Oral Antiviral Therapy Utilization Among Adults with Recent COVID-19 in the United States.

BACKGROUND: This is the first study, to our knowledge, to assess uptake of oral antiviral treatment (OAV) for COVID-19 in the US and assess whether it is reaching recommended groups. OBJECTIVE: The study evaluated uptake among persons of all ages, with emphasis on utilization among individuals ages 65 + who comprise 75% of all COVID-19 deaths. To maximize public health outreach and benefit, we sought to understand reasons for use and non-use of OAV among individuals 65 + with at least mild COVID-19 symptoms. DESIGN: Data were collected from phase 3.5 of the US Census Household Pulse Survey, during three 2022 time periods: June 1-13, June 29-July 11, and July 27-August 8. PARTICIPANTS: Respondents (n = 12,299) were ages 18 + with active or resolved COVID-19 within the last 4 weeks of their survey participation. MAIN MEASURE(S): Comparisons of demographic variables were made for OAV uptake using the chi-square test of independence. A logistic regression was conducted to identify characteristics of participants independently associated with receipt of an OAV. Comparisons were made with chi-square testing, between those ages 65 + with at least mild symptoms who endorsed one of a number of specific reasons for not using OAV. KEY RESULTS: Utilization was low-17.9% of all respondents, 20.5% of respondents ages 50-64, and 33.9% of respondents 65 years and older received guideline-concordant treatment for their infection. Receipt did not differ by income or sex. The average response across the three phases was 5.4%. Most common reasons for not receiving treatment included having minimal symptoms, not thinking that they needed treatment, and not receiving a recommendation from their healthcare provider. CONCLUSIONS: A minority of increased-risk US residents have accessed early therapy for COVID-19 despite being made available without cost. Responses suggest that efforts to improve patient and provider knowledge could improve utilization to mitigate future COVID-19 hospitalizations.

Inequities in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Vaccination Rates Among Adolescents in Massachusetts: A Cross-sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disproportionately affected more socioeconomically disadvantaged persons and areas. We sought to determine how certain sociodemographic factors were correlated to adolescents' COVID-19 vaccination rates in towns and cities ("communities") in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. METHODS: Data on COVID-19 vaccination rates were obtained over a 20-week period from 30 March 2021 to 10 August 2021. Communities' adolescent (ages 12-19) vaccination rates were compared across quintiles of community-level income, COVID-19 case rate, and proportion of non-Hispanic Black or Hispanic individuals. Other variables included population density and earlier COVID-19 vaccination rates of adolescents and adults, averaged from 30 March to 11 May to determine their effects on vaccination rates on 10 August. Linear and logistic regression was used to estimate individual effects of variables on adolescent vaccination rates. RESULTS: Higher median household income, lower proportion of Black or Hispanic individuals, higher early adolescent COVID-19 vaccination rates, and higher early adult COVID-19 vaccination rates were associated with higher later adolescent COVID-19 vaccination rates. Income per $10 000 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.01 [95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.01-1.02]), proportion of Hispanic individuals (aOR = 1.33 [95% CI: 1.13-1.56]), early adolescent COVID-19 vaccination rates (aOR = 5.28 [95% CI: 4.67-5.96]), and early adult COVID-19 vaccination rates (aOR = 2.31 [95% CI: 2.02-2.64]) were associated with higher adolescent COVID-19 vaccination on 10 August, whereas proportion of Black individuals approached significance (aOR = 1.26 [95% CI: .98-1.61]). CONCLUSIONS: Vaccination efforts for adolescents in Massachusetts should focus on boosting vaccination rates early in communities with the lowest incomes and greatest proportion of Hispanic individuals and consider targeting communities with a greater proportion of Black individuals.

Association of Remdesivir Treatment With Survival and Length of Hospital Stay Among US Veterans Hospitalized With COVID-19.

Importance: Randomized clinical trials have yielded conflicting results about the effects of remdesivir therapy on survival and length of hospital stay among people with COVID-19. Objective: To examine associations between remdesivir treatment and survival and length of hospital stay among people hospitalized with COVID-19 in routine care settings. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used data from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) to identify adult patients in 123 VHA hospitals who had a first hospitalization with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 from May 1 to October 8, 2020. Propensity score matching of patients initiating remdesivir treatment to control patients who had not initiated remdesivir treatment by the same hospital day was used to create the analytic cohort. Exposures: Remdesivir treatment. Main Outcomes and Measures: Time to death within 30 days of remdesivir treatment initiation (or corresponding hospital day for matched control individuals) and time to hospital discharge with time to death as a competing event. Associations between remdesivir treatment and these outcomes were assessed using Cox proportional hazards regression in the matched cohort. Results: The initial cohort included 5898 patients admitted to 123 hospitals, 2374 (40.3%) of whom received remdesivir treatment (2238 men [94.3%]; mean [SD] age, 67.8 [12.8] years) and 3524 (59.7%) of whom never received remdesivir treatment (3302 men [93.7%]; mean [SD] age, 67.0 [14.4] years). After propensity score matching, the analysis included 1172 remdesivir recipients and 1172 controls, for a final matched cohort of 2344 individuals. Remdesivir recipients and matched controls were similar with regard to age (mean [SD], 66.6 [14.2] years vs 67.5 [14.1] years), sex (1101 men [93.9%] vs 1101 men [93.9%]), dexamethasone use (559 [47.7%] vs 559 [47.7%]), admission to the intensive care unit (242 [20.7%] vs 234 [19.1%]), and mechanical ventilation use (69 [5.9%] vs 45 [3.8%]). Standardized differences were less than 10% for all measures. Remdesivir treatment was not associated with 30-day mortality (143 remdesivir recipients [12.2%] vs 124 controls [10.6%]; log rank P = .26; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.06; 95% CI, 0.83-1.36). Results were similar for people receiving vs not receiving dexamethasone at remdesivir initiation (dexamethasone recipients: adjusted HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.64-1.35; nonrecipients: adjusted HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.84-1.69). Remdesivir recipients had a longer median time to hospital discharge compared with matched controls (6 days [interquartile range, 4-12 days] vs 3 days [interquartile range, 1-7 days]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of US veterans hospitalized with COVID-19, remdesivir treatment was not associated with improved survival but was associated with longer hospital stays. Routine use of remdesivir may be associated with increased use of hospital beds while not being associated with improvements in survival.