Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
J Racial Ethn Health Disparities ; 2023 May 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20235132

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: While previous studies have identified a range of factors associated with mask wearing in the US, little is known about drivers of mask-wearing among racial and ethnic minority groups. This analysis assessed whether factors positively associated with wearing a mask early in the pandemic differed between participants grouped by race/ethnicity (Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic Asian, and non-Hispanic White). METHOD: Data were obtained from a US internet panel survey of 3217 respondents during May-November 2020 (weighted by race/ethnicity, age, gender, and education to the US national population). Within each of the four available racial/ethnic groups, crude and adjusted odds ratios (COR and AOR) were calculated using logistic regression to assess factors positively associated with wearing a mask. Adjusted models were controlled for age, gender, education, county COVID-19 case count, presence of a state-issued mask mandate, and interview month. RESULTS: The following variables were most strongly positively associated with mask wearing (p<0.05) in each racial/ethnic group: Hispanic-seeing others wearing masks (AOR: 6.7), importance of wearing a mask combined with social distancing (AOR: 3.0); non-Hispanic Black-belief that wearing a mask would protect others from coronavirus (AOR: 5.1), reporting hearing that one should wear a mask (AOR: 3.6); non-Hispanic Asian-belief that people important to them believe they should wear a mask (COR: 5.1, not statistically significant); and non-Hispanic White-seeing others wearing masks (AOR: 3.1), importance of wearing a mask (AOR: 2.3). CONCLUSION: Public health efforts to encourage mask wearing should consider the diversity of behavioral influences within different population groups.

2.
Am J Health Promot ; : 8901171221119796, 2022 Aug 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2236442

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Information on incentives for COVID-19 testing is needed to understand effective practices that encourage testing uptake. We describe characteristics of those who received an incentive after performing a rapid antigen test. DESIGN: Cross-sectional descriptive analysis of survey data. SETTING: During April 29-May 9, 2021, COVID-19 rapid antigen testing was offered in 2 Maryland cities. SAMPLE: Convenience sample of 553 adults (≥18 years) who tested and received an incentive; 93% consented to survey. MEASURES: Survey questions assessed reasons for testing, testing history, barriers, and demographics. ANALYSIS: Robust Poisson regressions were used to determine characteristic differences based on testing history and between participants who would re-test in the future without an incentive vs participants who would not. RESULTS: The most common reasons for testing were the desire to be tested (n = 280; 54%) and convenience of location (n = 146; 28%). Those motivated by an incentive to test (n = 110; 21%) were 5.83 times as likely to state they would not test again without an incentive, compared to those with other reasons for testing (95% CI: 2.67-12.72, P < .001). CRITICAL LIMITATIONS: No comparative study group. CONCLUSION: Results indicate internal motivation and convenience were prominent factors supporting testing uptake. Incentives may increase community testing participation, particularly among people who have never tested. Keywords COVID-19, pandemic, incentives, health behavior, community testing.

3.
JAMA Health Forum ; 3(10): e223810, 2022 Oct 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2094111

ABSTRACT

Importance: Some US states have issued COVID-19 vaccine mandates; however, the association of these mandates with vaccination rates remains unknown. Objective: To examine the association between announcing state-issued COVID-19 vaccine mandates that did not provide a test-out option for workers and the vaccine administration rates in terms of state-level first-dose vaccine administration and series completion coverage. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used publicly available, state-level aggregated panel data to fit linear regression models with 2-way fixed effects (state and time) estimating vaccine coverage changes 8 weeks before and 8 weeks after a state-issued COVID-19 vaccine mandate was announced. Mandates were announced on or after July 26, 2021, and were included only if they went into effect before December 31, 2021. Data were included from 13 state-level jurisdictions with a vaccine mandate in effect as of December 31, 2021, that did not allow recurring testing in lieu of vaccination (mandate group), and 14 state-level jurisdictions that allowed a test-out option and/or did not restrict vaccine requirements (comparison group). Interventions/Exposures: The event of interest was the announcement of a state-issued COVID-19 vaccine mandate applicable to specific groups of workers. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcome measures were state-level daily COVID-19 vaccine first-dose administration and series completion coverage, reported as mean percentage point changes. Results: Of 5 508 539 first-dose administrations in the 8-week postannouncement period, an estimated 634 831 (11.5%) were associated with the mandate announcement. First-dose administration coverage among 13 jurisdictions increased starting at 3 weeks after the mandate announcement, with statistically significant differences of 0.20, 0.33, 0.39, 0.45, 0.49, and 0.59 percentage points higher than the referent category coverage of 62.9%. Increases in vaccine series completion coverage were observed from 5 to 8 weeks after the announcement, but statistically significant differences from the referent category coverage of 56.3% were observed only during weeks 7 and 8 after the announcement (both differed by 0.2 percentage points; P = .05 and P = .02, respectively). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cross-sectional event study suggest that the announcement of state-issued vaccine mandates may be associated with short-term increases in vaccine uptake. This observed association may be a product of both a direct outcome experienced by groups governed by the mandate as well as the spillover outcome due to a government signaling the importance of vaccination to the general population of the state.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Humans , COVID-19 Vaccines , Cross-Sectional Studies , District of Columbia , COVID-19/epidemiology , Vaccination
4.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 71(8): 299-305, 2022 Feb 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1704008

ABSTRACT

During December 2021, the United States experienced a surge in COVID-19 cases, coinciding with predominance of the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant (1). During this surge, the National Football League (NFL) and NFL Players Association (NFLPA) adjusted their protocols for test-to-release from COVID-19 isolation on December 16, 2021, based on analytic assessments of their 2021 test-to-release data. Fully vaccinated* persons with COVID-19 were permitted to return to work once they were asymptomatic or fever-free and experiencing improving symptoms for ≥24 hours, and after two negative or high cycle-threshold (Ct) results (Ct≥35) from either of two reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests† (2). This report describes data from NFL's SARS-CoV-2 testing program (3) and time to first negative or Ct≥35 result based on serial COVID-19 patient testing during isolation. Among this occupational cohort of 173 fully vaccinated adults with confirmed COVID-19 during December 14-19, 2021, a period of Omicron variant predominance, 46% received negative test results or had a subsequent RT-PCR test result with a Ct≥35 by day 6 postdiagnosis (i.e., concluding 5 days of isolation) and 84% before day 10. The proportion of persons with positive test results decreased with time, with approximately one half receiving positive RT-PCR test results after postdiagnosis day 5. Although this test result does not necessarily mean these persons are infectious (RT-PCR tests might continue to return positive results long after an initial positive result) (4), these findings indicate that persons with COVID-19 should continue taking precautions, including correct and consistent mask use, for a full 10 days after symptom onset or initial positive test result if they are asymptomatic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , Quarantine , Return to Sport , Return to Work , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Athletes , COVID-19/prevention & control , Football , Humans , Male , United States/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL