COVID-19 pandemic impacts on mental health, burnout, and longevity in the workplace among healthcare workers: A mixed methods study.

To explore the mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare workers in Massachusetts and identify potential strategies to maintain the healthcare workforce we conducted a sequential exploratory mixed methods study. Fifty-two individuals completed interviews from April 22nd - September 7th, 2021; 209 individuals completed an online survey from February 17th - March 23rd, 2022. Interviews and surveys asked about the mental health impacts of working in healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic, burnout, longevity in the workplace, and strategies for reducing attrition. Interview and survey participants were predominantly White (56%; 73%, respectively), female (79%; 81%) and worked as physicians (37%; 34%). Interviewees indicated high stress and anxiety levels due to frequent exposure to patient deaths from COVID-19. Among survey respondents, 55% reported worse mental health than before the pandemic, 29% reported a new/worsening mental health condition for themselves or their family, 59% reported feeling burned out at least weekly, and 37% intended to leave healthcare in less than 5 years. To decrease attrition, respondents suggested higher salaries (91%), flexible schedules (90%), and increased support to care for patients (89%). Healthcare workers' experiences with death, feeling unvalued, and overworked resulted in unprecedented rates of burnout and intention to leave healthcare.

Condition-Dependent and Dynamic Impacts of Indoor Masking Policies for COVID-19 Mitigation: A Nationwide, Interrupted Time-Series Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness and sustainability of masking policies as a pandemic control measure remain uncertain. Our aim was to evaluate different masking policy types on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) incidence and to identify factors and conditions impacting effectiveness. METHODS: Nationwide, retrospective cohort study of US counties from 4/4/2020-28/6/2021. Policy impacts were estimated using interrupted time-series models with the masking policy change date (eg, recommended-to-required, no-recommendation-to-recommended, no-recommendation-to-required) modeled as the interruption. The primary outcome was change in SARS-CoV-2 incidence rate during the 12 weeks after the policy change; results were stratified by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) risk level. A secondary analysis was completed using adult vaccine availability as the policy change. RESULTS: In total, N = 2954 counties were included (2304 recommended-to-required, 535 no-recommendation-to-recommended, 115 no-recommendation-to-required). Overall, indoor mask mandates were associated with 1.96 fewer cases/100 000/week (cumulative reduction of 23.52/100 000 residents during the 12 weeks after policy change). Reductions were driven by communities with critical and extreme COVID-19 risk, where masking mandated policies were associated with an absolute reduction of 5 to 13.2 cases/100 000 residents/week (cumulative reduction of 60 to 158 cases/100 000 residents over 12 weeks). Impacts in low- and moderate-risk counties were minimal (<1 case/100 000 residents/week). After vaccine availability, mask mandates were not associated with significant reductions at any risk level. CONCLUSIONS: Masking policy had the greatest impact when COVID-19 risk was high and vaccine availability was low. When transmission risk decreases or vaccine availability increases, the impact was not significant regardless of mask policy type. Although often modeled as having a static impact, masking policy effectiveness may be dynamic and condition dependent.

Healthcare workers' perspectives on the COVID-19 vaccine and boosters for themselves, their patients, and their communities: a mixed methods study.

Aim: To examine experiences and attitudes of a diverse sample of clinical and non-clinical healthcare workers regarding COVID-19 vaccines and boosters for themselves, their patients, and their communities. Subject and methods: We conducted a sequential exploratory mixed methods study; 52 healthcare workers participated in qualitative interviews between April 22 and September 7, 2021, and 209 healthcare workers completed surveys between February 17 and March 23, 2022. Interviews and survey questions asked about personal attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination and boosters and experiences discussing vaccination with patients. Results: Participants were predominantly White (56% and 73%, respectively) and female (79% and 81%, respectively). Factors motivating healthcare workers to take the vaccine were the belief that vaccination would protect themselves, their families, patients, and communities. Healthcare workers were accepting of and had high receipt of the booster, though some had diminished belief in its effectiveness after becoming infected with SARS-CoV-2 after initial vaccination. Race related mistrust, misinformation related to vaccine safety, and concerns about vaccine effects during pregnancy were the most common barriers that providers encountered among their patients and communities. Conclusions: Healthcare workers' primary motivation to receive COVID-19 vaccines was the desire to protect themselves and others. Healthcare workers' perception was that concerns about safety and misinformation were more important barriers for their patients than themselves. Race-related medical mistrust amplified concerns about vaccine safety and hindered communication efforts.

Performance of three screening tools to predict COVID-19 positivity in emergency department patients.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 symptoms vary widely. This retrospective study assessed which of three clinical screening tools-a nursing triage screen (NTS), an ED review of systems (ROS) performed by physicians and physician assistants and a standardised ED attending (ie, consultant) physician COVID-19 probability assessment (PA)-best identified patients with COVID-19 on a subsequent reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) confirmation. METHODS: All patients admitted to Boston Medical Center from the ED between 27 April 2020 and 17 May 2020 were included. Sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated for each method. Logistic regression assessed each tool's performance. RESULTS: The attending physician PA had higher sensitivity (0.62, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.71) than the NTS (0.46, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.56) and higher specificity (0.76, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.80) than the NTS (0.71, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.75) and ED ROS (0.62, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.67). Categorisation as moderate or high probability on the ED physician PA was associated with the highest odds of having COVID-19 in regression analyses (adjusted OR=4.61, 95% CI 3.01 to 7.06). All methods had a low PPV (ranging from 0.26 for the ED ROS to 0.40 for the attending physician PA) and a similar NPV (0.84 for both the NTS and the ED ROS, and 0.89 for the attending physician PA). CONCLUSION: The ED attending PA had higher sensitivity and specificity than the other two methods, but none was accurate enough to replace a COVID-19 RT-PCR test in a clinical setting where transmission control is crucial. Therefore, we recommend universal COVID-19 testing prior to all admissions.

Projected Long-Term Impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic on Hepatitis C Outcomes in the United States: A Modeling Study.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic disrupted access to and uptake of hepatitis C virus (HCV) care services in the United States. It is unknown how substantially the pandemic will impact long-term HCV-related outcomes. METHODS: We used a microsimulation to estimate the 10-year impact of COVID-19 disruptions in healthcare delivery on HCV outcomes including identified infections, linkage to care, treatment initiation and completion, cirrhosis, and liver-related death. We modeled hypothetical scenarios consisting of an 18-month pandemic-related disruption in HCV care starting in March 2020 followed by varying returns to pre-pandemic rates of screening, linkage, and treatment through March 2030 and compared them to a counterfactual scenario in which there was no COVID-19 pandemic or disruptions in care. We also performed alternate scenario analyses in which the pandemic disruption lasted for 12 and 24 months. RESULTS: Compared to the "no pandemic" scenario, in the scenario in which there is no return to pre-pandemic levels of HCV care delivery, we estimate 1060 fewer identified cases, 21 additional cases of cirrhosis, and 16 additional liver-related deaths per 100 000 people. Only 3% of identified cases initiate treatment and <1% achieve sustained virologic response (SVR). Compared to "no pandemic," the best-case scenario in which an 18-month care disruption is followed by a return to pre-pandemic levels, we estimated a smaller proportion of infections identified and achieving SVR. CONCLUSIONS: A recommitment to the HCV epidemic in the United States that involves additional resources coupled with aggressive efforts to screen, link, and treat people with HCV is needed to overcome the COVID-19-related disruptions.

Lack of Association between Pandemic School Mode Policy and Pediatric Body Mass Index Percentile over Time.

During the 2020-2021 academic year, schools across the country were closed for prolonged periods. Prior research suggests that children tend to gain more weight during times of extended school closures, such as summer vacation; however, little is known about the impact of school learning mode on changes. Thus, the aim of this study was to measure the association between school mode (in-person, hybrid, remote) and pediatric body mass index (BMI) percentile increases over time. In this longitudinal, statewide retrospective cohort study in Massachusetts, we found that BMI percentile increased in elementary and middle school students in all learning modes, and that increases slowed but did not reverse following the statewide reopening. Body mass percentile increases were highest in elementary school aged children. Hispanic ethnicity and receipt of Medicaid insurance were also associated with increases. Additional research is needed to identify strategies to combat pediatric body mass percentile increases and to address disparities.

A pilot model of a public-private partnership for implementation of a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnostic testing program to facilitate a safe school reopening.

Objective: We developed an implementation plan to integrate diagnostic testing for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) into a public school system. Implementation barriers were identified and strategies were mapped to overcome them. Design: A COVID-19 diagnostic testing program leveraging a public-private partnership was developed for a public school system. Setting: A suburban school district and a local hospital during the 2020-2021 academic year. Methods: Using Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) constructs and evidenced-based implementation strategies, the program was designed as a "closed system" and was adapted based on stakeholder feedback. Implementation barriers and facilitators were identified and mapped to CFIR constructs to provide insights into factors influencing program adoption. Results: Preimplementation stages of engagement, feasibility, and readiness planning were completed. The program did not progress to implementation due to multiple factors, including changes in school leadership (inner setting and process-level constructs), improved access to outside testing, and lack of an existing paradigm for in-school testing (external constructs). Limited support from key stakeholders and opinion leaders was also a barrier (process-level construct). Conclusions: Although this locally initiated program did not progress beyond the preimplementation stage, the processes developed and barriers identified may be useful to inform planning efforts in other testing programs within public school systems. Future programs may consider incorporating multiplex diagnostic testing for influenza in addition to COVID-19. With relaxation of infection control measures, the prevalence of other respiratory viruses will increase. Actionable results will be needed to inform decisions about closures and quarantines.

Patients' Perspectives on Emergency Department COVID-19 Vaccination and Vaccination Messaging Through Randomized Vignettes.

OBJECTIVES: Emergency departments (EDs) could play an important role in the COVID-19 pandemic response by reaching patients who would otherwise not seek vaccination in the community. Prior to expanding COVID-19 vaccination to the acute care setting, we assessed ED patients' COVID-19 vaccine status, perspectives, and hypothetical receptivity to ED-based vaccination. METHODS: From January 11 through March 31, 2021, we conducted a multisite (Albany Medical Center, Boston Medical Center, Buffalo General Hospital, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, and Upstate Medical Center), cross-sectional survey of ED patients, with embedded randomization for participants to receive 1 of 4 vignette vaccination messages (simple opt-in message, recommendation by the hospital, community-oriented message, and acknowledgment of vaccine hesitancy). Main outcomes included COVID-19 vaccination status, prior intention to be vaccinated, and receptivity to randomized hypothetical vignette messages. RESULTS: Of 610 participants, 122 (20.0%) were vaccinated, 234 (38.4%) had prior intent to be vaccinated, 111 (18.2%) were unsure as to prior intent, and 143 (23.4%) had no prior intent to be vaccinated. Vaccine hesitancy (participants who were vaccine unsure or did not intend to receive the vaccine) was associated with the following: age <45 years, female, non-Hispanic Black, no primary health care, and no prior influenza vaccination. Overall, 364 of 565 (64.4%; 95% CI, 60.3%-68.4%) were willing to accept a hypothetical vaccination in the ED. Among participants with prior vaccine hesitancy, a simple opt-in message resulted in the highest acceptance rates to hypothetical vaccination (39.7%; 95% CI, 27.6%-52.8%). CONCLUSIONS: EDs have appropriate patient populations to initiate COVID-19 vaccination programs as a supplement to community efforts. A simple opt-in approach may offer the best messaging to reach vaccine-hesitant ED patients.

Racial equity in linkage to inpatient opioid use disorder treatment in patients that received emergency care.

OBJECTIVES: Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a national epidemic, and Black and Hispanic patients are less likely to receive treatment when compared to white patients. In this study, race was used as a proxy to assess potential effects of racism on the referral process for OUD treatment. Our primary aim was to examine whether Black or Hispanic patients experienced increased barriers to inpatient OUD detoxification (detox) placement at a community-integrated, substance use disorder support program based in an emergency department (ED). Our secondary aim was to determine if Black and Hispanic patients were more likely to have >3 referrals. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a large urban safety-net hospital and included patients seen in the ED from July 2018 to September 2019 with ICD-10 codes for an opioid-related visit and who sought placement to inpatient detox. A generalized linear mixed model controlling for multiple visits, age, sex, insurance, time, day of week, and time of year was used to assess the association between race/ethnicity and hypothesized barriers to placement. The proportion of patients with >3 visits for referral to inpatient detox was compared between Black and Hispanic patients and white patients using a chi-squared test. RESULTS: We identified 1733 encounters from 782 unique patients seeking connection to inpatient detox for OUD. Of the 1733 encounters, 45% were among Black and Hispanic patients. Hispanic and Black men had significantly lower odds of having a barrier to inpatient OUD detox than white men (OR = 0.734, 95% CI 0.542-0.995). No significant difference was found for Hispanic and Black women (OR = 1.212, 95% CI 0.705-2.082). More Black and Hispanic patients experienced >3 referrals to inpatient detox compared to white patients (19.2% vs 12.9%, p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests in the context of near-universal health insurance coverage, an ED-based OUD support program staffed by diverse community members can mitigate inequities in access to inpatient detox. However, the increased number of ED visits for OUD detox placement by Black and Hispanic patients suggests racial inequities in OUD treatment exist after linkage to care. Additional research should explore the causes, specifically structural and interpersonal racism, and determine solutions to address racial inequities in detox placement as well as maintenance in treatment programs.

The Science Behind Safe School Re-opening: Leveraging the Pillars of Infection Control to Support Safe Elementary and Secondary Education During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

There are limited tools for adapting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection control plans to school settings. We present an infection prevention model for optimizing safe re-opening for elementary and secondary schools during the global COVID-19 pandemic and review the current evidence behind various infection prevention interventions in school settings. The model is adapted from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention fundamental pillars for infection prevention and includes 4 categories of intervention: epidemiologic controls (town prevalence metrics, diagnostic testing, quarantine strategies), administrative controls (state vaccination policies, alternative school models, symptom screens, quarantine breaks), engineering/environmental controls (distancing, outdoor space, ventilation), and personal protective equipment (PPE)/hand hygiene (face coverings, hand sanitizing). The adapted infection control pillars model utilizes implementation science-informed considerations to maximize pragmatism and adherence by leveraging evidence-based strategies. It highlights the necessity of redundant infection prevention interventions, acknowledges the importance of community buy-in to achieve real-world effectiveness, and addresses tactics to overcome implementation barriers. Recommendations are grounded in the Dynamic Sustainability Framework and include suggestions to maintain infection prevention effectiveness over time to ensure ongoing safety.

A Test-to-Stay Modified Quarantine Program for COVID-19 in Schools.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Mandatory quarantine upon exposure to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) results in a substantial number of lost days of school. We hypothesized that implementation of a state-wide test-to-stay (TTS) program would allow more students to participate in in-person learning, and not cause additional clusters of COVID-19 cases due to in-school transmission. METHODS: For the 2020-2021 academic year, Massachusetts implemented an opt-in TTS program, in which students exposed to COVID-19 in school are tested each school day with a rapid antigen test. If negative, students may participate in school-related activities that day. Testing occurs daily for a duration of 7 calendar days after exposure. Here, we report the results from the first 13 weeks of the program. RESULTS: A total of 2298 schools signed up for TTS, and 504 167 individuals out of a total population of 860 457 consented. During the first 13 weeks with complete data, 1959 schools activated the program at least once for 102 373 individual, exposed students. Out of 328 271 tests performed, 2943 positive cases were identified (per person positivity rate, 2.9%, 95% confidence interval, 2.8-3.0). A minimum of 325 328 and a maximum of 497 150 days of in-person school were saved through participation in the program. CONCLUSIONS: Daily, rapid on-site antigen testing is a safe and feasible alternative to mandatory quarantine and can be used to maximize safe in-person learning time during the pandemic.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccine Impact on Rates of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Cases and Postvaccination Strain Sequences Among Health Care Workers at an Urban Academic Medical Center: A Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine trials and post-implementation data suggest that vaccination decreases infections. We examine vaccination's impact on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) case rates and viral diversity among health care workers (HCWs) during a high community prevalence period. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, HCW received 2 doses of BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273. We included confirmed cases among HCWs from 9 December 2020 to 23 February 2021. Weekly SARS-CoV-2 rates per 100,000 person-days and by time from first injection (1-14 and ≥15 days) were compared with surrounding community rates. Viral genomes were sequenced. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 cases occurred in 1.4% (96/7109) of HCWs given at least a first dose and 0.3% (17/5913) of HCWs given both vaccine doses. Adjusted rate ratios (95% confidence intervals) were 0.73 (.53-1.00) 1-14 days and 0.18 (.10-.32) ≥15 days from first dose. HCW ≥15 days from initial dose compared to 1-14 days were more often older (46 vs 38 years, P = .007), Latinx (10% vs 8%, P = .03), and asymptomatic (48% vs 11%, P = .0002). SARS-CoV-2 rates among HCWs fell below the surrounding community, an 18% vs 11% weekly decrease, respectively (P = .14). Comparison of 50 genomes from post-first dose cases did not indicate selection pressure toward known spike antibody escape mutations. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate an early positive impact of vaccines on SARS-CoV-2 case rates. Post-vaccination isolates did not show unusual genetic diversity or selection for mutations of concern.

Effectiveness of 3 Versus 6 ft of Physical Distancing for Controlling Spread of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Among Primary and Secondary Students and Staff: A Retrospective, Statewide Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: National and international guidelines differ about the optimal physical distancing between students for prevention of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission; studies directly comparing the impact of ≥3 versus ≥6 ft of physical distancing policies in school settings are lacking. Thus, our objective was to compare incident cases of SARS-CoV-2 in students and staff in Massachusetts public schools among districts with different physical distancing requirements. State guidance mandates masking for all school staff and for students in grades 2 and higher; the majority of districts required universal masking. METHODS: Community incidence rates of SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV-2 cases among students in grades K-12 and staff participating in-person learning, and district infection control plans were linked. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for students and staff members in traditional public school districts with ≥3 versus ≥6 ft of physical distancing were estimated using log-binomial regression; models adjusted for community incidence are also reported. RESULTS: Among 251 eligible school districts, 537 336 students and 99 390 staff attended in-person instruction during the 16-week study period, representing 6 400 175 student learning weeks and 1 342 574 staff learning weeks. Student case rates were similar in the 242 districts with ≥3 versus ≥6 ft of physical distancing between students (IRR, 0.891; 95% confidence interval, .594-1.335); results were similar after adjustment for community incidence (adjusted IRR, 0.904; .616-1.325). Cases among school staff in districts with ≥3 versus ≥6 ft of physical distancing were also similar (IRR, 1.015, 95% confidence interval, .754-1.365). CONCLUSIONS: Lower physical distancing requirements can be adopted in school settings with masking mandates without negatively affecting student or staff safety.

The impact of school opening model on SARS-CoV-2 community incidence and mortality.

The role that traditional and hybrid in-person schooling modes contribute to the community incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections relative to fully remote schooling is unknown. We conducted an event study using a retrospective nationwide cohort evaluating the effect of school mode on SARS-CoV-2 cases during the 12 weeks after school opening (July-September 2020, before the Delta variant was predominant), stratified by US Census region. After controlling for case rate trends before school start, state-level mitigation measures and community activity level, SARS-CoV-2 incidence rates were not statistically different in counties with in-person learning versus remote school modes in most regions of the United States. In the South, there was a significant and sustained increase in cases per week among counties that opened in a hybrid or traditional mode versus remote, with weekly effects ranging from 9.8 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.7-16.1) to 21.3 (95% CI = 9.9-32.7) additional cases per 100,000 persons, driven by increasing cases among 0-9 year olds and adults. Schools can reopen for in-person learning without substantially increasing community case rates of SARS-CoV-2; however, the impacts are variable. Additional studies are needed to elucidate the underlying reasons for the observed regional differences more fully.

Loop Drainage Is Noninferior to Traditional Incision and Drainage of Cutaneous Abscesses in the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: There is limited research on loop drainage (LD) compared to incision and drainage (I&D) for treatment of cutaneous abscesses. We investigated whether LD was noninferior to I&D for abscess resolution and whether there was any difference in repeat ED visits or complication rates between these techniques. METHODS: We performed a prospective randomized controlled trial, using a convenience sample at an urban academic emergency department (ED). Subjects over 18 years who presented for first-time management of an abscess were eligible. Patients requiring specialist drainage or hospital admission or had previous treatment for the abscess were excluded. Enrolled subjects were seen 2 weeks after treatment for blinded reevaluation of abscess resolution, and the electronic medical record was reviewed for return ED visits/abscess complications. RESULTS: Of 2,889 patients screened, 238 subjects consented and were randomized to LD or I&D. Abscess resolution was achieved in 53/65 (81.5%) of patients in the I&D arm, compared to 66/75 (88%) in the LD arm. Fewer patients in the LD group compared to the I&D group returned to the ED for abscess-related management during the following 14 days (37.3% vs 67.1%, p = 0.002). Among returning subjects, there was a significant difference in mean visits per subject between LD and I&D groups (0.5 vs. 1.2, p = 0.001). There were fewer complications among LD than I&D subjects (9.3% vs. 24.6%, p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Our study provides evidence that LD is noninferior to I&D in achieving complete abscess resolution at 14 days and is associated with fewer return ED visits and fewer complications. This makes it an attractive alternative treatment option for abscesses.