Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
J Public Health Manag Pract ; 28(6): 624-630, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2287696

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the costs to implement public health department (PHD)-run COVID-19 vaccination clinics. DESIGN: Retrospectively reported data on COVID-19 vaccination clinic characteristics and resources used during a high-demand day in March 2021. These resources were combined with national average wages, supply costs, and facility costs to estimate the operational cost and start-up cost of clinics. SETTING: Thirty-four PHD-run COVID-19 vaccination clinics across 8 states and 1 metropolitan statistical area. PARTICIPANTS: Clinic managers at 34 PHD-run COVID-19 vaccination clinics. INTERVENTION: Large-scale COVID-19 vaccination clinics were implemented by public health agencies as part of the pandemic response. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURED: Operational cost per day, operational cost per vaccination, start-up cost per clinic. RESULTS: Median operational cost per day for a clinic was $10 314 (range, $637-$95 163) and median cost per vaccination was $38 (range, $9-$206). There was a large range of operational costs across clinics. Clinics used an average of 99 total staff hours per 100 patients vaccinated. Median start-up cost per clinic was $15 348 (range, $1 409-$165 190). CONCLUSIONS: Results show that clinics require a large range of resources to meet the high throughput needs of the COVID-19 pandemic response. Estimating the costs of PHD-run vaccination clinics for the pandemic response is essential for ensuring that resources are available for clinic success. If clinics are not adequately supported, they may stop functioning, which would slow the pandemic response if no other setting or approach is possible.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Humans , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , United States/epidemiology , Vaccination
2.
Prev Chronic Dis ; 20: E06, 2023 02 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2234410

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, has caused more than 100.2 million infections and more than 1 million deaths in the US as of November 2022, yet information on the economic burden associated with post-COVID-19 conditions is lacking. We estimated the possible economic burden associated with post-COVID-19 conditions by comparing direct medical costs among patients younger than 65 years with and without COVID-19 in the postacute period. METHODS: Commercially insured children and adults with a COVID-19 diagnosis (cases) during April-August 2020 were matched to those without COVID-19 (controls) on a 1:4 ratio. Direct medical costs represented 1-, 3-, and 6-month total expenditures per person starting 31 days after the diagnosis date. We used a 2-part model to evaluate cost differences among individuals with and without COVID-19, adjusted for patient characteristics. RESULTS: Costs were higher among cases compared with controls. Direct medical costs among child cases were 1.82, 1.72, and 1.70 times higher than controls over 1, 3, and 6 months, respectively. Direct medical costs among adult cases were 1.69, 1.54, and 1.46 times higher than costs among controls over 1, 3, and 6 months, respectively. Relative differences in costs were highest among adults aged 50 to 64 years. In a subset of people with COVID-19, costs were higher among hospitalized cases compared with nonhospitalized cases. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest a considerable economic burden of COVID-19 even after the resolution of acute illness, highlighting the importance of prevention and mitigation measures to reduce the economic impact of COVID-19 on the US health care system.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing , COVID-19 , Adult , Humans , Child , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Health Expenditures , Insurance, Health , Health Care Costs
3.
JAMA Netw Open ; 6(1): e2253582, 2023 01 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2219604

ABSTRACT

Importance: COVID-19 vaccination rates in the US remain below optimal levels. Patient preferences for different attributes of vaccine products and the vaccination experience can be important in determining vaccine uptake decisions. Objective: To assess preferences for attributes of adult and pediatric COVID-19 vaccination among US adults. Design, Setting, and Participants: An online survey of a national panel of 1040 US adults was conducted in May and June 2021. A discrete choice analysis was used to measure the relative value of each attribute in the decision to choose a COVID-19 vaccination option for adults or children. Six attributes were used to described hypothetical vaccination options: vaccine effectiveness, mild side effects, rare adverse events, number of doses, time required for vaccination, and regulatory approval. Respondents chose between hypothetical vaccination profiles or no vaccination. Additional survey questions asked about vaccination beliefs, COVID-19 illness experience, COVID-19 risk factors, vaccination status, and opinions about the risk of COVID-19. Exposures: Respondents chose which vaccine profile they would prefer to receive for themselves (or no vaccination). Respondents then considered an identical set of profiles for a hypothetical child aged 0 to 17 years. Main Outcomes and Measures: Relative value of vaccination-related attributes were estimated using Bayesian logit regression. Preference profiles for subgroups were estimated using latent class analyses. Results: A total of 1040 adults (610 [59%] female; 379 participants [36%] with an age of 55 years and older years) responded to the survey. When asked about vaccination choices for themselves, participants indicated that vaccine effectiveness (95% vs 60%) was a significant attribute (ß, 9.59 [95% CrI, 9.20-10.00] vs ß, 0.41 [95% CrI, 0-0.80]). Respondents also preferred fewer rare adverse events (ß, 6.35 [95% CrI, 5.74-6.86), fewer mild side effects (ß, 5.49; 95% CrI, 5.12-5.87), 1 dose (ß, 5.41; 95% CrI, 5.04-5.78), FDA approval (ß, 6.01; 95% CrI, 5.64-6.41), and shorter waiting times (ß, 5.67; 95% CrI, 4.87-6.48). Results were very similar when framing the question as adult or child vaccination, with slightly stronger preference for fewer rare adverse events for children. Latent class analysis revealed 4 groups of respondents: (1) individuals sensitive to safety and regulatory status, (2) individuals sensitive to convenience, (3) individuals who carefully considered all attributes in making their choices, and (4) individuals who rejected the vaccine. Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study of US adults, the identification of 4 distinct preference groups provides new information to guide communications to support vaccine decision making. In particular, the group that prioritize convenience (less time required for vaccination and fewer doses) may present an opportunity to create actionable strategies to increase vaccination uptake for both adult and pediatric populations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Adult , Humans , Child , Female , Male , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Bayes Theorem , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Vaccination
4.
Vaccine ; 41(3): 750-755, 2023 01 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2150796

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Public health department (PHD) led COVID-19 vaccination clinics can be a critical component of pandemic response as they facilitate high volume of vaccination. However, few patient-time analyses examining patient throughput at mass vaccination clinics with unique COVID-19 vaccination challenges have been published. METHODS: During April and May of 2021, 521 patients in 23 COVID-19 vaccination sites counties of 6 states were followed to measure the time spent from entry to vaccination. The total time was summarized and tabulated by clinic characteristics. A multivariate linear regression analysis was conducted to evaluate the association between vaccination clinic settings and patient waiting times in the clinic. RESULTS: The average time a patient spent in the clinic from entry to vaccination was 9 min 5 s (range: 02:00-23:39). Longer patient flow times were observed in clinics with higher numbers of doses administered, 6 or fewer vaccinators, walk-in patients accepted, dedicated services for people with disabilities, and drive-through clinics. The multivariate linear regression showed that longer patient waiting times were significantly associated with the number of vaccine doses administered, dedicated services for people with disabilities, the availability of more than one brand of vaccine, and rurality. CONCLUSIONS: Given the standardized procedures outlined by immunization guidelines, reducing the wait time is critical in lowering the patient flow time by relieving the bottleneck effect in the clinic. Our study suggests enhancing the efficiency of PHD-led vaccination clinics by preparing vaccinators to provide vaccines with proper and timely support such as training or delivering necessary supplies and paperwork to the vaccinators. In addition, patient wait time can be spent answering questions about vaccination or reviewing educational materials on other public health services.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Humans , United States , COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19/prevention & control , Vaccination , Mass Vaccination
5.
Drug Alcohol Depend ; 232: 109297, 2022 Mar 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1630513

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Sociodemographic factors and chronic conditions associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among persons with substance use disorder (PWSUD) are not well understood. We identified risk factors associated with COVID-19 among PWSUD with hospital visits. METHODS: Using the Premier Healthcare Database Special COVID-19 Release, we conducted a case-control study using ICD-10-CM codes to identify PWSUD aged 12 years and older with hospital visits for any reason during April-December 2020. Multivariable logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) to identify factors associated with COVID-19 diagnosis among PWSUD (age, sex, race/ethnicity, U.S. Census Region, urban/rural classification, insurance payor type, comorbidities, and substance use disorder [SUD] type), and then stratified by SUD type. RESULTS: From April-December 2020, 18,298 (1.3%) of 1,429,154 persons with SUD in the database had a COVID-19 diagnosis. Among PWSUD, opioid use disorder (OUD; aOR = 1.24, 95% CI = 1.18-1.32), alcohol use disorder (AUD; aOR = 1.16, 95% CI = 1.11-1.22), cocaine or other stimulant use disorder (COUD; aOR = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.22-1.34), and multiple SUDs (aOR = 1.20, 95% CI = 1.15-1.26) were associated with higher odds of COVID-19, as were comorbidities such as chronic lower respiratory disease (aOR = 1.32, 95% CI = 1.26-1.37), chronic hepatitis (aOR = 1.45, 95% CI = 1.34-1.57), and diabetes (aOR = 1.78, 95% CI = 1.71-1.86). CONCLUSIONS: Among a sample of PWSUD, OUD, AUD, COUD, multiple SUDs, and associated comorbidities were associated with COVID-19 diagnosis. Integration of COVID-related care, care of other comorbidities, and SUD treatment may benefit PWSUD. Future studies are needed to better understand COVID-19 prevention in this population and to reduce disparities among subpopulations at increased risk.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Opioid-Related Disorders , Substance-Related Disorders , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Case-Control Studies , Child , Hospitals , Humans , Opioid-Related Disorders/epidemiology , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Substance-Related Disorders/epidemiology , United States/epidemiology
6.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(6): 212-216, 2021 02 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1079855

ABSTRACT

SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is transmitted predominantly by respiratory droplets generated when infected persons cough, sneeze, spit, sing, talk, or breathe. CDC recommends community use of face masks to prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2 (1). As of October 22, 2020, statewide mask mandates were in effect in 33 states and the District of Columbia (2). This study examined whether implementation of statewide mask mandates was associated with COVID-19-associated hospitalization growth rates among different age groups in 10 sites participating in the COVID-19-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET) in states that issued statewide mask mandates during March 1-October 17, 2020. Regression analysis demonstrated that weekly hospitalization growth rates declined by 2.9 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.3-5.5) among adults aged 40-64 years during the first 2 weeks after implementing statewide mask mandates. After mask mandates had been implemented for ≥3 weeks, hospitalization growth rates declined by 5.5 percentage points among persons aged 18-39 years (95% CI = 0.6-10.4) and those aged 40-64 years (95% CI = 0.8-10.2). Statewide mask mandates might be associated with reductions in SARS-CoV-2 transmission and might contribute to reductions in COVID-19 hospitalization growth rates, compared with growth rates during <4 weeks before implementation of the mandate and the implementation week. Mask-wearing is a component of a multipronged strategy to decrease exposure to and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and reduce strain on the health care system, with likely direct effects on COVID-19 morbidity and associated mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Masks/statistics & numerical data , Public Health/legislation & jurisprudence , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Cohort Studies , Humans , Middle Aged , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL