Use of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Antibody Tests by US Infectious Disease Physicians: Results of an Emerging Infections Network Survey, March 2022.

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody tests have had limited recommended clinical application during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. To inform clinical practice, an understanding is needed of current perspectives of United States-based infectious disease (ID) physicians on the use, interpretation, and need for SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests. Methods: In March 2022, members of the Emerging Infections Network (EIN), a national network of practicing ID physicians, were surveyed on types of SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays ordered, interpretation of test results, and clinical scenarios for which antibody tests were considered. Results: Of 1867 active EIN members, 747 (40%) responded. Among the 583 who managed or consulted on COVID-19 patients, a majority (434/583 [75%]) had ordered SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests and were comfortable interpreting positive (452/578 [78%]) and negative (405/562 [72%]) results. Antibody tests were used for diagnosing post-COVID-19 conditions (61%), identifying prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (60%), and differentiating prior infection and response to COVID-19 vaccination (37%). Less than a third of respondents had used antibody tests to assess need for additional vaccines or risk stratification. Lack of sufficient evidence for use and nonstandardized assays were among the most common barriers for ordering tests. Respondents indicated that statements from professional societies and government agencies would influence their decision to order SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests for clinical decision making. Conclusions: Practicing ID physicians are using SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests, and there is an unmet need for clarifying the appropriate use of these tests in clinical practice. Professional societies and US government agencies can support clinicians in the community through the creation of appropriate guidance.

Analysis of serological surveys of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in the United States to estimate parameters needed for transmission modeling and to evaluate and improve the accuracy of predictions.

Seroprevalence studies can estimate proportions of the population that have been infected or vaccinated, including infections that were not reported because of the lack of symptoms or testing. Based on information from studies in the United States from mid-summer 2020 through the end of 2021, we describe proportions of the population with antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 as functions of age and time. Slices through these surfaces at arbitrary times provide initial and target conditions for simulation modeling. They also provide the information needed to calculate age-specific forces of infection, attack rates, and - together with contact rates - age-specific probabilities of infection on contact between susceptible and infectious people. We modified the familiar Susceptible-Exposed-Infectious-Removed (SEIR) model to include features of the biology of COVID-19 that might affect transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and stratified by age and location. We consulted the primary literature or subject matter experts for contact rates and other parameter values. Using time-varying Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker assessments of US state and DC efforts to mitigate the pandemic and compliance with non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) from a YouGov survey fielded in the US during 2020, we estimate that the efficacy of social-distancing when possible and mask-wearing otherwise at reducing susceptibility or infectiousness was 31% during the fall of 2020. Initialized from seroprevalence among people having commercial laboratory tests for purposes other than SARS-CoV-2 infection assessments on 7 September 2020, our age- and location-stratified SEIR population model reproduces seroprevalence among members of the same population on 25 December 2020 quite well. Introducing vaccination mid-December 2020, first of healthcare and other essential workers, followed by older adults, people who were otherwise immunocompromised, and then progressively younger people, our metapopulation model reproduces seroprevalence among blood donors on 4 April 2021 less well, but we believe that the discrepancy is due to vaccinations being under-reported or blood donors being disproportionately vaccinated, if not both. As experimenting with reliable transmission models is the best way to assess the indirect effects of mitigation measures, we determined the impact of vaccination, conditional on NPIs. Results indicate that, during this period, vaccination substantially reduced infections, hospitalizations and deaths. This manuscript was submitted as part of a theme issue on "Modelling COVID-19 and Preparedness for Future Pandemics."

Severity of COVID-19 Hospitalization Outcomes and Patient Disposition Differ by Disability Status and Disability Type.

BACKGROUND: Systemic inequities may place people with disabilities at higher risk of severe COVID-19 illness or lower likelihood to be discharged home after hospitalization. We examined whether severity of COVID-19 hospitalization outcomes and disposition differ by disability status and disability type. METHODS: In a retrospective analysis of April 2020-November 2021 hospital-based administrative data among 745,375 people hospitalized with COVID-19 from 866 US hospitals, people with disabilities (n = 120,360) were identified via ICD-10-CM codes. Outcomes compared by disability status included intensive care admission, invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), in-hospital mortality, 30-day readmission, length of stay, and disposition (discharge to home, long-term care facility (LTCF), or skilled nursing facility (SNF). RESULTS: People with disabilities had increased risks of IMV (aRR: 1.05; 95%CI: 1.03-1.08) and in-hospital mortality (1.04; 1.02-1.06) compared to those with no disability; risks were higher among people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) (IMV [1.34; 1.28-1.40], mortality [1.31; 1.26-1.37]) or mobility disabilities (IMV [1.13; 1.09-1.16], mortality [1.04; 1.01-1.07]). Risk of readmission was increased among people with any disability (1.23; 1.20-1.27) and each disability type. Risks of discharge to a LTCF (1.45, 1.39-1.49) or SNF (1.78, 1.74-1.81) were increased among community-dwelling people with each disability type. CONCLUSIONS: Severity of COVID-19 hospitalization outcomes vary by disability status and type; IDD and mobility disabilities were associated with higher risks of severe outcomes. Disparities such as differences in discharge disposition by disability status require further study which would be facilitated by standardized data on disability. Increased readmission across disability types indicates a need to improve discharge planning and support services.

Pediatric Infection-Induced SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence Increases and Seroprevalence by Type of Clinical Care-September 2021-February 2022.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Trends in estimates of US pediatric SARS-CoV-2 infection-induced seroprevalence from commercial laboratory specimens may overrepresent children with frequent healthcare needs. We examined seroprevalence trends and compared seroprevalence estimates by testing type and diagnostic coding. METHODS: Cross-sectional convenience samples of residual sera between September 2021 and February 2022 from 52 U.S. jurisdictions were assayed for infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 antibodies; monthly seroprevalence estimates were calculated by age group. Multivariate logistic analyses compared seroprevalence estimates for specimens associated with ICD-10 codes and laboratory orders indicating well-child care with estimates for other pediatric specimens. RESULTS: Infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence increased in each age group; from 30% to 68% (1-4 years), 38% to 77% (5-11 years), and 40% to 74% (12-17 years). On multivariate analysis, patients with well-child ICD-10 codes were seropositive more often than other patients aged 1-17 years (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] 1.04; 95% CI 1.02-1.07); children aged 9-11 years receiving standard lipid screening were seropositive more often than those receiving other laboratory tests (1.05; 1.02-1.08). CONCLUSIONS: Infection-induced seroprevalence more than doubled among children under 12 between September 2021 and February 2022, and increased 85% in adolescents. Differences in seroprevalence by care type did not substantially impact US pediatric seroprevalence estimates.

Estimated SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence trends and relationship to reported case prevalence from a repeated, cross-sectional study in the 50 states and the District of Columbia, United States—October 25, 2020–February 26, 2022

Background Sero-surveillance of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can reveal trends and differences in subgroups and capture undetected or unreported infections that are not included in case-based surveillance systems. Methods Cross-sectional, convenience samples of remnant sera from clinical laboratories from 51 U.S. jurisdictions were assayed for infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 antibodies biweekly from October 25, 2020, to July 11, 2021, and monthly from September 6, 2021, to February 26, 2022. Test results were analyzed for trends in infection-induced, nucleocapsid-protein seroprevalence using mixed effects models that adjusted for demographic variables and assay type. Findings Analyses of 1,469,792 serum specimens revealed U.S. infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence increased from 8.0% (95% confidence interval (CI): 7.9%–8.1%) in November 2020 to 58.2% (CI: 57.4%–58.9%) in February 2022. The U.S. ratio of the change in estimated seroprevalence to the change in reported case prevalence was 2.8 (CI: 2.8–2.9) during winter 2020–2021, 2.3 (CI: 2.0–2.5) during summer 2021, and 3.1 (CI: 3.0–3.3) during winter 2021–2022. Change in seroprevalence to change in case prevalence ratios ranged from 2.6 (CI: 2.3–2.8) to 3.5 (CI: 3.3–3.7) by region in winter 2021–2022. Interpretation Ratios of the change in seroprevalence to the change in case prevalence suggest a high proportion of infections were not detected by case-based surveillance during periods of increased transmission. The largest increases in the seroprevalence to case prevalence ratios coincided with the spread of the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant and with increased accessibility of home testing. Ratios varied by region and season with the highest ratios in the midwestern and southern United States during winter 2021–2022. Our results demonstrate that reported case counts did not fully capture differing underlying infection rates and demonstrate the value of sero-surveillance in understanding the full burden of infection. Levels of infection-induced antibody seroprevalence, particularly spikes during periods of increased transmission, are important to contextualize vaccine effectiveness data as the susceptibility to infection of the U.S. population changes. Funding This work was supported by the 10.13039/100000030Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.

Estimated SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence trends and relationship to reported case prevalence from a repeated, cross-sectional study in the 50 states and the District of Columbia, United States-October 25, 2020-February 26, 2022.

Background: Sero-surveillance of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can reveal trends and differences in subgroups and capture undetected or unreported infections that are not included in case-based surveillance systems. Methods: Cross-sectional, convenience samples of remnant sera from clinical laboratories from 51 U.S. jurisdictions were assayed for infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 antibodies biweekly from October 25, 2020, to July 11, 2021, and monthly from September 6, 2021, to February 26, 2022. Test results were analyzed for trends in infection-induced, nucleocapsid-protein seroprevalence using mixed effects models that adjusted for demographic variables and assay type. Findings: Analyses of 1,469,792 serum specimens revealed U.S. infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence increased from 8.0% (95% confidence interval (CI): 7.9%-8.1%) in November 2020 to 58.2% (CI: 57.4%-58.9%) in February 2022. The U.S. ratio of the change in estimated seroprevalence to the change in reported case prevalence was 2.8 (CI: 2.8-2.9) during winter 2020-2021, 2.3 (CI: 2.0-2.5) during summer 2021, and 3.1 (CI: 3.0-3.3) during winter 2021-2022. Change in seroprevalence to change in case prevalence ratios ranged from 2.6 (CI: 2.3-2.8) to 3.5 (CI: 3.3-3.7) by region in winter 2021-2022. Interpretation: Ratios of the change in seroprevalence to the change in case prevalence suggest a high proportion of infections were not detected by case-based surveillance during periods of increased transmission. The largest increases in the seroprevalence to case prevalence ratios coincided with the spread of the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant and with increased accessibility of home testing. Ratios varied by region and season with the highest ratios in the midwestern and southern United States during winter 2021-2022. Our results demonstrate that reported case counts did not fully capture differing underlying infection rates and demonstrate the value of sero-surveillance in understanding the full burden of infection. Levels of infection-induced antibody seroprevalence, particularly spikes during periods of increased transmission, are important to contextualize vaccine effectiveness data as the susceptibility to infection of the U.S. population changes. Funding: This work was supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.

Association of Trends in Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Seroprevalence and State-Issued Nonpharmaceutical Interventions: United States, 1 August 2020 to 30 March 2021.

BACKGROUND: We assess if state-issued nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) are associated with reduced rates of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection as measured through anti-nucleocapsid (anti-N) seroprevalence, a proxy for cumulative prior infection that distinguishes seropositivity from vaccination. METHODS: Monthly anti-N seroprevalence during 1 August 2020 to 30 March 2021 was estimated using a nationwide blood donor serosurvey. Using multivariable logistic regression models, we measured the association of seropositivity and state-issued, county-specific NPIs for mask mandates, gathering bans, and bar closures. RESULTS: Compared with individuals living in a county with all three NPIs in place, the odds of having anti-N antibodies were 2.2 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.0-2.3) times higher for people living in a county that did not have any of the 3 NPIs, 1.6 (95% CI: 1.5-1.7) times higher for people living in a county that only had a mask mandate and gathering ban policy, and 1.4 (95% CI: 1.3-1.5) times higher for people living in a county that had only a mask mandate. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with studies assessing NPIs relative to COVID-19 incidence and mortality, the presence of NPIs were associated with lower SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence indicating lower rates of cumulative infections. Multiple NPIs are likely more effective than single NPIs.

Analysis of Serological Surveys of Antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in the United States to Estimate Parameters Needed for Transmission Modeling and to Evaluate and Improve the Accuracy of Predictions

Seroprevalence studies can estimate proportions of the population that have been infected or vaccinated, including infections that were not reported because of the lack of symptoms or testing. Based on information from studies in the United States from mid-summer 2020 through the end of 2021, we describe proportions of the population with antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 as functions of age and time. Slices through these surfaces at arbitrary times provide initial and target conditions for simulation modeling. They also provide the information needed to calculate age-specific forces of infection, attack rates, and – together with contact rates – age-specific probabilities of infection on contact between susceptible and infectious people. We modified the familiar Susceptible-Exposed-Infectious-Removed (SEIR) model to include features of the biology of COVID-19 that might affect transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and stratified by age and location. We consulted the primary literature or subject matter experts for contact rates and other parameter values. Using time-varying Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker assessments of US state and DC efforts to mitigate the pandemic and compliance with non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) from a YouGov survey fielded in the US during 2020, we estimate that the efficacy of social-distancing when possible and mask-wearing otherwise at reducing susceptibility or infectiousness was 31% during the fall of 2020. Initialized from seroprevalence among people having commercial laboratory tests for purposes other than SARS-CoV-2 infection assessments on 7 September 2020, our age- and location-stratified SEIR population model reproduces seroprevalence among members of the same population on 25 December 2020 quite well. Introducing vaccination mid-December 2020, first of healthcare and other essential workers, followed by older adults, people who were otherwise immunocompromised, and then progressively younger people, our metapopulation model reproduces seroprevalence among blood donors on 4 April 2021 less well, but we believe that the discrepancy is due to vaccinations being under-reported or blood donors being disproportionately vaccinated, if not both. As experimenting with reliable transmission models is the best way to assess the indirect effects of mitigation measures, we determined the impact of vaccination, conditional on NPIs. Results indicate that, during this period, vaccination substantially reduced infections, hospitalizations and deaths. This manuscript was submitted as part of a theme issue on “Modelling COVID-19 and Preparedness for Future Pandemics.”

SARS-CoV-2 Convalescent Sera Binding and Neutralizing Antibody Concentrations Compared with COVID-19 Vaccine Efficacy Estimates against Symptomatic Infection.

Previous COVID-19 vaccine efficacy (VE) studies have estimated neutralizing and binding antibody concentrations that correlate with protection from symptomatic infection; how these estimates compare to those generated in response to SARS-CoV-2 infection is unclear. Here, we assessed quantitative neutralizing and binding antibody concentrations using standardized SARS-CoV-2 assays on 3,067 serum specimens collected during 27 July 2020 to 27 August 2020 from COVID-19-unvaccinated persons with detectable anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Neutralizing and binding antibody concentrations were severalfold lower in the unvaccinated study population compared to published concentrations at 28 days postvaccination. In this convenience sample, ~88% of neutralizing and ~63 to 86% of binding antibody concentrations met or exceeded concentrations associated with 70% COVID-19 VE against symptomatic infection; ~30% of neutralizing and 1 to 14% of binding antibody concentrations met or exceeded concentrations associated with 90% COVID-19 VE. Our study not only supports observations of infection-induced immunity and current recommendations for vaccination postinfection to maximize protection against COVID-19, but also provides a large data set of pre-COVID-19 vaccination anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody concentrations that will serve as an important comparator in the current setting of vaccine-induced and hybrid immunity. As new SARS-CoV-2 variants emerge and displace circulating virus strains, we recommend that standardized binding antibody assays that include spike protein-based antigens be utilized to estimate antibody concentrations correlated with protection from COVID-19. These estimates will be helpful in informing public health guidance, such as the need for additional COVID-19 vaccine booster doses to prevent symptomatic infection. IMPORTANCE Although COVID-19 vaccine efficacy (VE) studies have estimated antibody concentrations that correlate with protection from COVID-19, how these estimates compare to those generated in response to SARS-CoV-2 infection is unclear. We assessed quantitative neutralizing and binding antibody concentrations using standardized assays on serum specimens collected from COVID-19-unvaccinated persons with detectable antibodies. We found that most unvaccinated persons with qualitative antibody evidence of prior infection had quantitative antibody concentrations that met or exceeded concentrations associated with 70% VE against COVID-19. However, only a small proportion had antibody concentrations that met or exceeded concentrations associated with 90% VE, suggesting that persons with prior COVID-19 would benefit from vaccination to maximize protective antibody concentrations against COVID-19.

Social Vulnerability and Rurality Associated With Higher Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Infection-Induced Seroprevalence: A Nationwide Blood Donor Study-United States, July 2020-June 2021.

BACKGROUND: Most studies on health disparities during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic focused on reported cases and deaths, which are influenced by testing availability and access to care. This study aimed to examine severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody seroprevalence in the United States and its associations with race/ethnicity, rurality, and social vulnerability over time. METHODS: This repeated cross-sectional study used data from blood donations in 50 states and Washington, DC, from July 2020 through June 2021. Donor zip codes were matched to counties and linked with Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) and urban-rural classification. SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalences induced by infection and infection-vaccination combined were estimated. Association of infection-induced seropositivity with demographics, rurality, SVI, and its 4 themes were quantified using multivariate regression models. RESULTS: Weighted seroprevalence differed significantly by race/ethnicity and rurality, and increased with increasing social vulnerability. During the study period, infection-induced seroprevalence increased from 1.6% to 27.2% and 3.7% to 20.0% in rural and urban counties, respectively, while rural counties had lower combined infection- and vaccination-induced seroprevalence (80.0% vs 88.1%) in June 2021. Infection-induced seropositivity was associated with being Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, and living in rural or more socially vulnerable counties, after adjusting for demographic and geographic covariates. CONCLUSIONS: The findings demonstrated increasing SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in the United States across all geographic, demographic, and social sectors. The study illustrated disparities by race-ethnicity, rurality, and social vulnerability. The findings identified areas for targeted vaccination strategies and can inform efforts to reduce inequities and prepare for future outbreaks.

Seroprevalence of Infection-Induced SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies - United States, September 2021-February 2022.

In December 2021, the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, became predominant in the United States. Subsequently, national COVID-19 case rates peaked at their highest recorded levels.* Traditional methods of disease surveillance do not capture all COVID-19 cases because some are asymptomatic, not diagnosed, or not reported; therefore, the proportion of the population with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (i.e., seroprevalence) can improve understanding of population-level incidence of COVID-19. This report uses data from CDC's national commercial laboratory seroprevalence study and the 2018 American Community Survey to examine U.S. trends in infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence during September 2021-February 2022, by age group.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Seroprevalence and Reported Coronavirus Disease 2019 Cases in US Children, August 2020-May 2021.

BACKGROUND: Case-based surveillance of pediatric coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases underestimates the prevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections among children and adolescents. Our objectives were to estimate monthly SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence and calculate ratios of SARS-CoV-2 infections to reported COVID-19 cases among children and adolescents in 8 US states. METHODS: Using data from the Nationwide Commercial Laboratory Seroprevalence Survey, we estimated monthly SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence among children aged 0-17 years from August 2020 through May 2021. We calculated and compared cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection extrapolated from population-standardized seroprevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2, cumulative COVID-19 case reports since March 2020, and infection-to-case ratios among persons of all ages and children aged 0-17 years for each state. RESULTS: Of 41 583 residual serum specimens tested, children aged 0-4, 5-11, and 12-17 years accounted for 1619 (3.9%), 10 507 (25.3%), and 29 457 (70.8%), respectively. Median SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence among children increased from 8% (range, 6%-20%) in August 2020 to 37% (range, 26%-44%) in May 2021. Estimated ratios of SARS-CoV-2 infections to reported COVID-19 cases in May 2021 ranged by state from 4.7-8.9 among children and adolescents to 2.2-3.9 for all ages combined. CONCLUSIONS: Through May 2021 in selected states, the majority of children with serum specimens included in serosurveys did not have evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Case-based surveillance underestimated the number of children infected with SARS-CoV-2 more than among all ages. Continued monitoring of pediatric SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence should inform prevention and vaccination strategies.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Seroprevalence and Reported Coronavirus Disease 2019 Cases in US Children, August 2020–May 2021

Background Case-based surveillance of pediatric coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases underestimates the prevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections among children and adolescents. Our objectives were to estimate monthly SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence and calculate ratios of SARS-CoV-2 infections to reported COVID-19 cases among children and adolescents in 8 US states. Methods Using data from the Nationwide Commercial Laboratory Seroprevalence Survey, we estimated monthly SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence among children aged 0–17 years from August 2020 through May 2021. We calculated and compared cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection extrapolated from population-standardized seroprevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2, cumulative COVID-19 case reports since March 2020, and infection-to-case ratios among persons of all ages and children aged 0–17 years for each state. Results Of 41 583 residual serum specimens tested, children aged 0–4, 5–11, and 12–17 years accounted for 1619 (3.9%), 10 507 (25.3%), and 29 457 (70.8%), respectively. Median SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence among children increased from 8% (range, 6%–20%) in August 2020 to 37% (range, 26%–44%) in May 2021. Estimated ratios of SARS-CoV-2 infections to reported COVID-19 cases in May 2021 ranged by state from 4.7–8.9 among children and adolescents to 2.2–3.9 for all ages combined. Conclusions Through May 2021 in selected states, the majority of children with serum specimens included in serosurveys did not have evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Case-based surveillance underestimated the number of children infected with SARS-CoV-2 more than among all ages. Continued monitoring of pediatric SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence should inform prevention and vaccination strategies. We estimated monthly pediatric SARS-CoV-2 infections from antibody seroprevalence compared to reported COVID-19 cases among children in 8 US states. As of May 2021, estimated numbers of children infected were 5 times higher than reported pediatric COVID-19 cases in included states.

Hospitalizations for COVID-19 Among US People Experiencing Incarceration or Homelessness.

Importance: People experiencing incarceration (PEI) and people experiencing homelessness (PEH) have an increased risk of COVID-19 exposure from congregate living, but data on their hospitalization course compared with that of the general population are limited. Objective: To compare COVID-19 hospitalizations for PEI and PEH with hospitalizations among the general population. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional analysis used data from the Premier Healthcare Database on 3415 PEI and 9434 PEH who were evaluated in the emergency department or were hospitalized in more than 800 US hospitals for COVID-19 from April 1, 2020, to June 30, 2021. Exposures: Incarceration or homelessness. Main Outcomes and Measures: Hospitalization proportions were calculated. and outcomes (intensive care unit admission, invasive mechanical ventilation [IMV], mortality, length of stay, and readmissions) among PEI and PEH were compared with outcomes for all patients with COVID-19 (not PEI or PEH). Multivariable regression was used to adjust for potential confounders. Results: In total, 3415 PEI (2952 men [86.4%]; mean [SD] age, 50.8 [15.7] years) and 9434 PEH (6776 men [71.8%]; mean [SD] age, 50.1 [14.5] years) were evaluated in the emergency department for COVID-19 and were hospitalized more often (2170 of 3415 [63.5%] PEI; 6088 of 9434 [64.5%] PEH) than the general population (624 470 of 1 257 250 [49.7%]) (P < .001). Both PEI and PEH hospitalized for COVID-19 were more likely to be younger, male, and non-Hispanic Black than the general population. Hospitalized PEI had a higher frequency of IMV (410 [18.9%]; adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.16; 95% CI, 1.04-1.30) and mortality (308 [14.2%]; aRR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.11-1.47) than the general population (IMV, 88 897 [14.2%]; mortality, 84 725 [13.6%]). Hospitalized PEH had a lower frequency of IMV (606 [10.0%]; aRR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.58-0.70) and mortality (330 [5.4%]; aRR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.47-0.59) than the general population. Both PEI and PEH had longer mean (SD) lengths of stay (PEI, 9 [10] days; PEH, 11 [26] days) and a higher frequency of readmission (PEI, 128 [5.9%]; PEH, 519 [8.5%]) than the general population (mean [SD] length of stay, 8 [10] days; readmission, 28 493 [4.6%]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, a higher frequency of COVID-19 hospitalizations for PEI and PEH underscored the importance of adhering to recommended prevention measures. Expanding medical respite may reduce hospitalizations in these disproportionately affected populations.

Disaggregating Data to Measure Racial Disparities in COVID-19 Outcomes and Guide Community Response - Hawaii, March 1, 2020-February 28, 2021.

Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander populations have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19 (1-3). Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, and Asian populations vary in language; cultural practices; and social, economic, and environmental experiences,† which can affect health outcomes (4).§ However, data from these populations are often aggregated in analyses. Although data aggregation is often used as an approach to increase sample size and statistical power when analyzing data from smaller population groups, it can limit the understanding of disparities among diverse Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, and Asian subpopulations¶ (4-7). To assess disparities in COVID-19 outcomes among Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, and Asian populations, a disaggregated, descriptive analysis, informed by recommendations from these communities,** was performed using race data from 21,005 COVID-19 cases and 449 COVID-19-associated deaths reported to the Hawaii State Department of Health (HDOH) during March 1, 2020-February 28, 2021.†† In Hawaii, COVID-19 incidence and mortality rates per 100,000 population were 1,477 and 32, respectively during this period. In analyses with race categories that were not mutually exclusive, including persons of one race alone or in combination with one or more races, Pacific Islander persons, who account for 5% of Hawaii's population, represented 22% of COVID-19 cases and deaths (COVID-19 incidence of 7,070 and mortality rate of 150). Native Hawaiian persons experienced an incidence of 1,181 and a mortality rate of 15. Among subcategories of Asian populations, the highest incidences were experienced by Filipino persons (1,247) and Vietnamese persons (1,200). Disaggregating Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, and Asian race data can aid in identifying racial disparities among specific subpopulations and highlights the importance of partnering with communities to develop culturally responsive outreach teams§§ and tailored public health interventions and vaccination campaigns to more effectively address health disparities.

Mental Health and Substance Use Among Adults with Disabilities During the COVID-19 Pandemic - United States, February-March 2021.

Adults with disabilities, a group including >25% of U.S. adults (1), experience higher levels of mental health and substance use conditions and lower treatment rates than do adults without disabilities* (2,3). Survey data collected during April-September 2020 revealed elevated adverse mental health symptoms among adults with disabilities (4) compared with the general adult population (5). Despite disproportionate risk for infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, and COVID-19-associated hospitalization and mortality among some adults with disabilities (6), information about mental health and substance use in this population during the pandemic is limited. To identify factors associated with adverse mental health symptoms and substance use among adults with disabilities, the COVID-19 Outbreak Public Evaluation (COPE) Initiative† administered nonprobability-based Internet surveys to 5,256 U.S. adults during February-March 2021 (response rate = 62.1%). Among 5,119 respondents who completed a two-item disability screener, nearly one third (1,648; 32.2%) screened as adults with disabilities. These adults more frequently experienced symptoms of anxiety or depression (56.6% versus 28.7%, respectively), new or increased substance use (38.8% versus 17.5%), and suicidal ideation (30.6% versus 8.3%) than did adults without disabilities. Among all adults who had received a diagnosis of mental health or substance use conditions, adults with disabilities more frequently (42.6% versus 35.3%; p <0.001) reported that the pandemic made it harder for them to access related care or medication. Enhanced mental health and substance use screening among adults with disabilities and improved access to medical services are critical during public health emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Prevalence in Homeless Shelters - Four U.S. Cities, March 27-April 15, 2020.

In the United States, approximately 1.4 million persons access emergency shelter or transitional housing each year (1). These settings can pose risks for communicable disease spread. In late March and early April 2020, public health teams responded to clusters (two or more cases in the preceding 2 weeks) of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in residents and staff members from five homeless shelters in Boston, Massachusetts (one shelter); San Francisco, California (one); and Seattle, Washington (three). The investigations were performed in coordination with academic partners, health care providers, and homeless service providers. Investigations included reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction testing at commercial and public health laboratories for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, over approximately 1-2 weeks for residents and staff members at the five shelters. During the same period, the team in Seattle, Washington, also tested residents and staff members at 12 shelters where a single case in each had been identified. In Atlanta, Georgia, a team proactively tested residents and staff members at two shelters with no known COVID-19 cases in the preceding 2 weeks. In each city, the objective was to test all shelter residents and staff members at each assessed facility, irrespective of symptoms. Persons who tested positive were transported to hospitals or predesignated community isolation areas.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 Infection, 22 US States and DC, January 1-October 1, 2020.

We examined disparities in cumulative incidence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 by race/ethnicity, age, and sex in the United States during January 1-October 1, 2020. Hispanic/Latino and non-Hispanic Black, American Indian/Alaskan Native, and Native Hawaiian/other Pacific Islander persons had a substantially higher incidence of infection than non-Hispanic White persons.

Rapid Spread of SARS-CoV-2 in a State Prison After Introduction by Newly Transferred Incarcerated Persons - Wisconsin, August 14-October 22, 2020.

SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, can spread rapidly in prisons and can be introduced by staff members and newly transferred incarcerated persons (1,2). On September 28, 2020, the Wisconsin Department of Health Services (DHS) contacted CDC to report a COVID-19 outbreak in a state prison (prison A). During October 6-20, a CDC team investigated the outbreak, which began with 12 cases detected from specimens collected during August 17-24 from incarcerated persons housed within the same unit, 10 of whom were transferred together on August 13 and under quarantine following prison intake procedures (intake quarantine). Potentially exposed persons within the unit began a 14-day group quarantine on August 25. However, quarantine was not restarted after quarantined persons were potentially exposed to incarcerated persons with COVID-19 who were moved to the unit. During the subsequent 8 weeks (August 14-October 22), 869 (79.4%) of 1,095 incarcerated persons and 69 (22.6%) of 305 staff members at prison A received positive test results for SARS-CoV-2. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) of specimens from 172 cases among incarcerated persons showed that all clustered in the same lineage; this finding, along with others, demonstrated that facility spread originated with the transferred cohort. To effectively implement a cohorted quarantine, which is a harm reduction strategy for correctional settings with limited space, CDC's interim guidance recommendation is to serial test cohorts, restarting the 14-day quarantine period when a new case is identified (3). Implementing more effective intake quarantine procedures and available mitigation measures, including vaccination, among incarcerated persons is important to controlling transmission in prisons. Understanding and addressing the challenges faced by correctional facilities to implement medical isolation and quarantine can help reduce and prevent outbreaks.