Hospital COVID-19 preparedness: Are (were) we ready?

BACKGROUND: Terrorist attacks and natural disasters such as Hurricanes Katrina and Harvey have increased focus on disaster preparedness planning. Despite the attention on planning, many studies have found that hospitals in the United States are underprepared to manage extended disasters appropriately and the surge in patient volume it might bring. AIM: This study aims to profile and examine the availability of hospital capacity specifically related to COVID-19 patients, such as emergency department (ED) beds, intensive care unit (ICU) beds, temporary space setup, and ventilators. METHOD: A cross-sectional retrospective study design was used to examine secondary data from the 2020 American Hospital Association (AHA) Annual Survey. A series of multivariate logistic analyses were conducted to investigate the strength of association between changes in ED beds, ICU beds, staffed beds, and temporary spaces setup, and the 3,655 hospitals' characteristics. RESULTS: Our results highlight that the odds of a change in ED beds are 44 percent lower for government hospitals and 54 percent for for-profit hospitals than not-for-profit hospitals. The odds of ED bed change for nonteaching hospitals were 34 percent lower compared to teaching hospitals. Small and medium hospitals have significantly lower odds (75 and 51 percent, respectively) than large hospitals. For ICU bed change, staffed bed change, and temporary spaces setup, the conclusions were consistently significant regarding the impact of hospital ownership, teaching status, and hospital size. However, temporary spaces setup differs by hospital location. The odds of change is significantly lower (OR = 0.71) in urban hospitals compared with rural hospitals, while for ED beds, the odds of change is considerably higher (OR = 1.57) in urban hospitals compared to rural hospitals. CONCLUSION: There is a need for policymakers to consider not only resource limitations that were created from supply line disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic but also a more global assessment of the adequacy of funding and support for insurance coverage, hospital finance, and how hospitals meet the needs of the populations they serve.

Attitudes towards dementia among Chinese adults aged 50 years and older: a comparative study of immigrants living in Melbourne and nonimmigrants living in Beijing.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated attitudes towards dementia among Chinese immigrants aged 50 years and over living in Australia and compares these attitudes with those of individuals living in mainland China. It aimed to better understand what older Chinese adults think about dementia and to inform the development of tailored dementia-related services for this group of people. DESIGN: A qualitative design involving individual interviews was employed in this study. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-six participants were recruited: 21 in Melbourne and 25 in Beijing. All interviewees were born in mainland China, were community-dwelling, and did not have a dementia diagnosis. MEASUREMENTS: The tripartite model of attitudes was used to guide the semi-structured interview design and report the results. Thematic qualitative analysis was employed. RESULTS: In both groups, most participants held negative feelings, stigmatized views and negative stereotypes of dementia. However, most participants expressed a willingness to help individuals living with dementia. Regarding dementia care, nearly all participants preferred home care but thought formal care would become the mainstream form of care in the future. Fewer Melbourne participants expressed concerns regarding developing dementia, were interested in dementia, or perceived a need for dementia-related educational activities. Melbourne participants also reported more avoidant responses to dementia or individuals living with dementia. CONCLUSION: This study carefully compares attitudes towards dementia between older Chinese immigrants in Melbourne and older Chinese adults in Beijing. Similarities and differences were observed between these two groups. Dementia-related service providers should consider the sociocultural changes and migration-related barriers experienced by Chinese immigrants.

COVID-19 Deaths and the Impact of Health Disparities, Hospital Characteristics, Community, Social Distancing, and Health System Competition.

The United States has one of the highest cumulative mortalities of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and has reached 1 million deaths as of May 19th, 2022. Understanding which community and hospital factors contributed to disparities in COVID-19 mortality is important to inform public health strategies. This study aimed to explore the potential relationship between hospital service area (1) community (ie, health professional shortage areas, market competition, and uninsured percentage) and (2) hospital (ie, teaching, system, and ownership status) characteristics (2013-2018) on publicly available COVD-19 (February to October 2020) mortality data. The study included 2514 health service areas and used multilevel mixed-effects linear model to account for the multilevel data structure. The outcome measure was the number of COVID-19 deaths. This study found that public health, as opposed to acute care provision, was associated with community health and, ultimately, COVID-19 mortality. The study found that population characteristics including more uninsured greater proportion of those over 65 years, more diverse populations, and larger populations were all associated with a higher rate of death. In addition, communities with fewer hospitals were associated with a lower rate of death. When considering region in the United States, the west region showed a higher rate of death than all other regions. The association between some community characteristics and higher COVID-19 deaths demonstrated that access to health care, either for COVID-19 infection or worse health from higher disease burden, is strongly associated with COVID-19 deaths. Thus, to be better prepared for potential future pandemics, a greater emphasis on public health infrastructure is needed.

Healthcare Professionals and Telehealth Usability during COVID-19

Objective: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, many other health providers needed to rapidly adopt telehealth services to ensure continuity of patient care, without the opportunity to extensively evaluate the usability of the adopted technology. Therefore, this study aims to examine health professionals’ telehealth usability during COVID-19 in Florida. Design: This cross-sectional study employed the Telehealth Usability Questionnaire (TUQ) to licensed healthcare providers in Florida in June 2020. Setting and Participants: A total of 399,660 selected health professionals with Florida licensure were recruited from open-access Florida healthcare to participate in a Qualtrics web-based survey. A total of 1,868 health professionals completed the survey. Multiple linear and mixed regression models were applied to analyze the overall and subdomain scores from TUQ. Main Outcome Measures: Telehealth usability. Results: The analysis of the overall TUQ score showed younger, female healthcare professionals, and participants who reported an increase in telehealth usage during pandemic had a significantly higher overall TUQ score. Compared with the score from physicians and nurses, the scores from the mental health group and social work group were significantly higher, while the score rehabilitation group was significantly lower. Analysis of the subdomain scores was consistent with the overall scores. Conclusion: The findings from this study indicate that the health professionals’ telehealth usability is related to age, gender, and the change of telehealth usage during the COVID-19 pandemic. While pandemics represent only one possible impetus for the healthcare system to swiftly switch to telehealth platforms, each profession should consider providing adequate resources to accommodate the need for change.

Disrupted rhythms of life, work and entertainment and their associations with psychological impacts under the stress of the COVID-19 pandemic: A survey in 5854 Chinese people with different sociodemographic backgrounds

Background & aim: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected the life and work of people worldwide. The present study aimed to evaluate the rhythm disruptions of life, work, and entertainment, and their associations with the psychological impacts during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Method: A cross-sectional study was conducted from the 10th to 17th March 2020 in China. A structured e-questionnaire containing general information, the Chinese version of Brief Social Rhythm Scale, and Zung's self-rating scales of depression and anxiety (SDS and SAS) was posted and collected online through a public media (i.e. EQxiu online questionnaire platform). Scores in sleeping, getting up, and socializing (SGS) rhythm and eating, physical practice, and entertainment (EPE) rhythm were compared among and between participants with different sociodemographic backgrounds including gender, age, education, current occupation, annual income, health status, and chronic disease status. Correlations of SDS and SAS with SGS-scale and EPE-scale were also analyzed. Results: Overall, 5854 participants were included. There were significant differences in the scores of SGS-scale and EPE-scale among people with different sociodemographic backgrounds. The scores were significantly higher in the groups with female gender, low education level, lower or higher than average income, poor health status, ages of 26-30 years or older than 61 years, nurses and subjects with divorce or widow status. There were also significant differences in SAS and SDS scores among people with different sociodemographic backgrounds (all P< 0.05). The overall prevalence of depression and anxiety was 24.3% and 12.6%, respectively, with nurses having the highest rates of depression (32.94%) and anxiety (18.98%) among the different occupational groups. SGS-scale was moderately correlated with SDS and SAS, and disruption of SGS rhythm was an independent risk factor for depression and anxiety. Conclusion: Social rhythm disruption was independently associated with depression and anxiety. Interventions should be applied to people vulnerable to the rhythm disruption during the COVID-19 pandemic. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Examining the Relationship Between Hospital-Community Partnerships and COVID-19 Case-Fatality Rates.

Abtract During the COVID-19 pandemic, hospitals across the United States were tasked to develop partnerships with other hospitals and community organizations to overcome the unexpected challenges. The aim of this study is to examine COVID-19 case-fatality rates and explore their relationship with hospital-community partnerships. This study employed a cross-sectional design using a multilevel generalized linear model with a Poisson regression distribution and publicly available COVID-19 mortality data from February to October 2020 across 2526 hospital service areas (HSAs). HSAs with a greater number of partnerships were found to have a reduced risk of higher case-fatality rates than those with fewer health system partnerships. The findings indicated the need for greater cooperation between individual health care systems, state and local governments, and community programs for better outcomes in the ongoing and evolving COVID-19 pandemic, and to be better prepared for future pandemics or large-scale public health crises. This study provides the necessary insights for policy makers, hospital administrators, and public health leaders to understand the critical importance of community partnerships and their influence on reducing the COVID-19 case-fatality rate, as well as their potential effects on improving the health of vulnerable populations as a means to achieve the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's goal of achieving health equity. This research illustrates the need for further inquiries into the importance of these health care partnerships for positive health care outcomes.

Medicare and telehealth: The impact of COVID-19 pandemic.

STUDY RATIONALE: The swift progression of the COVID-19 pandemic appeared to facilitate the increase in telehealth utilization. However, it is clear neither how telehealth was offered by providers nor how it was used by patients during this time of unusual and rapid change within the health industry. AIM: To investigates the telehealth utilization patterns of Medicare beneficiaries during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A cross-sectional study design was used to examine the responses of 9686 Medicare beneficiaries to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey, Fall 2020 COVID-19 Supplement. Multiple logistic regression analyses were conducted to examine the relationship between telehealth offering and beneficiaries' sociodemographic variables. RESULTS: Over half (58%) of primary care providers provided telehealth services, while only 26%-28% of specialists did. Less than 8% of Medicare beneficiaries reported that they were unable to obtain care because of COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: This research found that changes in Medicare policy, associated with CMS' declaration of telehealth waivers during the Public Health Emergency (PHE), likely increased the proliferation and utilization of telehealth services during the COVID-19 pandemic, providing important access to care for certain populations. With the impending conclusion of the PHE, policymakers must 1) ascertain which elements of the new telehealth landscape will be retained, 2) modernize the regulatory, accreditation and reimbursement framework to maintain pace with care model innovation and 3) address disparities in access to broadband connectivity with a particular focus on rural and underserved communities.

The difference of disrupted rhythms of life, work and entertainment between patients with FGIDs and healthy people and their associations with psychological disorders under COVID-19 pandemic.

AIMS: To investigate the differences in disrupted rhythms between healthy people and patients with functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs) and their associations with mood disorders during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: The rhythm scales were composed of subscales 1 and 2 for the assessment of life-work and entertainment rhythms, respectively; Zung's Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) and Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS) were used to assess mood disorders. RESULTS: A total of 671 patients with FGIDs and 4373 healthy people successfully participated. The scores of subscales 1 and 2 for patients with FGIDs were significantly higher than those for healthy people (p < .005). The SAS and SDS scores, their prevalence rates were significantly higher than those for the healthy group (all p < .001). Health status, current occupation, life-work rhythm, SDS, and SAS were independent related factors of FGIDs. The score of life-work-entertainment rhythm was significantly positively correlated with SDS and SAS (both p < .001). CONCLUSION: Disrupted rhythms in patients with FGIDs under the COVID-19 pandemic were more frequently and significantly positively associated with mood disorders.

Constructing and Communicating COVID-19 Stigma on Twitter: A Content Analysis of Tweets during the Early Stage of the COVID-19 Outbreak.

This study focuses on stigma communication about COVID-19 on Twitter in the early stage of the outbreak, given the lack of information and rapid global expansion of new cases during this period. Guided by the model of stigma communication, we examine four types of message content, namely mark, group labeling, responsibility, and peril, that are instrumental in forming stigma beliefs and sharing stigma messages. We also explore whether the presence of misinformation and conspiracy theories in COVID-19-related tweets is associated with the presence of COVID-19 stigma content. A total of 155,353 unique COVID-19-related tweets posted between December 31, 2019, and March 13, 2020, were identified, from which 7000 tweets were randomly selected for manual coding. Results showed that the peril of COVID-19 was mentioned the most often, followed by mark, responsibility, and group labeling content. Tweets with conspiracy theories were more likely to include group labeling and responsibility information, but less likely to mention COVID-19 peril. Public health agencies should be aware of the unintentional stigmatization of COVID-19 in public health messages and the urgency to engage and educate the public about the facts of COVID-19.