Experiences, risk perceptions, and COVID-19 vaccination outcomes among hospital workers.

BACKGROUND: Although COVID-19 vaccinations have been available to hospital workers in the U.S. since December 2020, coverage is far from universal, even in groups with patient contact. The aim of this study was to describe COVID-19-related experiences at work and in the personal lives of nurses, allied health workers, and non-clinical staff with patient contact, and to assess whether these experiences relate to COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: Health care workers at a large Midwestern hospital in the U.S. were contacted to participate in an online cross-sectional survey during February 2021. A logistic regression model was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) for vaccination by different experiences, and we assessed mediation through models that also included measures of risk perceptions. RESULTS: Among 366 nurse practitioners / nurse midwives / physician assistant, 1,698 nurses, 1,798 allied health professionals, and 1,307 non-clinical staff with patient contact, the proportions who had received or intended to receive a COVID-19 vaccination were 94 %, 87 %, 82 %, and 88 %, respectively. Working and being physically close to COVID-19 patients was not significantly associated with vaccine intent. Vaccination intent was significantly lower among those with a previous COVID-19 diagnosis vs not (OR = 0.33, 95 % CI: 0.27, 0.40) and higher for those who knew close family members of friends hospitalized or died of COVID-19 (OR = 1.33, 95 % CI: 1.10, 1.60). CONCLUSION: Even when COVID-19 vaccination was available in February 2021, a substantial minority of hospital workers with patient contact did not intend to be vaccinated. Moreover, their experiences working close to COVID-19 patients were not significantly related to vaccination intent. Instead, personal experiences with family members and friends were associated with vaccination intent through changes in risk perceptions. Interventions to increase uptake among hospital workers should emphasize protection of close family members or friends and the severity of COVID-19.

Use of Electronic Medical Records to Estimate Changes in Pregnancy and Birth Rates During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: The influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on fertility rates has been suggested in the lay press and anticipated based on documented decreases in fertility and pregnancy rates during previous major societal and economic shifts. Anticipatory planning for birth rates is important for health care systems and government agencies to accurately estimate size of economy and model working and/or aging populations. Objective: To use projection modeling based on electronic health care records in a large US university medical center to estimate changes in pregnancy and birth rates prior to and after the COVID-19 pandemic societal lockdowns. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included all pregnancy episodes within a single US academic health care system retrospectively from 2017 and modeled prospectively to 2021. Data were analyzed September 2021. Exposures: Pre- and post-COVID-19 pandemic societal shutdown measures. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was number of new pregnancy episodes initiated within the health care system and use of those episodes to project birth volumes. Interrupted time series analysis was used to assess the degree to which COVID-19 societal changes may have factored into pregnancy episode volume. Potential reasons for the changes in volumes were compared with historical pregnancy volumes, including delays in starting prenatal care, interruptions in reproductive endocrinology and infertility services, and preterm birth rates. Results: This cohort study documented a steadily increasing number of pregnancy episodes over the study period, from 4100 pregnancies in 2017 to 4620 in 2020 (28 284 total pregnancies; median maternal [interquartile range] age, 30 [27-34] years; 18 728 [66.2%] White women, 3794 [13.4%] Black women; 2177 [7.7%] Asian women). A 14% reduction in pregnancy episode initiation was observed after the societal shutdown of the COVID-19 pandemic (risk ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.79-0.92; P < .001). This decrease appeared to be due to a decrease in conceptions that followed the March 15 mandated COVID-19 pandemic societal shutdown. Prospective modeling of pregnancies currently suggests that a birth volume surge can be anticipated in summer 2021. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study using electronic medical record surveillance found an initial decline in births associated with the COVID-19 pandemic societal changes and an anticipated increase in birth volume. Future studies can further explore how pregnancy episode volume changes can be monitored and birth rates projected in real-time during major societal events.

Universal Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) Testing Uptake in the Labor and Delivery Unit: Implications for Health Equity.

OBJECTIVE: To understand severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing uptake in the labor and delivery unit and rationales for declining testing, and to institute a process to increase equitable testing uptake. METHODS: We conducted a quality-improvement initiative from May 28-June 25, 2020, during the first 4 weeks of universal SARS-CoV-2 testing in the Barnes-Jewish Hospital labor and delivery unit. All consecutive patients presenting for delivery without coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms were offered testing over four 1-week phases. Phase I documented the rate of testing uptake. Phase II recorded patients' reasons for declining testing. Phase III used phase II findings to create and implement shared decision-making tools. Phase IV offered each patient who declined nasopharyngeal testing an oropharyngeal alternative. The primary outcome was rate of SARS-CoV-2 testing uptake by phase. RESULTS: Of 270 patients, 223 (83%) accepted testing and 47 (17%) declined. Maternal age and mode of delivery were similar between groups, whereas testing uptake was higher among nulliparous, White, Hispanic, or privately insured patients. There was a significant increase in the primary outcome of SARS-CoV-2 testing across phases I-IV, from 68% to 76% to 94% to 95%, respectively (Somers' D 0.45; 95% CI of association 0.30-0.59). The most commonly cited reason for declining testing was concern regarding testing discomfort. In subgroup analyses by race and insurance type, there was a significant increase in testing uptake across phases I-IV for Black patients (56%, 54%, 91%, 92%; Somers' D 0.36; 95% CI of association 0.28-0.64), White patients (76%, 93%, 96%, 100%; Somers' D 0.59; 95% CI of association 0.38-0.8), those with Medicaid insurance (60%, 64%, 88%, 92%; 95%; Somers' D 0.39; CI of association 0.22 to 0.56), and those with private insurance (77%, 96%, 97%, 100%; Somers' D 0.63; 95% CI of association 0.40-0.86). CONCLUSION: Universal SARS-CoV-2 testing uptake significantly increased through a rapid-cycle improvement initiative. Aligning hospital policy with patient-centered approaches led to nearly universally acceptable testing.

False-negative testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2: consideration in obstetrical care.

Because the obstetrical population seems to have a high proportion of asymptomatic patients who are carriers of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, universal testing has been proposed as a strategy to risk-stratify all obstetrical admissions and guide infection prevention protocols. Here, we describe a case of a critically ill obstetrical patient with all the clinical symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 and 3 false-negative results of nasopharyngeal swabs for molecular testing. We review and discuss the uncertain clinical characteristics of current severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 molecular testing and the implications of false-negative results in the obstetrical population.