A State Profile of Disparities in Telehealth Utilization Among Medicare Beneficiaries: An Intersection Between Race/Ethnicity, Rurality, and Chronic Conditions-Arkansas, 2019.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic brought about renewed interest and investment in telehealth, while also highlighting persistent health disparities in the Southern states. Little is known about the characteristics of those utilizing telehealth services in Arkansas, a rural Southern state. We sought to compare the characteristics of telehealth utilizers and nonutilizers among Medicare beneficiaries in Arkansas before the COVID-19 public health emergency to provide a baseline for future research investigating disparities in telehealth utilization. Methods: We used Arkansas Medicare beneficiary data (2018-2019) to model telehealth use. We included interactions to assess how the association between the number of chronic conditions and telehealth was moderated by race/ethnicity and rurality, adjusted for covariates. Results: Overall telehealth utilization in 2019 was low (n = 4,463; 1.1%). The adjusted odds of utilizing telehealth was higher for non-Hispanic Black/African Americans (vs. white, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.17-1.52), rural beneficiaries (aOR = 1.99, 95% CI = 1.79-2.21), and those with more chronic conditions (aOR = 1.23, 95% CI = 1.21-1.25). Race/ethnicity and rurality were significant moderators, such that the association between the number of chronic conditions and telehealth was strongest among white and among rural beneficiaries. Discussion: Among the 2019 Arkansas Medicare beneficiaries, having more chronic conditions was most strongly associated with telehealth use among white and rural individuals, while the effect was not as pronounced for Black/African American and urban individuals. Our findings suggest that advances in telehealth are not benefiting all Americans equally, with aging minoritized communities continuing to engage with more strained and underresourced health systems. Future research should investigate how upstream factors such as structural racism perpetuate poor health outcomes.

Surveillance of COVID-19 outbreaks in prisons in the US South: The role of economic distress in the communities surrounding prison facilities.

Introduction: The US South is the epicenter of the epidemic of mass incarceration. Prisons have experienced substantial challenges in preventing COVID-19. Incarcerated individuals and prison staff are at a high risk for infection due to minimal available preventive measures. Prisons are not closed systems and many staff come from communities in close proximity to the facility. Characteristics of the communities immediately surrounding prisons are an overlooked but critical factor to better understand the role prisons play in pandemics. Methods: We used facility-level COVID-19 data from the COVID Prison Project to identify the number of unique outbreaks between May 2019 and May 2020. We used a county-level composite indicator of economic distress (DCI score) to identify the environment surrounding each prison (2015-2019). We modeled the number of outbreaks to DCI scores using negative binomial regression, adjusting for race/ethnicity (African American and Latino/Hispanic), age (65 and older), and rurality level. Results: Our sample included 570 prisons in 368 counties across 13 Southern states. We found that score was positively and significantly associated with prison COVID-19 outbreaks (aRR, 1.012; p < 0.0001), and rurality was potentially a stronger surrogate measure of economic distress (aRR, 1.35; p, 0.02). Economic stability is a key precursor to physical health. Poorer communities have been disproportionately impacted by the pandemic, and we found that prisons located in these communities were more susceptible to recurring outbreaks. Prison-based disease prevention interventions should consider the impact that the outside world has on the health of incarcerated individuals.

“Everything has changed”: detention officer roles and recreation time changes due to COVID-19 policies at a Southwest County Jail

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic responses in jails have forced detention officers to adjust how they approach the confinement and care of individuals while they are incarcerated. One aspect of incarceration affected was detention officers’ roles. The aims of this research project were to determine how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the general duties of detention officers at a Southwest County Jail. Detention officers were recruited via email to participate in an online questionnaire from October to December 2020. Participants answered Likert scale and open-ended questions regarding how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected their job duties. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis were used to identify themes and patterns in the responses.ResultsAmong 24 detention officers, 87% indicated agreement that the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly changed the duties of detention officers at CCDF. The most discussed change was the introduction of a 14-day quarantine process for newly incarcerated individuals. The 14-day quarantine increased the workload of detention officers.ConclusionThe COVID-19 pandemic responses in jail may have unintended negative consequences for the job duties of detention officers. Current and future pandemic response strategies in jails would benefit from taking staff perspectives into consideration as they are directly impacted by the COVID-19 response strategies put into place. Policy implications are discussed.

Deployment of Health Equity Strike Teams to Address COVID-19 Vaccine Disparities in Arkansas, 2021.

Minority populations have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, and disparities have been noted in vaccine uptake. In the state of Arkansas, health equity strike teams (HESTs) were deployed to address vaccine disparities. A total of 13 470 vaccinations were administered by HESTs to 10 047 eligible people at 45 events. Among these individuals, 5645 (56.2%) were African American, 2547 (25.3%) were White, and 1068 (10.6%) were Hispanic. Vaccination efforts must specifically target populations that have been disproportionately affected by the pandemic. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(1):29-33. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306564).

US trends in mask wearing during the COVID-19 pandemic depend on rurality.

INTRODUCTION: Face masks are widely recommended as a COVID-19 prevention strategy. State mask mandates have generally reduced the spread of the disease, but decisions to wear a mask depend on many factors. Recent increases in case rates in rural areas following initial outbreaks in more densely populated areas highlight the need to focus on prevention and education. Messaging about disease risk has faced challenges in rural areas in the past. While surges in cases within some communities are likely an impetus for behavior change, rising case rates likely explain only part of mask-wearing decisions. The current study examined the relationship between county-level indicators of rurality and mask wearing in the USA. METHODS: National data from the New York Times' COVID-19 cross-sectional mask survey was used to identify the percentage of a county's residents who reported always/frequently wearing a mask (2-14 July 2020). The New York Times' COVID-19 data repository was used to calculate county-level daily case rates for the 2 weeks preceding the mask survey (15 June - 1 July 2020), and defined county rurality using the Index of Relative Rurality (n=3103 counties). Multivariate linear regression was used to predict mask wearing across levels of rurality. The model was adjusted for daily case rates and other relevant county-level confounders, including county-level indicators of age, race/ethnicity, gender, political partisanship, income inequality, and whether each county was subject to a statewide mask mandate. RESULTS: Large clusters of counties with high rurality and low mask wearing were observed in the Midwest, upper Midwest, and mountainous West. Holding daily case rates and other county characteristics constant, the predicted probability of wearing a mask decreased significantly as counties became more rural (β=-0.560; p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: Upticks in COVID-19 cases and deaths in rural areas are expected to continue, and localized outbreaks will likely occur indefinitely. The present findings highlight the need to better understand the mechanisms underlying perceptions of COVID-19 risk in rural areas. Dissemination of scientifically correct and consistent information is critical during national emergencies.

Multilevel modeling of county-level excessive alcohol use, rurality, and COVID-19 case fatality rates in the US.

OBJECTIVE: Reports of disparities in COVID-19 mortality rates are emerging in the public health literature as the pandemic continues to unfold. Alcohol misuse varies across the US and is related to poorer health and comorbidities that likely affect the severity of COVID-19 infection. High levels of pre-pandemic alcohol misuse in some counties may have set the stage for worse COVID-19 outcomes. Furthermore, this relationship may depend on how rural a county is, as access to healthcare in rural communities has lagged behind more urban areas. The objective of this study was to test for associations between county-level COVID-19 mortality, pre-pandemic county-level excessive drinking, and county rurality. METHOD: We used national COVID-19 data from the New York Times to calculate county-level case fatality rates (n = 3,039 counties and county equivalents; October 1 -December 31, 2020) and other external county-level data sources for indicators of rurality and health. We used beta regression to model case fatality rates, adjusted for several county-level population characteristics. We included a multilevel component to our model and defined state as a random intercept. Our focal predictor was a single variable representing nine possible combinations of low/mid/high alcohol misuse and low/mid/high rurality. RESULTS: The median county-level COVID-19 case fatality rate was 1.57%. Compared to counties with low alcohol misuse and low rurality (referent), counties with high levels of alcohol and mid (ß = -0.17, p = 0.008) or high levels of rurality (ß = -0.24, p<0.001) demonstrated significantly lower case fatality rates. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the intersecting roles of county-level alcohol consumption, rurality, and COVID-19 mortality.

COVID-19 vaccination rates vary by community vulnerability: A county-level analysis.

We used the COVID-19 Community Vulnerability Index and 7 theme scores to assess associations between vulnerability and county-level COVID-19 vaccination (n = 2415 counties) through May 25th, 2021. When comparing vaccination rates among quintiles of CCVI scores, Theme 3 (housing type, transportation, household composition, and disability) was associated with the largest disparity, with the least vulnerable counties (Q1) having 33% higher rates of vaccination among individuals aged 18+ (53.5% vs 40.2%) compared to counties with the highest vulnerability (Q5). Using generalized linear models with binomial distributions and log links, we found that a 10-point increase in the CCVI index, socioeconomic vulnerability, housing type and composition, and epidemiological factors were associated with at least a 1.0 percentage point decline in county-level vaccination. The association between community vulnerability and lower vaccination rates suggests the need for continued efforts for equitable COVID-19 vaccination across marginalized communities.