for grades three - six students in an East Tennessee school district

The purpose of this comparative, quantitative study was to explore the relationship of interim test scores among remote and in-person learners, low-income students, and students with disabilities. In March 2020, a portion of students enrolled in a K-12 school in Northeast Tennessee was moved into remote learning until the end of the school year in May 2020. In July 2020, parents were given the option for their child to attend remote or in-person learning. While some chose in-person learning, giving reasons such as child-care, work obligations, or personal preference, others chose for their children to continue to receive online learning due to health concerns brought on by the pandemic. Since these decisions were made, some parents that originally opted for online learning chose to send their child back to school due to perceived obstacles faced within the online environment.This study was conducted to determine the efficacy of online learning in comparison to in-person learning for students grades three - six separated into the following categories: general population, students with disabilities, and low-income students. Comparison of both mathematics and literacy interim third quarter checkpoint data were analyzed using SPSS software to conduct a series of independent t-tests. Data were analyzed at the 0.05 level of significance. Twelve research questions were addressed testing corresponding null hypotheses. Results included third grade online literacy scores significantly exceeding the scores of in-person. Mean literacy and math scores were approximately equal for online and in-person learners. Overall, scores for students with disabilities and low socio-economic students were approximately equal whether the learners were online or in-person. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Outbreak or pseudo-outbreak? Integrating SARS-CoV-2 sequencing to validate infection control practices in a dialysis facility.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic poses a particularly high risk for End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) patients so rapid identification of case clusters in ESRD facilities is essential. Nevertheless, with high community prevalence, a series of ESRD patients may test positive contemporaneously for reasons unrelated to their shared ESRD facility. Here we describe a series of 5 cases detected within 11 days in November 2020 in a hospital-based 32-station ESRD facility in Southwest Wisconsin, the subsequent facility-wide testing, and the use of genetic sequence analysis to evaluate links between cases. METHODS: Four patient cases and one staff case were identified in symptomatic individuals by RT-PCR. Facility-wide screening was conducted using rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests. SARS-CoV-2 genome sequences were obtained from residual diagnostic specimens. RESULTS: Facility-wide screening of 47 staff and 107 patients identified no additional cases. Residual specimens from 4 of 5 cases were available for genetic sequencing. Clear genetic differences proved that these contemporaneous cases were not linked. CONCLUSIONS: With high community prevalence, epidemiological data alone is insufficient to deem a case cluster an outbreak. Cluster evaluation with genomic data, when available with a short turn-around time, can play an important role in infection prevention and control response programs.