Prevalence and Correlates of COVID-19 Vaccine Information on Family Medicine Practices' Websites in the United States: Cross-sectional Website Content Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Primary care providers are regarded as trustworthy sources of information about COVID-19 vaccines. Although primary care practices often provide information about common medical and public health topics on their practice websites, little is known about whether they also provide information about COVID-19 vaccines on their practice websites. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and correlates of COVID-19 vaccine information on family medicine practices' website home pages in the United States. METHODS: We used the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid National Provider Identifier records to create a sampling frame of all family medicine providers based in the United States, from which we constructed a nationally representative random sample of 964 family medicine providers. Between September 20 and October 8, 2021, we manually examined the practice websites of these providers and extracted data on the availability of COVID-19 vaccine information, and we implemented a 10% cross-review quality control measure to resolve discordances in data abstraction. We estimated the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine information on practice websites and website home pages and used Poisson regression with robust error variances to estimate crude and adjusted prevalence ratios for correlates of COVID-19 vaccine information, including practice size, practice region, university affiliation, and presence of information about seasonal influenza vaccines. Additionally, we performed sensitivity analyses to account for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: Of the 964 included family medicine practices, most (n=509, 52.8%) had ≥10 distinct locations, were unaffiliated with a university (n=838, 87.2%), and mentioned seasonal influenza vaccines on their websites (n=540, 56.1%). In total, 550 (57.1%) practices mentioned COVID-19 vaccines on their practices' website home page, specifically, and 726 (75.3%) mentioned COVID-19 vaccines anywhere on their practice website. As practice size increased, the likelihood of finding COVID-19 vaccine information on the home page increased (n=66, 27.7% among single-location practices, n=114, 52.5% among practices with 2-9 locations, n=66, 56.4% among practices with 10-19 locations, and n=304, 77.6% among practices with 20 or more locations, P<.001 for trend). Compared to clinics in the Northeast, those in the West and Midwest United States had a similar prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine information on website home pages, but clinics in the south had a lower prevalence (adjusted prevalence ratio 0.8, 95% CI 0.7 to 1.0; P=.02). Our results were largely unchanged in sensitivity analyses accounting for multiple comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: Given the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, primary care practitioners who promote and provide vaccines should strongly consider utilizing their existing practice websites to share COVID-19 vaccine information. These existing platforms have the potential to serve as an extension of providers' influence on established and prospective patients who search the internet for information about COVID-19 vaccines.

Projected HIV and Bacterial Sexually Transmitted Infection Incidence Following COVID-19-Related Sexual Distancing and Clinical Service Interruption.

BACKGROUND: The global COVID-19 pandemic has the potential to indirectly impact transmission dynamics and prevention of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STI). It is unknown what combined impact reductions in sexual activity and interruptions in HIV/STI services will have on HIV/STI epidemic trajectories. METHODS: We adapted a model of HIV, gonorrhea, and chlamydia for a population of approximately 103 000 men who have sex with men (MSM) in the Atlanta area. Model scenarios varied the timing, overlap, and relative extent of COVID-19-related sexual distancing and service interruption within 4 service categories (HIV screening, preexposure prophylaxis, antiretroviral therapy, and STI treatment). RESULTS: A 50% relative decrease in sexual partnerships and interruption of all clinical services, both lasting 18 months, would generally offset each other for HIV (total 5-year population impact for Atlanta MSM, -227 cases), but have net protective effect for STIs (-23 800 cases). If distancing lasted only 3 months but service interruption lasted 18 months, the total 5-year population impact would be an additional 890 HIV cases and 57 500 STI cases. CONCLUSIONS: Immediate action to limit the impact of service interruptions is needed to address the indirect effects of the global COVID-19 pandemic on the HIV/STI epidemic.

Projected HIV and Bacterial STI Incidence Following COVID-Related Sexual Distancing and Clinical Service Interruption.

BACKGROUND: The global COVID-19 pandemic has the potential to indirectly impact the transmission dynamics and prevention of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STI). Studies have already documented reductions in sexual activity ("sexual distancing") and interruptions in HIV/STI services, but it is unknown what combined impact these two forces will have on HIV/STI epidemic trajectories. METHODS: We adapted a network-based model of co-circulating HIV, gonorrhea, and chlamydia for a population of approximately 103,000 men who have sex with men (MSM) in the Atlanta area. Model scenarios varied the timing, overlap, and relative extent of COVID-related sexual distancing in casual and one-time partnership networks and service interruption within four service categories (HIV screening, HIV PrEP, HIV ART, and STI treatment). RESULTS: A 50% relative decrease in sexual partnerships and interruption of all clinical services, both lasting 18 months, would generally offset each other for HIV (total 5-year population impact for Atlanta MSM: -227 cases), but have net protective effect for STIs (-23,800 cases). Greater relative reductions and longer durations of service interruption would increase HIV and STI incidence, while greater relative reductions and longer durations of sexual distancing would decrease incidence of both. If distancing lasted only 3 months but service interruption lasted 18 months, the total 5-year population impact would be an additional 890 HIV cases and 57,500 STI cases. CONCLUSIONS: The counterbalancing impact of sexual distancing and clinical service interruption depends on the infection and the extent and durability of these COVID-related changes. If sexual behavior rebounds while service interruption persists, we project an excess of hundreds of HIV cases and thousands of STI cases just among Atlanta MSM over the next 5 years. Immediate action to limit the impact of service interruptions is needed to address the indirect effects of the global COVID pandemic on the HIV/STI epidemic.