Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
JMIR Form Res ; 6(11): e38425, 2022 Nov 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2141394

ABSTRACT

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.

2.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 9(4): ofac101, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1774409

ABSTRACT

Background: We examined differences in mortality among coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases in the first, second, and third waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of COVID-19 cases in Fulton County, Georgia, USA, reported to a public health surveillance from March 2020 through February 2021. We estimated case-fatality rates (CFR) by wave and used Cox proportional hazards random-effects models in each wave, with random effects at individual and long-term-care-facility level, to determine risk factors associated with rates of mortality. Results: Of 75 289 confirmed cases, 4490 (6%) were diagnosed in wave 1 (CFR 31 deaths/100 000 person days [pd]), 24 293 (32%) in wave 2 (CFR 7 deaths/100 000 pd), and 46 506 (62%) in wave 3 (CFR 9 deaths/100 000 pd). Compared with females, males were more likely to die in each wave: wave 1 (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-1.8), wave 2 (aHR 1.5, 95% CI, 1.2-1.8), and wave 3 (aHR 1.7, 95% CI, 1.5-2.0). Compared with non-Hispanic whites, non-Hispanic blacks were more likely to die in each wave: wave 1 (aHR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1-1.8), wave 2 (aHR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2-1.9), and wave 3 (aHR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.4-2.0). Cases with any disability, chronic renal disease, and cardiovascular disease were more likely to die in each wave compared with those without these comorbidities. Conclusions: Our study found gender and racial/ethnic disparities in COVID-19 mortality and certain comorbidities associated with COVID-19 mortality. These factors have persisted throughout the COVID-19 pandemic waves, despite improvements in diagnosis and treatment.

3.
Open forum infectious diseases ; 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1733092

ABSTRACT

Background We examined differences in mortality among COVID-19 cases in the first, second and third waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods A retrospective cohort study of COVID-19 cases in Fulton County, Georgia, USA, reported to a public health surveillance from March 2020 through February 2021. We estimated case fatality rates (CFR) by wave and used Cox proportional hazards random effects models in each wave, with random effects at individual and long-term-care-facility level, to determine risk factors associated with rates of mortality. Results Of 75,289 confirmed cases, 4,490 (6%) were diagnosed in wave one (CFR 31 deaths/100,000 person days [pd]), 24,293 (32%) in wave two (CFR 7 deaths/100,000 pd), and 46,506 (62%) in wave three (CFR 9 deaths/100,000 pd). Compared to females, males were more likely to die in each wave: Wave one (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2–1.8), wave two (aHR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2–1.8), and wave three (aHR 1.7, 95% CI 1.5–2.0). Compared to non-Hispanic Whites, non-Hispanic Blacks were more likely to die in each wave: Wave one (aHR 1.4, 95% CI 1.1–1.8), wave two (aHR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2–1.9), and wave three (aHR 1.7, 95% CI 1.4–2.0). Cases with any disability, chronic renal disease, and cardiovascular disease were more likely to die in each wave compared to those without these comorbidities. Conclusions Our study found gender and racial/ethnic disparities in COVID-19 mortality, and certain comorbidities associated with COVID-19 mortality. These factors have persisted throughout the COVID-19 pandemic waves, despite improvements in diagnosis and treatment.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL