Increasing Social Media Presence for Graduate Medical Education Programs.

Virtual residency interviews during COVID-19 pandemic created a need for residency programs to use social media to increase their visibility and connect with potential applicants. This was, however, new and a road never travelled for many programs. This report describes how our General Surgery Residency Program increased its presence through social media by using various exposure methods and approaches, including diversifying presence and developing candid personalized content. Results suggest that these methods have increased our exposure and reach from an average of 7 people per post to posts reaching over 4500 people. Moreover, the video posts introducing our residents and faculty provided the highest activity and reach. Thus, appropriate use of social media with described interventions and new content creation could exponentially increase the visibility of a residency program. Moreover, educating faculty and residents on the use and importance of social media could increase their interest and participation as well.

Place Still Matters: Social Vulnerabilities, Place-Level Disadvantage, and Food Insecurity during COVID-19.

COVID-19 variants continue to create public health danger impacting mortality and morbidity across the United States. The spillover effects of COVID-19 on the economy and social institutions pose a significant threat to broader wellbeing, including the food security of millions across the country. We aim to explore whether the context of place matters above and beyond individual and social vulnerabilities for food insecurity. To do so, we employ a multi-level framework using data from a survey of over 10,000 U.S. adults from March 2020 with American Community Survey (ACS) and John Hopkins COVID Dashboard county-level data. We find nearly two in five respondents were food insecure by March of 2020 with disparities across race, nativity, the presence of children in the home, unemployment, and age. Furthermore, we note that individuals living in more disadvantaged communities were more likely to report food insecurity above and beyond individual and social vulnerabilities. Overall, food insecurity is driven by complex, multi-level dynamics that remain a pressing public health concern for the current-but also future-public health crisis.

The Impact of Polymerase Chain Reaction Versus Antigen Based COVID-19 Testing on Subsequent Infections in Military Trainees

Background. Screening large groups of individuals entering a congregate setting has been a challenge during the COVID-19 pandemic. Current Infectious Disease Society of America guidelines recommend polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based screening in symptomatic and at-risk individuals over antigen based testing due to higher sensitivity. However, there are limited real-world data describing secondary COVID-19 cases after different arrival testing strategies. Methods. Between January 1 - August 31, 2021 all trainees attending United States Air Force Basic Military Training underwent arrival testing for COVID-19. Trainees who arrived January 1, 2021 - May 21, 2021 were tested via PCR and those from May 24, 2021 - August 31, 2021 via antigen test. All trained in groups of 30-50 and slept in communal quarters. Symptomatic secondary cases within the first two weeks of training were identified by individual as well as training group and compared based on method of arrival testing. For this study, a case cluster was defined as > 5 cases. Results. A total of 24,601 trainees arrived during the study period with 406 (1.6%) trainees testing positive on arrival, of which 134 (33%) were symptomatic. Initial positivity rate was greater for PCR testing as compared to antigen testing (2.5% vs 0.4%, RR: 5.4, 95% CI: 4.0-7.3, p< 0.001). With PCR testing, training groups were significantly more likely to have a positive case on arrival (57% vs 11%, RR: 5.3, 95% CI: 3.7-7.7, p< 0.001). However, PCR testing was not associated with a difference in training groups with a secondary case (20% vs 22%, RR: 0.9, 95% CI: 0.66-1.2, p=0.53), number of training groups with a case cluster (4% vs 6.7%, RR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.3-1.2, p=0.16), or number of days after arrival until development of symptomatic secondary case (median 8 vs 6.5 days, p=0.37) as compared to antigen testing. Conclusion. This study describes two strategies of arrival testing for COVID-19 in a congregate setting at high risk for disease transmission. In this study, PCR-based testing was associated with more arrival cases. However, there was no difference in the number of training groups having a secondary case or a case cluster. This study supports the utility of antigen-based arrival testing for congregate settings.

Sensitivity of Symptom-Based Screening for COVID-19 in Active Duty Service Members

Background. Symptomatic COVID-19 screening has been a cornerstone of case identification during the pandemic. Despite the myriad of COVID-19 symptoms, screens have focused on fever, cough, and dyspnea. It is unknown how well these symptoms identify cases in a healthy military population. This study aims to evaluate the utility of symptom-based screening in identifying COVID-19 through different COVID-19 waves. Methods. A convenience sample of 600 active-duty service members who arrived at JBSA in 2021 and 2022 was included in this study. We compared 200 symptomatic service members who tested positive for COVID-19 in each of FEB-APR 2021 (prior to the emergence of the Delta variant), JUN-AUG 2021 (Delta variant was predominant), and JAN 2022 (Omicron variant was predominant). Collected data included test date, reported symptoms, and vaccination status. Comparisons were conducted via Chi-Square or Fisher's Exact test. Results. Of the 600 symptomatic active-duty service members who tested positive for COVID-19, the most common symptoms were sore throat (n=385, 64%), headache (n=334, 56%), and cough (n=314, 52%). While sore throat was the most prominent symptom during Delta (n=140, 70%) and Omicron (n=153, 77%), headache was the most common prior to Delta (n=93, 47%). There were significant differences in symptoms by vaccination status (Table 2). Overall, screening for fever, cough, and dyspnea had a 65.1% sensitivity in this cohort (Table 3) with its lowest sensitivity in the pre-Delta cohort (53.5%) and highest sensitivity in the fully vaccinated Omicron cohort (78.3%). Conclusion. In this descriptive cross-sectional study evaluating symptomatic military members with COVID-19, symptom prevalence varied based on the predominant COVID-19 variant as well as patients' vaccination status. As screening strategies evolve with the pandemic, changing symptom prevalence should be considered.

Examining disparities in the early adoption of Covid-19 personal mitigation across family structures.

The United States' response to the COVID-19 pandemic has relied heavily on personal mitigation behaviors versus centralized governmental prevention strategies, especially early in the virus's outbreak. This study examines how family structure shapes mitigation, focusing on the intersectional effects of gender, marital status, and the presence of children while accounting for differences in worry about infection from the virus. Using data from a national survey of 10,368 United States adults early in the pandemic (March 2020), survey-weighted logistic regression models show important differences in the likelihood of personal mitigation adoption across family structures. Unmarried women with children were most likely to report personal mitigation behaviors, including washing hands more frequently and avoiding social gatherings. Our findings highlight the differential impacts of the pandemic on those living in specific family circumstances.

Social and behavioral vulnerability, pregnancy, and negative mental health outcomes in the U.S. during the Covid-19 pandemic

The novel coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic has had a significant impact on the mental health of the general U.S. population. Extant literature has increasingly linked social vulnerabilities, risky behavior, and limited social and psychological resources to the growing mental health crisis during the virus's spread. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of pertinent social vulnerabilities and subjective risk factors for both men and women on mental health (i.e., depression, anxiety, isolation) with a closer examination of the influence of pregnancy during the pandemic on mental health. The sample included 740,640 respondents participating in the U.S. Covid-19 Trends and Impact Survey that was deployed between February and March 2021. Descriptive statistics and ordinary least squares regression models are presented with a focus on the factors that shape negative mental health outcomes, particularly on the disparities between pregnant and non-pregnant women relative to men, but also subjective/perception factors (e.g., fear/worry) and social vulnerabilities. Results show that pregnant women were at significantly greater risk of negative mental health outcomes at this stage of the pandemic than either men or non-pregnant women. Overall, respondents who were younger, without children in the household, unemployed, worried generally about infection or their finances, or had ever tested positive for Covid were also more likely to report feelings of anxiety, isolation, and depression than their counterparts. Pregnant women may be especially vulnerable to depression, anxiety, and isolation during the pandemic and our findings suggest the importance of developing targeted mental health support for this sub-population.

Preaching by the Rivers of Babylon: How an Exile from Pulpit and Pew Can Change White Preaching On the Other Side of Pandemic: A Journal of Bible and Theology

Preaching platforms have always influenced the message preachers prepare and the message people receive, for good and for ill. The shift from the pulpit platform to social media platforms during stay-at-home orders due to the COVID-19 pandemic reveals a legacy of White supremacy haunting the sanctuary. This essay explores this legacy, its relationship with technoculture, and its impact on the practice of White preaching.

The effects of arrival quarantine on subsequent COVID-19 testing in a cohort of military basic trainees

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with significant spread in congregate settings and various forms of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI) have been implemented to prevent spread. Basic Military Training at Joint Base-San Antonio is the entrance to the US Air Force and has been associated with respiratory outbreaks in the past. A two-week arrival quarantine was implemented in March 2020. Effects on subsequent testing for COVID-19 after an arrival quarantine is unknown. Methods: The first four weekly cohorts of trainees who underwent an arrival quarantine between March 16-April 13 were monitored during their 7 week training for COVID-19 symptoms. Symptoms, medical testing, and days removed from training were collected on every patient with possible COVID-19 symptoms including cough, shortness of breath, or fever. Testing during the two-week arrival quarantine were compared to the subsequent five weeks of training. Nominal variables were compared by chi squared or Fisher's exact test as appropriate. Continuous variables were compared by Mann-Whitney U Test. Results: A total of 2,573 started training during study period, 89 (3.4%) had symptoms concerning for COVID-19 and were tested. 5 (6%) patients tested positive, all of whom in the arrival quarantine. Compared to patients who completed quarantine (n=29), patients in the arrival quarantine who tested negative for COVID-19 (n=54) were tested more often (26 trainees a week vs. 5.8 later in training, p=< 0.0001), and received more rapid flu tests (74% vs. 38%, p=0.001) and multiplex respiratory PCR (15% vs. 0%, p=0.05). Trainees in quarantine were isolated longer for symptoms than patients who completed quarantine (median 3 vs. 2, p=0.01). There was no difference in presenting symptoms for trainees in quarantine or after quarantine. Conclusion: Arrival quarantine appears to be an effective NPI, which in conjunction with other interventions prevented any COVID-19 transmission after quarantine completion. For those who went through arrival quarantine, there was more intense initial testing and initial longer symptomatic patient isolation, this was balanced by fewer symptomatic patients, less testing, and shorter isolations later in training.