Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
J Behav Health Serv Res ; 2022 May 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1864451

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic caused disruptions in behavioral health services (BHS), essential for people experiencing homelessness (PEH). BHS changes created barriers to care and opportunities for innovative strategies for reaching PEH. The authors conducted 50 qualitative interviews with behavioral health providers in the USA during August-October 2020 to explore their observations of BHS changes for PEH. Interviews were transcribed and entered into MAXQDA for analysis and to identify salient themes. The largest impact from COVID-19 was the closure or limited hours for BHS and homeless shelters due to mandated "stay-at-home" orders or staff working remotely leading to a disconnection in services and housing linkages. Most providers initiated telehealth services for clients, yielding positive outcomes. Implications for BHS are the need for long-term strategies, such as advances in communication technology to support BHS and homeless services and to ensure the needs of underserved populations are met during public health emergencies.

2.
Public Health Rep ; 137(4): 764-773, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1784976

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: SARS-CoV-2 testing is a critical component of preventing the spread of COVID-19. In the United States, people experiencing homelessness (PEH) have accessed testing at health clinics, such as those provided through Health Care for the Homeless (HCH) clinics or through community-based testing events at homeless service sites or encampments. We describe data on SARS-CoV-2 testing among PEH in US clinic- and community-based settings from March through November 2020. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive analysis of data from HCH clinics and community testing events. We used a standardized survey to request data from HCH clinics. We developed and made publicly available an online data entry portal to collect data from community-based organizations that provided testing for PEH. We assessed positivity rates across clinics and community service sites serving PEH and used generalized linear mixed models to account for clustering. RESULTS: Thirty-seven HCH clinics reported providing 280 410 tests; 3.2% (n = 8880) had positive results (range, 1.6%-4.9%). By race, positivity rates were highest among people who identified as >1 race (11.6%; P < .001). During the reporting period, 22 states reported 287 community testing events and 14 116 tests; 7.1% (n = 1004) had positive results. Among facility types, day shelters (380 of 2697; 14.1%) and inpatient drug/alcohol rehabilitation facilities (32 of 251; 12.7%) reported the highest positivity rates. CONCLUSIONS: While HCH clinic data provided results for a larger number of patients, community-based testing data showed higher positivity rates. Clinic data demonstrated racial disparities in positivity. Community-based testing data provided information about SARS-CoV-2 transmission settings. Although these data provide information about testing, standard surveillance systems are needed to better understand the incidence of disease among PEH.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Homeless Persons , Ambulatory Care Facilities , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
3.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(1): e2143407, 2022 01 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1620077

ABSTRACT

Importance: People experiencing incarceration (PEI) and people experiencing homelessness (PEH) have an increased risk of COVID-19 exposure from congregate living, but data on their hospitalization course compared with that of the general population are limited. Objective: To compare COVID-19 hospitalizations for PEI and PEH with hospitalizations among the general population. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional analysis used data from the Premier Healthcare Database on 3415 PEI and 9434 PEH who were evaluated in the emergency department or were hospitalized in more than 800 US hospitals for COVID-19 from April 1, 2020, to June 30, 2021. Exposures: Incarceration or homelessness. Main Outcomes and Measures: Hospitalization proportions were calculated. and outcomes (intensive care unit admission, invasive mechanical ventilation [IMV], mortality, length of stay, and readmissions) among PEI and PEH were compared with outcomes for all patients with COVID-19 (not PEI or PEH). Multivariable regression was used to adjust for potential confounders. Results: In total, 3415 PEI (2952 men [86.4%]; mean [SD] age, 50.8 [15.7] years) and 9434 PEH (6776 men [71.8%]; mean [SD] age, 50.1 [14.5] years) were evaluated in the emergency department for COVID-19 and were hospitalized more often (2170 of 3415 [63.5%] PEI; 6088 of 9434 [64.5%] PEH) than the general population (624 470 of 1 257 250 [49.7%]) (P < .001). Both PEI and PEH hospitalized for COVID-19 were more likely to be younger, male, and non-Hispanic Black than the general population. Hospitalized PEI had a higher frequency of IMV (410 [18.9%]; adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.16; 95% CI, 1.04-1.30) and mortality (308 [14.2%]; aRR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.11-1.47) than the general population (IMV, 88 897 [14.2%]; mortality, 84 725 [13.6%]). Hospitalized PEH had a lower frequency of IMV (606 [10.0%]; aRR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.58-0.70) and mortality (330 [5.4%]; aRR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.47-0.59) than the general population. Both PEI and PEH had longer mean (SD) lengths of stay (PEI, 9 [10] days; PEH, 11 [26] days) and a higher frequency of readmission (PEI, 128 [5.9%]; PEH, 519 [8.5%]) than the general population (mean [SD] length of stay, 8 [10] days; readmission, 28 493 [4.6%]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, a higher frequency of COVID-19 hospitalizations for PEI and PEH underscored the importance of adhering to recommended prevention measures. Expanding medical respite may reduce hospitalizations in these disproportionately affected populations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Homeless Persons/statistics & numerical data , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Prisoners/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Cross-Sectional Studies , Databases, Factual , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , United States
4.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 27(12): 2999-3008, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1485010

ABSTRACT

Outcomes and costs of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) contact tracing are limited. During March-May 2020, we constructed transmission chains from 184 index cases and 1,499 contacts in Salt Lake County, Utah, USA, to assess outcomes and estimate staff time and salaries. We estimated 1,102 staff hours and $29,234 spent investigating index cases and contacts. Among contacts, 374 (25%) had COVID-19; secondary case detection rate was ≈31% among first-generation contacts, ≈16% among second- and third-generation contacts, and ≈12% among fourth-, fifth-, and sixth-generation contacts. At initial interview, 51% (187/370) of contacts were COVID-19-positive; 35% (98/277) became positive during 14-day quarantine. Median time from symptom onset to investigation was 7 days for index cases and 4 days for first-generation contacts. Contact tracing reduced the number of cases between contact generations and time between symptom onset and investigation but required substantial resources. Our findings can help jurisdictions allocate resources for contact tracing.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Contact Tracing , Humans , Quarantine , SARS-CoV-2 , Utah/epidemiology
5.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(7): 1805-1813, 2021 10 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1455252

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The evidence base for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is nascent. We sought to characterize SARS-CoV-2 transmission within US households and estimate the household secondary infection rate (SIR) to inform strategies to reduce transmission. METHODS: We recruited patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and their household contacts in Utah and Wisconsin during 22 March 2020-25 April 2020. We interviewed patients and all household contacts to obtain demographics and medical histories. At the initial household visit, 14 days later, and when a household contact became newly symptomatic, we collected respiratory swabs from patients and household contacts for testing by SARS-CoV-2 real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) and sera for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies testing by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). We estimated SIR and odds ratios (ORs) to assess risk factors for secondary infection, defined by a positive rRT-PCR or ELISA test. RESULTS: Thirty-two (55%) of 58 households secondary infection among household contacts. The SIR was 29% (n = 55/188; 95% confidence interval [CI], 23%-36%) overall, 42% among children (aged <18 years) of the COVID-19 patient and 33% among spouses/partners. Household contacts to COVID-19 patients with immunocompromised conditions and household contacts who themselves had diabetes mellitus had increased odds of infection with ORs 15.9 (95% CI, 2.4-106.9) and 7.1 (95% CI: 1.2-42.5), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We found substantial evidence of secondary infections among household contacts. People with COVID-19, particularly those with immunocompromising conditions or those with household contacts with diabetes, should take care to promptly self-isolate to prevent household transmission.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Child , Contact Tracing , Family Characteristics , Humans , United States/epidemiology , Wisconsin
6.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(7): e1841-e1849, 2021 10 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1455251

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Improved understanding of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spectrum of disease is essential for clinical and public health interventions. There are limited data on mild or asymptomatic infections, but recognition of these individuals is key as they contribute to viral transmission. We describe the symptom profiles from individuals with mild or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: From 22 March to 22 April 2020 in Wisconsin and Utah, we enrolled and prospectively observed 198 household contacts exposed to SARS-CoV-2. We collected and tested nasopharyngeal specimens by real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) 2 or more times during a 14-day period. Contacts completed daily symptom diaries. We characterized symptom profiles on the date of first positive rRT-PCR test and described progression of symptoms over time. RESULTS: We identified 47 contacts, median age 24 (3-75) years, with detectable SARS-CoV-2 by rRT-PCR. The most commonly reported symptoms on the day of first positive rRT-PCR test were upper respiratory (n = 32 [68%]) and neurologic (n = 30 [64%]); fever was not commonly reported (n = 9 [19%]). Eight (17%) individuals were asymptomatic at the date of first positive rRT-PCR collection; 2 (4%) had preceding symptoms that resolved and 6 (13%) subsequently developed symptoms. Children less frequently reported lower respiratory symptoms (21%, 60%, and 69% for <18, 18-49, and ≥50 years of age, respectively; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Household contacts with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection reported mild symptoms. When assessed at a single timepoint, several contacts appeared to have asymptomatic infection; however, over time all developed symptoms. These findings are important to inform infection control, contact tracing, and community mitigation strategies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Child , Contact Tracing , Fever , Humans , Prospective Studies , Young Adult
7.
Ann Epidemiol ; 59: 50-55, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1198609

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Contact tracing is intended to reduce the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but it is difficult to conduct among people who live in congregate settings, including people experiencing homelessness (PEH). This analysis compares person-based contact tracing among two populations in Salt Lake County, Utah, from March-May 2020. METHODS: All laboratory-confirmed positive cases among PEH (n = 169) and documented in Utah's surveillance system were included in this analysis. The general population comparison group (n = 163) were systematically selected from all laboratory-confirmed cases identified during the same period. RESULTS: Ninety-three PEH cases (55%) were interviewed compared to 163 (100%) cases among the general population (P < .0001). PEH were more likely to be lost to follow-up at end of isolation (14.2%) versus the general population (0%; P-value < .0001) and provided fewer contacts per case (0.3) than the general population (4.7) (P-value < .0001). Contacts of PEH were more often unreachable (13.0% vs. 7.1%; P-value < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that contact tracing among PEH should include a location-based approach, along with a person-based approach when resources allow, due to challenges in identifying, locating, and reaching cases among PEH and their contacts through person-based contact tracing efforts alone.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Homeless Persons , Contact Tracing , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Utah/epidemiology
8.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 27(2): 352-359, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-961594

ABSTRACT

Virus shedding in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can occur before onset of symptoms; less is known about symptom progression or infectiousness associated with initiation of viral shedding. We investigated household transmission in 5 households with daily specimen collection for 5 consecutive days starting a median of 4 days after symptom onset in index patients. Seven contacts across 2 households implementing no precautionary measures were infected. Of these 7, 2 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by reverse transcription PCR on day 3 of 5. Both had mild, nonspecific symptoms for 1-3 days preceding the first positive test. SARS-CoV-2 was cultured from the fourth-day specimen in 1 patient and from the fourth- and fifth-day specimens in the other. We also describe infection control measures taken in the households that had no transmission. Persons exposed to SARS-CoV-2 should self-isolate, including from household contacts, wear a mask, practice hand hygiene, and seek testing promptly.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/transmission , Disease Transmission, Infectious/statistics & numerical data , Environmental Exposure/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Virus Shedding , Adolescent , Adult , Child , Disease Transmission, Infectious/prevention & control , Environmental Exposure/prevention & control , Family Characteristics , Female , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Male , Middle Aged , Specimen Handling , Time Factors , Utah
9.
Pediatrics ; 147(1)2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-839914

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Limited data exist on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in children. We described infection rates and symptom profiles among pediatric household contacts of individuals with coronavirus disease 2019. METHODS: We enrolled individuals with coronavirus disease 2019 and their household contacts, assessed daily symptoms prospectively for 14 days, and obtained specimens for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and serology testing. Among pediatric contacts (<18 years), we described transmission, assessed the risk factors for infection, and calculated symptom positive and negative predictive values. We compared secondary infection rates and symptoms between pediatric and adult contacts using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Among 58 households, 188 contacts were enrolled (120 adults; 68 children). Secondary infection rates for adults (30%) and children (28%) were similar. Among households with potential for transmission from children, child-to-adult transmission may have occurred in 2 of 10 (20%), and child-to-child transmission may have occurred in 1 of 6 (17%). Pediatric case patients most commonly reported headache (79%), sore throat (68%), and rhinorrhea (68%); symptoms had low positive predictive values, except measured fever (100%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 44% to 100%). Compared with symptomatic adults, children were less likely to report cough (odds ratio [OR]: 0.15; 95% CI: 0.04 to 0.57), loss of taste (OR: 0.21; 95% CI: 0.06 to 0.74), and loss of smell (OR: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.96) and more likely to report sore throat (OR: 3.4; 95% CI: 1.04 to 11.18). CONCLUSIONS: Children and adults had similar secondary infection rates, but children generally had less frequent and severe symptoms. In two states early in the pandemic, we observed possible transmission from children in approximately one-fifth of households with potential to observe such transmission patterns.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/trends , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/diagnosis , Child , Child, Preschool , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Infant , Male , Middle Aged , Utah/epidemiology , Wisconsin/epidemiology , Young Adult
10.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 69(37): 1319-1323, 2020 Sep 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-782536

ABSTRACT

Reports suggest that children aged ≥10 years can efficiently transmit SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (1,2). However, limited data are available on SARS-CoV-2 transmission from young children, particularly in child care settings (3). To better understand transmission from young children, contact tracing data collected from three COVID-19 outbreaks in child care facilities in Salt Lake County, Utah, during April 1-July 10, 2020, were retrospectively reviewed to explore attack rates and transmission patterns. A total of 184 persons, including 110 (60%) children had a known epidemiologic link to one of these three facilities. Among these persons, 31 confirmed COVID-19 cases occurred; 13 (42%) in children. Among pediatric patients with facility-associated confirmed COVID-19, all had mild or no symptoms. Twelve children acquired COVID-19 in child care facilities. Transmission was documented from these children to at least 12 (26%) of 46 nonfacility contacts (confirmed or probable cases). One parent was hospitalized. Transmission was observed from two of three children with confirmed, asymptomatic COVID-19. Detailed contact tracing data show that children can play a role in transmission from child care settings to household contacts. Having SARS-CoV-2 testing available, timely results, and testing of contacts of persons with COVID-19 in child care settings regardless of symptoms can help prevent transmission. CDC guidance for child care programs recommends the use of face masks, particularly among staff members, especially when children are too young to wear masks, along with hand hygiene, frequent cleaning and disinfecting of high-touch surfaces, and staying home when ill to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission (4).


Subject(s)
Child Day Care Centers , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Disease Outbreaks , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Child , Child, Preschool , Cities/epidemiology , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Contact Tracing , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Female , Humans , Infant , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Utah/epidemiology , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL