Barriers and facilitators to COVID-19 testing among staff and parents from San Diego schools.

COVID-19 testing is an important risk mitigation strategy for COVID-19 prevention in school settings, where the virus continues to pose a public health challenge for in-person learning. Socially vulnerable school communities with the highest proportion of low-income, minority, and non-English speaking families have the least testing access despite shouldering a disproportionate burden of COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. Through the Safer at School Early Alert (SASEA) program, we investigated community perceptions of testing in San Diego County schools, with a focus on barriers and facilitators from the perspective of socially vulnerable parents and school staff. Using a mixed-methods approach, we administered a community survey and conducted focus group discussions (FGDs) with staff and parents from SASEA-affiliated schools and childcares. We recruited 299 survey respondents and 42 FGD participants. Protecting one's family (96.6%) and protecting one's community (96.6%) were marked as key motivators to testing uptake. School staff in particular reported that the reassurance of a negative status mitigated concerns about COVID-19 infection in schools. Participants expressed that COVID-19-related stigma, loss of income as a result of isolation/quarantine requirements, and lack of multilingual materials were the most significant barriers to testing. Our findings suggest that the testing barriers faced by school community members are predominantly structural. Testing uptake efforts must provide support and resources to manage the social and financial consequences of testing while continuously communicating its benefits. There is a clear need to continue to incorporate testing as a strategy to maintain school safety and facilitate access for vulnerable community members.

"A lotta people switched playing hard ball to playing Russian roulette": Experiences with rising overdose incidence caused by drug supply changes during the COVID-19 pandemic in the San Diego-Tijuana border metroplex.

Background: People who use drugs (PWUD) in the San Diego, USA and Tijuana, Mexico metroplex face high overdose risk related to historic methamphetamine use and relatively recent fentanyl introduction into local drug supplies. The personal overdose experiences of PWUD in this region are understudied, however, and may have been influenced by the COVID pandemic. Methods: From September-November 2021, we conducted 28 qualitative interviews among PWUD ≥18 years old sampled from an ongoing cohort study in the San Diego-Tijuana metroplex. Interviews explored overdose experiences and changes in the drug supply. Thematic analysis of coded interview transcripts explored overdose experiences, perspectives on drug supply changes, interactions with harm reduction services, and naloxone access. Results: Among 28 participants, 13 had experienced an overdose. Participants discussed rising levels of fentanyl in local drug supplies and increasing overdose incidents in their social networks. Participants discussed a general shift from injecting heroin to smoking fentanyl in their networks. Participants' most common concerns included having consistent access to a safe and potent drug supply and naloxone. Conclusion: Participants prioritized adapting to drug supply changes and preventing overdose compared to other health concerns, such as HIV and COVID-19. Efforts to address overdose in this region could benefit from drug checking services and expanded, equitable delivery of naloxone.

COVID-19 disproportionately impacts access to basic needs among households with disabled members.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately impacted disabled people, especially those who are members of marginalized communities that were already denied access to the resources and opportunities necessary to ensure health equity before the pandemic. OBJECTIVE: Compare COVID-19 impact on basic needs access among households with and without disabled adults. METHODS: An online survey was distributed to households with children enrolled in one of 30 socially vulnerable elementary or middle schools in San Diego County, California. We measured disability using the single-item Global Activities Limitations Indicator. We measured pandemic impacts on basic needs access using the RADx-UP common data elements toolkit. We then assessed number of impact items reported by household disability using multivariable linear regression, adjusting for household income, household size, education, parent gender, and child's ethnicity. RESULTS: Of 304 participants, 41% had at least one disabled household member. Participants reporting a disabled household member were more likely to report challenges accessing basic needs, such as food, housing, healthcare, transportation, medication, and stable income during the pandemic (all p < 0.05). Difficulty accessing basic needs was significantly associated with household income and parent gender in the final regression model. CONCLUSIONS: Households with a disabled member were significantly more likely to experience difficulty accessing basic needs during the COVID-19 pandemic. This has important implications for the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on disabled people, especially those from low-income communities that already face barriers to accessing resources. To improve COVID-19 outcomes for disabled people, we must focus on meeting their basic needs.

"We're already doing this work": ethical research with community-based organizations.

BACKGROUND: Public health research frequently relies on collaborations with community-based organizations, and these partnerships can be essential to the success of a project. However, while public health ethics and oversight policies have historically focused on ensuring that individual subjects are protected from unethical or unfair practices, there are few guidelines to protect the organizations which facilitate relationships with - and are frequently composed of - these same vulnerable populations. As universities, governments, and donors place a renewed emphasis on the need for community engaged research to address systematic drivers of health inequity, it is vital that the ways in which research is conducted does not uphold the same intersecting systems of gender, race, and class oppression which led to the very same health inequities of interest. METHODS: To understand how traditional notions of public health research ethics might be expanded to encompass partnerships with organizations as well as individuals, we conducted qualitative interviews with 39 staff members (executive directors and frontline) at community-based organizations that primarily serve people who use drugs, Black men who have sex with men, and sex workers across the United States from January 2016 - August 2017. We also conducted 11 in-depth interviews with professional academic researchers with experience partnering with CBOs that serve similar populations. Transcripts were analyzed thematically using emergent codes and a priori codes derived from the Belmont Report. RESULTS: The concepts of respect, beneficence, and justice are a starting point for collaboration with CBOs, but participants deepened them beyond traditional regulatory concepts to consider the ethics of relationships, care, and solidarity. These concepts could and should apply to the treatment of organizations that participate in research just as they apply to individual human subjects, although their implementation will differ when applied to CBOs vs individual human subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Academic-CBO partnerships are likely to be more successful for both academics and CBOs if academic researchers work to center individual-level relationship building that is mutually respectful and grounded in cultural humility. More support from academic institutions and ethical oversight entities can enable more ethically grounded relationships between academic researchers, academic institutions, and community based organizations.

COVID-19 vaccination acceptability and experiences among people who inject drugs in San Diego County.

Background: People who inject drugs (PWID) face increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition and severe disease, yet COVID-19 vaccine uptake has been suboptimal. To inform vaccination interventions tailored for the needs of this population, we explored COVID-19 vaccination acceptability and experiences among PWID in San Diego County, USA. Methods: From September-November 2021, we conducted qualitative interviews with PWID aged ≥18 years who were participating in a prospective study of infectious disease risks in San Diego. Thematic analysis of coded interview transcripts focused on identifying barriers and facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination. Results: Of 28 participants, 15 reported having had ≥1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine, primarily received through community health centers, pharmacies, jails, and homeless shelters. We identified three key barriers to COVID-19 vaccination: (1) low perceived risk of COVID-19 (or belief in natural immunity), (2) institutional distrust (e.g., of pharmaceutical companies and government agencies that "rushed" vaccine development, approval, and distribution), and (3) conflicting information from news, social media, and peers. We also identified three key facilitators of vaccination, including (1) heightened personal and interpersonal safety concerns, (2) health service outreach efforts to make vaccines more accessible, and (3) tailored information delivered by trusted sources (e.g., outreach or community health workers). Conclusions: Tailored intervention strategies to increase acceptability and uptake of COVID-19 vaccination among PWID should involve efforts to increase vaccine literacy and motivation while decreasing institutional distrust and structural barriers to access.

Understanding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on refugee communities in San Diego, California: A participatory action research cross-sectional study.

Background: While the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted people worldwide, refugee communities are particularly vulnerable to the pandemic's social, economic and health impacts. This study assessed factors associated with increases in adverse community effects of COVID-19 in a refugee community in California. Methods: This study uses data from a cross-sectional survey developed and administered as part of a participatory action research project by a refugee community organization in San Diego, California. Data was collected between September and November 2020 in a sample of refugee community members (n = 517). Multivariable Poisson regression models measured associations between sociodemographic and acculturation measures with seven adverse community effects overall and stratified by duration of residence in the United States. Adverse community effects included job/wage loss, bank/cash access barriers, food insecurity, school interruptions, household violence, substance misuse and poor mental health. Results: Refugee community members reported an average of 2.1 adverse community effects that worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic, with job/wage loss and poor mental health the most prevalent (84% and 49%). Characteristics associated with reporting increased numbers of adverse community effects included being younger, female, childless, not actively seeking employment, living in the US for six or more years and speaking English at home. Stratified analyses show that these associations were concentrated in refugees who had lived in the US for at least six years. Conclusion: Refugee communities have experienced pervasive job losses and worsening mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic, and these effects are concentrated in respondents who have lived in the US for six or more years. Additional targeted support is needed to ensure that refugees who have lived in the US for longer durations have the financial and social support needed to cope with the unprecedented challenges brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic.