Increases in drug overdose deaths in Norway and the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Little international comparative work exists describing pandemic-related spikes in overdose and related implications for drug and public health policy. We compared increases in overdose deaths during the pandemic in Norway and the United States, two countries in the top 10 for per-capita overdose mortality, yet with very different approaches to the pandemic, healthcare and drug policy. METHODS: We examined monthly overdoses in 2020 versus baseline rates (the monthly average across 2017-2019). We compared excess overdose mortality to shifts in human mobility and social interaction, measured using cellphone-based mobility data, an indicator of the societal response to the pandemic. RESULTS: Both the US and Norway saw large magnitude exacerbations in overdose mortality during the pandemic-related lockdowns, reaching 46.8% and 57.0% above baseline, respectively. Maximum increases occurred 2-3 months after peak reductions in mobility, suggesting lagged mechanisms. While overdose mortality returned to baseline relatively quickly in Norway, rates remained elevated in the US to the end of 2020. CONCLUSIONS: Spikes in overdose mortality in both contexts may relate to disruptions in healthcare access and the drug supply becoming more potent. Norway's quicker return to baseline may reflect more robust access to harm reduction and addiction-related healthcare services. Nevertheless, it is notable that even in Norway - with universal access to high-quality services, low COVID-19 rates, and a highly effective public health infrastructure - a greater than 50% spike in overdose deaths was still seen at the onset of lockdown measures. This may have important implications for future pandemic and disaster planning.

Substance use policy and practice in the COVID-19 pandemic: Learning from early pandemic responses through internationally comparative field data.

The COVID-19 pandemic has created an unprecedented natural experiment in drug policy, treatment delivery, and harm reduction strategies by exposing wide variation in public health infrastructures and social safety nets around the world. Using qualitative data including ethnographic methods, questionnaires, and semi-structured interviews with people who use drugs (PWUD) and Delphi-method with experts from field sites spanning 13 different countries, this paper compares national responses to substance use during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Field data was collected by the Substance Use x COVID-19 (SU x COVID) Data Collaborative, an international network of social scientists, public health scientists, and community health practitioners convened to identify and contextualise health service delivery models and social protections that influence the health and wellbeing of PWUD during COVID-19. Findings suggest that countries with stronger social welfare systems pre-COVID introduced durable interventions targeting structural drivers of health. Countries with fragmented social service infrastructures implemented temporary initiatives for PWUD led by non-governmental organisations. The paper summarises the most successful early pandemic responses seen across countries and ends by calling for greater systemic investments in social protections for PWUD, diversion away from criminal-legal systems toward health interventions, and integrated harm reduction, treatment and recovery supports for PWUD.

Quantifying the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on gender equality on health, social, and economic indicators: a comprehensive review of data from March, 2020, to September, 2021.

BACKGROUND: Gender is emerging as a significant factor in the social, economic, and health effects of COVID-19. However, most existing studies have focused on its direct impact on health. Here, we aimed to explore the indirect effects of COVID-19 on gender disparities globally. METHODS: We reviewed publicly available datasets with information on indicators related to vaccine hesitancy and uptake, health care services, economic and work-related concerns, education, and safety at home and in the community. We used mixed effects regression, Gaussian process regression, and bootstrapping to synthesise all data sources. We accounted for uncertainty in the underlying data and modelling process. We then used mixed effects logistic regression to explore gender gaps globally and by region. FINDINGS: Between March, 2020, and September, 2021, women were more likely to report employment loss (26·0% [95% uncertainty interval 23·8-28·8, by September, 2021) than men (20·4% [18·2-22·9], by September, 2021), as well as forgoing work to care for others (ratio of women to men: 1·8 by March, 2020, and 2·4 by September, 2021). Women and girls were 1·21 times (1·20-1·21) more likely than men and boys to report dropping out of school for reasons other than school closures. Women were also 1·23 (1·22-1·23) times more likely than men to report that gender-based violence had increased during the pandemic. By September 2021, women and men did not differ significantly in vaccine hesitancy or uptake. INTERPRETATION: The most significant gender gaps identified in our study show intensified levels of pre-existing widespread inequalities between women and men during the COVID-19 pandemic. Political and social leaders should prioritise policies that enable and encourage women to participate in the labour force and continue their education, thereby equipping and enabling them with greater ability to overcome the barriers they face. FUNDING: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

An Ethnographic Assessment of COVID-19‒Related Changes to the Risk Environment for People Who Use Drugs in Tijuana, Mexico.

Objectives. To characterize the effects of the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic on the risk environment of people who use drugs (PWUD) in Tijuana, Mexico. Methods. We used intensive participant-observation ethnography among street-based PWUD and key informants, such as frontline physicians and harm reductionists. Results. PWUD described an unprecedented cessation of police violence and extortion during the initial pandemic-related lockdown, though this quickly reversed and police violence worsened. Government-provided housing and medical treatment with methadone were temporarily provided to PWUD in a dedicated clinic, yet only for PWUD with COVID-19 symptoms. Concurrently, non‒COVID-19‒related hospital care became virtually inaccessible, and many PWUD died of untreated, chronic illnesses, such as hepatitis C, and soft-tissue infections. Border closures, decreases in social interaction, and reduced drug and sex tourism resulted in worsening food, income, and housing insecurity for many PWUD. By contrast, potent illicit drugs remained easily accessible in open-air drug markets. Conclusions. The pandemic exacerbated health risks for PWUD but also offered profound glimpses of beneficial structural changes. Efforts are needed in Tijuana and elsewhere to institutionalize positive pandemic-related shifts and ameliorate novel harms for PWUD. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(S2):S199-S202. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.306796).

Clozapine Use in a Movement Disorder Clinic.

BACKGROUND: Clozapine is an effective antipsychotic for Parkinson's disease (PD) that does not worsen motor function and can improve tremor. It is approved for PD psychosis in Europe and Australia. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to report on the use of clozapine in a movement disorder clinic. METHODS: We report on patients monitored during the COVID-19 pandemic in clinic over a 7-month period. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients were seen, of whom 50 had PD. Thirty-one were treated for psychosis, 18 for refractory tremor and 1 for levodopa dyskinesias. The remainder had psychotic symptoms with dementia with Lewy bodies (n = 2) or other movement disorders. Four had clozapine discontinued because of sedation and 1 for agranulocytosis. Three had clozapine temporarily halted because of granulocytopenia but were rechallenged successfully. CONCLUSIONS: When comparing clozapine use in this clinic as compared with others, we deduce that clozapine is likely significantly underutilized in the United States.

Parental education and inequalities in child mortality: a global systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The educational attainment of parents, particularly mothers, has been associated with lower levels of child mortality, yet there is no consensus on the magnitude of this relationship globally. We aimed to estimate the total reductions in under-5 mortality that are associated with increased maternal and paternal education, during distinct age intervals. METHODS: This study is a comprehensive global systematic review and meta-analysis of all existing studies of the effects of parental education on neonatal, infant, and under-5 child mortality, combined with primary analyses of Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) data. The literature search of seven databases (CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) was done between Jan 23 and Feb 8, 2019, and updated on Jan 7, 2021, with no language or publication date restrictions. Teams of independent reviewers assessed each record for its inclusion of individual-level data on parental education and child mortality and excluded articles on the basis of study design and availability of relevant statistics. Full-text screening was done in 15 languages. Data extracted from these studies were combined with primary microdata from the DHS for meta-analyses relating maternal or paternal education with mortality at six age intervals: 0-27 days, 1-11 months, 1-4 years, 0-4 years, 0-11 months, and 1 month to 4 years. Novel mixed-effects meta-regression models were implemented to address heterogeneity in referent and exposure measures among the studies and to adjust for study-level covariates (wealth or income, partner's years of schooling, and sex of the child). This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020141731). FINDINGS: The systematic review returned 5339 unique records, yielding 186 included studies after exclusions. DHS data were compiled from 114 unique surveys, capturing 3 112 474 livebirths. Data extracted from the systematic review were synthesized together with primary DHS data, for meta-analysis on a total of 300 studies from 92 countries. Both increased maternal and paternal education showed a dose-response relationship linked to reduced under-5 mortality, with maternal education emerging as a stronger predictor. We observed a reduction in under-5 mortality of 31·0% (95% CI 29·0-32·6) for children born to mothers with 12 years of education (ie, completed secondary education) and 17·3% (15·0-18·8) for children born to fathers with 12 years of education, compared with those born to a parent with no education. We also showed that a single additional year of schooling was, on average, associated with a reduction in under-5 mortality of 3·04% (2·82-3·23) for maternal education and 1·57% (1·35-1·72) for paternal education. The association between higher parental education and lower child mortality was significant for both parents at all ages studied and was largest after the first month of life. The meta-analysis framework incorporated uncertainty associated with each individual effect size into the model fitting process, in an effort to decrease the risk of bias introduced by study design and quality. INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, this study is the first effort to systematically quantify the transgenerational importance of education for child survival at the global level. The results showed that lower maternal and paternal education are both risk factors for child mortality, even after controlling for other markers of family socioeconomic status. This study provides robust evidence for universal quality education as a mechanism to achieve the Sustainable Development Goal target 3.2 of reducing neonatal and child mortality. FUNDING: Research Council of Norway, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and Rockefeller Foundation-Boston University Commission on Social Determinants, Data, and Decision Making (3-D Commission).

Far From a "White Problem": Responding to the Overdose Crisis as a Racial Justice Issue

The United States is in the midst of an overdose crisis of tremendous proportions. Even before overdose death rates spiked sharply during the COVID19 pandemic, the United States had twice the mortality rate of the second highest country, and 20 times the global average.1 Deaths from overdose have increased year after year-nearly uninterrupted-for the past four decades. During the pandemic, the United States crossed the grim milestone of 100 000 overdose deaths in a 12-month period. Although overdose deaths have increased for all racial/ethnic and socioeconomic groups, these increases have not been felt equally among all Americans. Overdose and addiction have long predominated among low-income communities,3 and during the "first wave" of the overdose crisis in the early 2000s, deaths were concentrated in low-income White communities.4However, the racial/ethnic profile of the US overdose crisis has changed sharply.5 In 2020, the overdose death rates of Black individuals overtook those of White individuals and now exceed them by nearly 20%. American Indians/Alaska Natives now have the highest overdose mortality rates of any group-30% higher than for White individuals. Far from a "White problem," overdose prevention is now a key racial justice issue. In this issue of AJPH, an analysis of a national data set by Pro et al. (p. S66) considers the individual- and state-level factors that help explain racial disparities in addiction treatment. Economic and community distress-including low education, high unemployment, and housing vacancy-had the strongest negative relationship to treatment success across all racial/ethnic groups. Black and American Indian/Alaska Native patients disproportionately presented for treatment in mid- to high-distress communities. Black patients were also much more likely to experience poor treatment outcomes. In addition, patients in states that have not expanded Medicaid were less likely to experience successful treatment.

The radically unequal distribution of Covid-19 vaccinations: a predictable yet avoidable symptom of the fundamental causes of inequality

The Covid-19 pandemic—and its social and economic fallout—has thrust social and health-related inequalities into the spotlight. The pandemic, and our response to it, has induced new inequalities both within and between nations. However, now that highly efficacious vaccines are available, one might reasonably presume that we have in our hands the tools to address pandemic-associated inequalities. Nevertheless, two prominent social science theories, fundamental cause theory and diffusion of innovation theory suggest otherwise. Together, these theories predict that better resourced individuals and countries will jockey to harness the greatest vaccine benefit for themselves, leaving large populations of disadvantaged people unprotected. While many other life-saving prevention measures have been distributed unequally in ways these theories would predict, the COVID-19 vaccines represent a different kind of case. As the disease is so highly infectious and because mutations lead to new variants so rapidly, any inequality-generating process that leaves disadvantaged individuals and countries behind acts to put everyone—rich and poor—at risk. It is time that we ensure the equitable distribution of this life-saving benefit. As the fundamental cause and diffusion of innovation theories help illuminate processes that regularly produce inequities, we turn to them to reason about the rollout of the COVID-19 vaccines. Specifically, employ them to suggest countermoves that may be necessary to avoid an irrational and inequitable vaccine rollout that ends up unfavorably affecting all people.

'Non-physiological' Disorders

The article presents the discussion on doctors with long-haul Covid symptoms complaining about poor treatment by the colleagues. Topics include examination tools discriminating between physiologic and non-physiologic symptoms and signs;and other task-specific movement disorders being a form of focal dystonia and not treatable with psychotherapy.

International COVID-19 mortality forecast visualization: covidcompare.io.

COVID-19 mortality forecasting models provide critical information about the trajectory of the pandemic, which is used by policymakers and public health officials to guide decision-making. However, thousands of published COVID-19 mortality forecasts now exist, many with their own unique methods, assumptions, format, and visualization. As a result, it is difficult to compare models and understand under which circumstances a model performs best. Here, we describe the construction and usability of covidcompare.io, a web tool built to compare numerous forecasts and offer insight into how each has performed over the course of the pandemic. From its launch in December 2020 to June 2021, we have seen 4600 unique visitors from 85 countries. A study conducted with public health professionals showed high usability overall as formally assessed using a Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire. We find that covidcompare.io is an impactful tool for the comparison of international COVID-19 mortality forecasting models.

Growing racial/ethnic disparities in overdose mortality before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in California.

As overdose mortality is spiking during the COVID-19 pandemic, few race/ethnicity-stratified trends are available. This is of particular concern as overdose mortality was increasing most rapidly in Black and Latinx communities prior to the pandemic. We used quarterly, age-standardized overdose mortality rates from California to assess trends by race/ethnicity and drug involved over time. Rates from 2020 Q2-Q4 were compared to expected trends based on ARIMA forecasting models fit using data from 2006 to 2020 Q1. In 2020 Q2-Q4 overdose death rates rose by 49.8% from 2019, exceeding an expected increase of 11.5% (95%CI: 0.5%-22.5%). Rates significantly exceeded forecasted trends for all racial/ethnic groups. Black/African American individuals saw an increase of 52.4% from 2019, compared to 42.6% among their White counterparts. The absolute Black-White overdose mortality gap rose from 0.7 higher per 100,000 for Black individuals in 2018 to 4.8 in 2019, and further increased to 9.9 during the pandemic. Black overdose mortality in California was therefore 34.3% higher than that of White individuals in 2020 Q2-Q4. This reflects growing methamphetamine-, cocaine-, and fentanyl-involved deaths among Black communities. Growing racial disparities in overdose must be understood in the context of the unequal social and economic fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic, during which time Black communities have been subjected to the dual burden of disproportionate COVID-19 deaths and rising overdose mortality. Increased investments are required to ameliorate racial/ethnic disparities in substance use treatment, harm reduction, and the structural drivers of overdose, as part of the COVID-19 response and post-pandemic recovery efforts.

COVID-19 and the Nordic Paradox: a call to measure the inequality reducing benefits of welfare systems in the wake of the pandemic.

The Nordic Paradox of inequality describes how the Nordic countries have puzzlingly high levels of relative health inequalities compared to other nations, despite extensive universal welfare systems and progressive tax regimes that redistribute income. However, the veracity and origins of this paradox have been contested across decades of literature, as many scholars argue it relates to measurement issues or historical coincidences. Disentangling between potential explanations is crucial to determine if widespread adoption of the Nordic model could represent a sufficient panacea for lowering health inequalities, or if new approaches must be pioneered. As newfound challenges to welfare systems continue to emerge, evidence describing the benefits of welfare systems is becoming ever more important. Preliminary evidence indicates that the COVID-19 pandemic is drastically exacerbating social inequalities in health across the world, via direct and indirect effects. We argue that the COVID-19 pandemic therefore represents a unique opportunity to measure the value of welfare systems in insulating their populations from rising social inequalities in health. However, COVID-19 has also created new measurement challenges and interrupted data collection mechanisms. Robust academic studies will therefore be needed-drawing on novel data collection methods-to measure increasing social inequalities in health in a timely fashion. In order to assure that policies implemented to reduce inequalities can be guided by accurate and updated information, policymakers, academics, and the international community must work together to ensure streamlined data collection, reporting, analysis, and evidence-based decision-making. In this way, the pandemic may offer the opportunity to finally clarify some of the mechanisms underpinning the Nordic Paradox, and potentially more firmly establish the merits of the Nordic model as a global example for reducing social inequalities in health.

Racial/Ethnic, Social, and Geographic Trends in Overdose-Associated Cardiac Arrests Observed by US Emergency Medical Services During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Provisional records from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) through July 2020 indicate that overdose deaths spiked during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, yet more recent trends are not available, and the data are not disaggregated by month of occurrence, race/ethnicity, or other social categories. In contrast, data from emergency medical services (EMS) provide a source of information nearly in real time that may be useful for rapid and more granular surveillance of overdose mortality. Objective: To describe racial/ethnic, social, and geographic trends in EMS-observed overdose-associated cardiac arrests during the COVID-19 pandemic through December 2020 and assess the concordance with CDC-reported provisional total overdose mortality through May 2020. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included more than 11 000 EMS agencies in 49 US states that participate in the National EMS Information System and 83.7 million EMS activations in which patient contact was made. Exposures: Year and month of occurrence of overdose-associated cardiac arrest; patient race/ethnicity; census region and division; county-level urbanicity; and zip code-level racial/ethnic composition, poverty, and educational attainment. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overdose-associated cardiac arrests per 100 000 EMS activations with patient contact in 2020 were compared with a baseline of values from 2018 and 2019. Aggregate numbers of overdose-associated cardiac arrests and percentage increases were compared with provisional total mortality in CDC records from rolling 12-month windows with end months spanning January 2018 through July 2020. Results: Among 33.4 million EMS activations in 2020, 16.8 million (50.2%) involved female patients and 16.3 million (48.8%) involved non-Hispanic White individuals. Overdose-associated cardiac arrests were elevated by 42.1% nationally in 2020 (42.3 per 100 000 EMS activations at baseline vs 60.1 per 100 000 EMS activations in 2020). The highest percentage increases were seen among Latinx individuals (49.7%; 38.8 per 100 000 activations at baseline vs 58.1 per 100 000 activations in 2020) and Black or African American individuals (50.3%; 21.5 per 100 000 activations at baseline vs 32.3 per 100 000 activations in 2020), people living in more impoverished neighborhoods (46.4%; 42.0 per 100 000 activations at baseline vs 61.5 per 100 000 activations in 2020), and the Pacific states (63.8%; 33.1 per 100 000 activations at baseline vs 54.2 per 100 000 activations in 2020), despite lower rates at baseline for these groups. The EMS records were available 6 to 12 months ahead of CDC mortality figures and showed a high concordance (r = 0.98) for months in which both data sets were available. If the historical association between EMS-observed and total overdose mortality holds true, an expected total of approximately 90 632 (95% CI, 85 737-95 525) overdose deaths may eventually be reported by the CDC for 2020. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, records from EMS agencies provided an effective manner to rapidly surveil shifts in US overdose mortality. Unprecedented overdose deaths during the pandemic necessitate investments in overdose prevention as an essential aspect of the COVID-19 response and postpandemic recovery. This is particularly urgent for more socioeconomically disadvantaged and racial/ethnic minority communities subjected to the compounded burden of disproportionate COVID-19 mortality and rising overdose deaths.

Predictive performance of international COVID-19 mortality forecasting models.

Forecasts and alternative scenarios of COVID-19 mortality have been critical inputs for pandemic response efforts, and decision-makers need information about predictive performance. We screen n = 386 public COVID-19 forecasting models, identifying n = 7 that are global in scope and provide public, date-versioned forecasts. We examine their predictive performance for mortality by weeks of extrapolation, world region, and estimation month. We additionally assess prediction of the timing of peak daily mortality. Globally, models released in October show a median absolute percent error (MAPE) of 7 to 13% at six weeks, reflecting surprisingly good performance despite the complexities of modelling human behavioural responses and government interventions. Median absolute error for peak timing increased from 8 days at one week of forecasting to 29 days at eight weeks and is similar for first and subsequent peaks. The framework and public codebase ( https://github.com/pyliu47/covidcompare ) can be used to compare predictions and evaluate predictive performance going forward.

COVID-19 and the Drug Overdose Crisis: Uncovering the Deadliest Months in the United States, January‒July 2020.

Objectives. To determine the magnitude of increases in monthly drug-related overdose mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. Methods. We leveraged provisional records from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention provided as rolling 12-month sums, which are helpful for smoothing, yet may mask pandemic-related spikes in overdose mortality. We cross-referenced these rolling aggregates with previous monthly data to estimate monthly drug-related overdose mortality for January through July 2020. We quantified historical errors stemming from reporting delays and estimated empirically derived 95% prediction intervals (PIs). Results. We found that 9192 (95% PI = 8988, 9397) people died from drug overdose in May 2020-making it the deadliest month on record-representing a 57.7% (95% PI = 54.2%, 61.2%) increase over May 2019. Most states saw large-magnitude increases, with the highest in West Virginia, Kentucky, and Tennessee. We observed low concordance between rolling 12-month aggregates and monthly pandemic-related shocks. Conclusions. Unprecedented increases in overdose mortality occurred during the pandemic, highlighting the value of presenting monthly values alongside smoothed aggregates for detecting shocks. Public Health Implications. Drastic exacerbations of the US overdose crisis warrant renewed investments in overdose surveillance and prevention during the pandemic response and postpandemic recovery efforts.

Cognitive Sinks & the Bermuda Triangle of fMRI Cognitive Studies

FMRI was obtained at baseline on each subject, along with the Neurostat psychological/intelligence battery. These findings have implications for understanding brain physiology, as well as for the interpretation of fMRI. 12 13 EN COMMENTARY Cognitive Sinks & the Bermuda Triangle of fMRI Cognitive Studies JOSEPH H. FRIEDMAN, MD (POSTER PRESENTATION, 2021 WORLD CONGRESS OF SPECIAL HONORED GUESTS: INVITED, HELD VIRTUALLY DUE TO COVID-19.). [Extracted from the article] Copyright of Rhode Island Medical Journal is the property of Rhode Island Medical Society and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)