Preliminary Incidence and Trends of Infections Caused by Pathogens Transmitted Commonly Through Food - Foodborne Diseases Active Surveillance Network, 10 U.S. Sites, 2016-2021.

To evaluate progress toward prevention of enteric infections in the United States, the Foodborne Diseases Active Surveillance Network (FoodNet) conducts active population-based surveillance for laboratory-diagnosed infections caused by Campylobacter, Cyclospora, Listeria, Salmonella, Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC), Shigella, Vibrio, and Yersinia at 10 U.S. sites. This report summarizes preliminary 2021 data and describes changes in annual incidence compared with the average annual incidence for 2016-2018, the reference period for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' (HHS) Healthy People 2030 goals for some pathogens (1). During 2021, the incidence of infections caused by Salmonella decreased, incidence of infections caused by Cyclospora, Yersinia, and Vibrio increased, and incidence of infections caused by other pathogens did not change. As in 2020, behavioral modifications and public health interventions implemented to control the COVID-19 pandemic might have decreased transmission of enteric infections (2). Other factors (e.g., increased use of telemedicine and continued increase in use of culture-independent diagnostic tests [CIDTs]) might have altered their detection or reporting (2). Much work remains to achieve HHS Healthy People 2030 goals, particularly for Salmonella infections, which are frequently attributed to poultry products and produce, and Campylobacter infections, which are frequently attributed to chicken products (3).

Food Handling Concerns and Practices at Home during the COVID-19 Pandemic by Food Security Status.

ABSTRACT: There is limited examination about coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19)-related food handling concerns and practices that cause chemical or microbial contamination and illness, particularly among those with food insecurity. We investigated consumer food handling concerns and practices during the COVID-19 pandemic and whether they differed by food insecurity status. An online survey was distributed among Chicago, IL, residents between 15 July and 21 August 2020 (n = 437). Independent t tests and Fisher's exact tests were used to identify differences in food handling concerns and practices between those with and without food insecurity (alpha = 0.05). Survey items included questions about food handling practices that were considered safe or neutral (i.e., washing hands and produce with water, sanitizing food packaging) and unsafe (i.e., using cleaning agents to wash foods, leaving perishable foods outside) by using 5-point Likert-style scales or categorical responses (i.e., yes, no). Participant responses fell between "slightly" and "somewhat" concerned about contracting COVID-19 from food and food packaging (mean ± standard error [SE]: 2.7 ± 0.1). Although participants reported washing their hands before eating and before preparing foods at least "most of the time" (mean ± SE: 4.4 ± 0.0 and 4.5 ± 0.0, respectively), only one-third engaged in unsafe practices. The majority of participants (68%) indicated that they altered food handling practices due to the COVID-19 pandemic and received information about food safety from social media (61%). When investigating differences in concerns and practices by food insecurity status, food insecure participants were more concerned about COVID-19 foodborne transmission for all food items (all P < 0.001) and more frequently performed unsafe food handling practices than those with food security (all P < 0.001). Results from this study suggest more investigation is needed to understand barriers to safe food handling knowledge and practices, particularly among those with food insecurity.

COVID-19 Vaccination Coverage Among Adults - United States, December 14, 2020-May 22, 2021.

The U.S. COVID-19 vaccination program launched on December 14, 2020. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended prioritizing COVID-19 vaccination for specific groups of the U.S. population who were at highest risk for COVID-19 hospitalization and death, including adults aged ≥75 years*; implementation varied by state, and eligibility was gradually expanded to persons aged ≥65 years beginning in January 2021. By April 19, 2021, eligibility was expanded to all adults aged ≥18 years nationwide.† To assess patterns of COVID-19 vaccination coverage among U.S. adults, CDC analyzed data submitted on vaccinations administered during December 14, 2020-May 22, 2021, by age, sex, and community-level characteristics. By May 22, 2021, 57.0% of persons aged ≥18 years had received ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine dose; coverage was highest among persons aged ≥65 years (80.0%) and lowest among persons aged 18-29 years (38.3%). During the week beginning February 7, 2021, vaccination initiation among adults aged ≥65 years peaked at 8.2%, whereas weekly initiation among other age groups peaked later and at lower levels. During April 19-May 22, 2021, the period following expanded eligibility to all adults, weekly initiation remained <4.0% and decreased for all age groups, including persons aged 18-29 years (3.6% to 1.9%) and 30-49 years (3.5% to 1.7%); based on the current rate of weekly initiation (as of May 22), younger persons will not reach the same levels of coverage as older persons by the end of August. Across all age groups, coverage (≥1 dose) was lower among men compared with women, except among adults aged ≥65 years, and lower among persons living in counties that were less urban, had higher social vulnerabilities, or had higher percentages of social determinants of poor health. Continued efforts to improve vaccination confidence and alleviate barriers to vaccination initiation, especially among adults aged 18-49 years, could improve vaccination coverage.

Patterns in COVID-19 Vaccination Coverage, by Social Vulnerability and Urbanicity - United States, December 14, 2020-May 1, 2021.

Disparities in vaccination coverage by social vulnerability, defined as social and structural factors associated with adverse health outcomes, were noted during the first 2.5 months of the U.S. COVID-19 vaccination campaign, which began during mid-December 2020 (1). As vaccine eligibility and availability continue to expand, assuring equitable coverage for disproportionately affected communities remains a priority. CDC examined COVID-19 vaccine administration and 2018 CDC social vulnerability index (SVI) data to ascertain whether inequities in COVID-19 vaccination coverage with respect to county-level SVI have persisted, overall and by urbanicity. Vaccination coverage was defined as the number of persons aged ≥18 years (adults) who had received ≥1 dose of any Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-authorized COVID-19 vaccine divided by the total adult population in a specified SVI category.† SVI was examined overall and by its four themes (socioeconomic status, household composition and disability, racial/ethnic minority status and language, and housing type and transportation). Counties were categorized into SVI quartiles, in which quartile 1 (Q1) represented the lowest level of vulnerability and quartile 4 (Q4), the highest. Trends in vaccination coverage were assessed by SVI quartile and urbanicity, which was categorized as large central metropolitan, large fringe metropolitan (areas surrounding large cities, e.g., suburban), medium and small metropolitan, and nonmetropolitan counties.§ During December 14, 2020-May 1, 2021, disparities in vaccination coverage by SVI increased, especially in large fringe metropolitan (e.g., suburban) and nonmetropolitan counties. By May 1, 2021, vaccination coverage was lower among adults living in counties with the highest overall SVI; differences were most pronounced in large fringe metropolitan (Q4 coverage = 45.0% versus Q1 coverage = 61.7%) and nonmetropolitan (Q4 = 40.6% versus Q1 = 52.9%) counties. Vaccination coverage disparities were largest for two SVI themes: socioeconomic status (Q4 = 44.3% versus Q1 = 61.0%) and household composition and disability (Q4 = 42.0% versus Q1 = 60.1%). Outreach efforts, including expanding public health messaging tailored to local populations and increasing vaccination access, could help increase vaccination coverage in high-SVI counties.

Disparities in COVID-19 Vaccination Coverage Between Urban and Rural Counties - United States, December 14, 2020-April 10, 2021.

Approximately 60 million persons in the United States live in rural counties, representing almost one fifth (19.3%) of the population.* In September 2020, COVID-19 incidence (cases per 100,000 population) in rural counties surpassed that in urban counties (1). Rural communities often have a higher proportion of residents who lack health insurance, live with comorbidities or disabilities, are aged ≥65 years, and have limited access to health care facilities with intensive care capabilities, which places these residents at increased risk for COVID-19-associated morbidity and mortality (2,3). To better understand COVID-19 vaccination disparities across the urban-rural continuum, CDC analyzed county-level vaccine administration data among adults aged ≥18 years who received their first dose of either the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna COVID-19 vaccine, or a single dose of the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine (Johnson & Johnson) during December 14, 2020-April 10, 2021 in 50 U.S. jurisdictions (49 states and the District of Columbia [DC]). Adult COVID-19 vaccination coverage was lower in rural counties (38.9%) than in urban counties (45.7%) overall and among adults aged 18-64 years (29.1% rural, 37.7% urban), those aged ≥65 years (67.6% rural, 76.1% urban), women (41.7% rural, 48.4% urban), and men (35.3% rural, 41.9% urban). Vaccination coverage varied among jurisdictions: 36 jurisdictions had higher coverage in urban counties, five had higher coverage in rural counties, and five had similar coverage (i.e., within 1%) in urban and rural counties; in four jurisdictions with no rural counties, the urban-rural comparison could not be assessed. A larger proportion of persons in the most rural counties (14.6%) traveled for vaccination to nonadjacent counties (i.e., farther from their county of residence) compared with persons in the most urban counties (10.3%). As availability of COVID-19 vaccines expands, public health practitioners should continue collaborating with health care providers, pharmacies, employers, faith leaders, and other community partners to identify and address barriers to COVID-19 vaccination in rural areas (2).

County-Level COVID-19 Vaccination Coverage and Social Vulnerability - United States, December 14, 2020-March 1, 2021.

The U.S. COVID-19 vaccination program began in December 2020, and ensuring equitable COVID-19 vaccine access remains a national priority.* COVID-19 has disproportionately affected racial/ethnic minority groups and those who are economically and socially disadvantaged (1,2). Thus, achieving not just vaccine equality (i.e., similar allocation of vaccine supply proportional to its population across jurisdictions) but equity (i.e., preferential access and administra-tion to those who have been most affected by COVID-19 disease) is an important goal. The CDC social vulnerability index (SVI) uses 15 indicators grouped into four themes that comprise an overall SVI measure, resulting in 20 metrics, each of which has national and state-specific county rankings. The 20 metric-specific rankings were each divided into lowest to highest tertiles to categorize counties as low, moderate, or high social vulnerability counties. These tertiles were combined with vaccine administration data for 49,264,338 U.S. residents in 49 states and the District of Columbia (DC) who received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose during December 14, 2020-March 1, 2021. Nationally, for the overall SVI measure, vaccination coverage was higher (15.8%) in low social vulnerability counties than in high social vulnerability counties (13.9%), with the largest coverage disparity in the socioeconomic status theme (2.5 percentage points higher coverage in low than in high vulnerability counties). Wide state variations in equity across SVI metrics were found. Whereas in the majority of states, vaccination coverage was higher in low vulnerability counties, some states had equitable coverage at the county level. CDC, state, and local jurisdictions should continue to monitor vaccination coverage by SVI metrics to focus public health interventions to achieve equitable coverage with COVID-19 vaccine.