Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(5): e2214171, 2022 05 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1864298

ABSTRACT

Importance: In emergency epidemic and pandemic settings, public health agencies need to be able to measure the population-level attack rate, defined as the total percentage of the population infected thus far. During vaccination campaigns in such settings, public health agencies need to be able to assess how much the vaccination campaign is contributing to population immunity; specifically, the proportion of vaccines being administered to individuals who are already seropositive must be estimated. Objective: To estimate population-level immunity to SARS-CoV-2 through May 31, 2021, in Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and Connecticut. Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational case series assessed cases, hospitalizations, intensive care unit occupancy, ventilator occupancy, and deaths from March 1, 2020, to May 31, 2021, in Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and Connecticut. Data were analyzed from July 2021 to November 2021. Exposures: COVID-19-positive test result reported to state department of health. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were statistical estimates, from a bayesian inference framework, of the percentage of individuals as of May 31, 2021, who were (1) previously infected and vaccinated, (2) previously uninfected and vaccinated, and (3) previously infected but not vaccinated. Results: At the state level, there were a total of 1 160 435 confirmed COVID-19 cases in Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and Connecticut. The median age among individuals with confirmed COVID-19 was 38 years. In autumn 2020, SARS-CoV-2 population immunity (equal to the attack rate at that point) in these states was less than 15%, setting the stage for a large epidemic wave during winter 2020 to 2021. Population immunity estimates for May 31, 2021, were 73.4% (95% credible interval [CrI], 72.9%-74.1%) for Rhode Island, 64.1% (95% CrI, 64.0%-64.4%) for Connecticut, and 66.3% (95% CrI, 65.9%-66.9%) for Massachusetts, indicating that more than 33% of residents in these states were fully susceptible to infection when the Delta variant began spreading in July 2021. Despite high vaccine coverage in these states, population immunity in summer 2021 was lower than planned owing to an estimated 34.1% (95% CrI, 32.9%-35.2%) of vaccines in Rhode Island, 24.6% (95% CrI, 24.3%-25.1%) of vaccines in Connecticut, and 27.6% (95% CrI, 26.8%-28.6%) of vaccines in Massachusetts being distributed to individuals who were already seropositive. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that future emergency-setting vaccination planning may have to prioritize high vaccine coverage over optimized vaccine distribution to ensure that sufficient levels of population immunity are reached during the course of an ongoing epidemic or pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Bayes Theorem , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Humans , Incidence , New England
2.
J Psychosoc Rehabil Ment Health ; 9(3): 251-262, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1827536

ABSTRACT

Many eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) therapists moved their practice online during COVID-19. We conducted surveys and interviews to understand the implementation and acceptability of online EMDR therapy. From 17 June to 2nd August 2021 an online survey was open to EMDR therapists from the EMDR Association UK & Ireland and EMDR International Association email lists, and, through them, their clients. Questions related to determinants of implementation (for therapists) and acceptability (for clients) of online EMDR. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a sample of therapist respondents to provide a deeper understanding of survey responses. Survey responses were received from therapists (n = 562) from five continents, and their clients (n = 148). 88% of clients responded as being extremely or very comfortable receiving EMDR therapy online. At the initial point of 'social distancing', 54% of therapists indicated strong or partial reluctance to deliver online EMDR therapy compared to 11% just over one year later. Four fifths of therapists intended to continue offering online therapy after restrictions were lifted. Free-text responses and interview data showed that deprivation and clinical severity could lead to exclusion from online EMDR. Internet connectivity could disrupt sessions, lead to cancellations, or affect the therapy process. Therapists benefited from training in online working. Online EMDR is generally acceptable to therapists and clients, with reservations about digital exclusion, case severity, poor internet connectivity and the need for training. Further research is needed to confirm that online EMDR is clinically non-inferior to in-person working. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40737-022-00260-0.

3.
BMC Med ; 19(1): 162, 2021 07 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1308097

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: When three SARS-CoV-2 vaccines came to market in Europe and North America in the winter of 2020-2021, distribution networks were in a race against a major epidemiological wave of SARS-CoV-2 that began in autumn 2020. Rapid and optimized vaccine allocation was critical during this time. With 95% efficacy reported for two of the vaccines, near-term public health needs likely require that distribution is prioritized to the elderly, health care workers, teachers, essential workers, and individuals with comorbidities putting them at risk of severe clinical progression. METHODS: We evaluate various age-based vaccine distributions using a validated mathematical model based on current epidemic trends in Rhode Island and Massachusetts. We allow for varying waning efficacy of vaccine-induced immunity, as this has not yet been measured. We account for the fact that known COVID-positive cases may not have been included in the first round of vaccination. And, we account for age-specific immune patterns in both states at the time of the start of the vaccination program. Our analysis assumes that health systems during winter 2020-2021 had equal staffing and capacity to previous phases of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic; we do not consider the effects of understaffed hospitals or unvaccinated medical staff. RESULTS: We find that allocating a substantial proportion (>75%) of vaccine supply to individuals over the age of 70 is optimal in terms of reducing total cumulative deaths through mid-2021. This result is robust to different profiles of waning vaccine efficacy and several different assumptions on age mixing during and after lockdown periods. As we do not explicitly model other high-mortality groups, our results on vaccine allocation apply to all groups at high risk of mortality if infected. A median of 327 to 340 deaths can be avoided in Rhode Island (3444 to 3647 in Massachusetts) by optimizing vaccine allocation and vaccinating the elderly first. The vaccination campaigns are expected to save a median of 639 to 664 lives in Rhode Island and 6278 to 6618 lives in Massachusetts in the first half of 2021 when compared to a scenario with no vaccine. A policy of vaccinating only seronegative individuals avoids redundancy in vaccine use on individuals that may already be immune, and would result in 0.5% to 1% reductions in cumulative hospitalizations and deaths by mid-2021. CONCLUSIONS: Assuming high vaccination coverage (>28%) and no major changes in distancing, masking, gathering size, hygiene guidelines, and virus transmissibility between 1 January 2021 and 1 July 2021 a combination of vaccination and population immunity may lead to low or near-zero transmission levels by the second quarter of 2021.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/supply & distribution , COVID-19 , Communicable Disease Control/organization & administration , Health Care Rationing/organization & administration , Resource Allocation/organization & administration , Vaccination Coverage , Vaccination , Age Factors , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Incidence , Massachusetts/epidemiology , Models, Theoretical , Public Health/methods , Public Health/standards , Rhode Island/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination/methods , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination Coverage/supply & distribution
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL