Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Am J Public Health ; 112(5): 762-765, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1760055

ABSTRACT

Objectives. To examine whether COVID-19 vaccine mandates that allow a test-out exemption for nursing home staff are associated with increased staff vaccination rates in nursing homes. Methods. Using the National Healthcare Safety Network data, we conducted analyses to test trends over time in statewide staff vaccination rates between June 1, 2021, and August 29, 2021, in Mississippi, 4 adjacent states, and the United States overall. Results. COVID-19 staff vaccination rates increased slowly following Mississippi enacting a vaccinate-or-test-out policy, achieving small, but statistically greater gains than most comparator states. Yet, staff vaccination rates in Mississippi remained well below the national average and similar numerically to surrounding states without mandates. Conclusions. Mississippi's COVID-19 vaccinate-or-test policy was ineffective in meaningfully increasing staff vaccination rates. For COVID-19 nursing home mandates to be effective while still balancing the staff turnover risks, facilities might consider a more stringent or hybrid approach (e.g., test-out option not offered to new staff). Public Health Implications. Statewide COVID-19 vaccine mandates, when given a test-out option, do not appear to be an effective strategy to meaningfully increase nursing home staff COVID-19 vaccination. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(5):762-765. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.306800).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Nursing Homes , Policy , SARS-CoV-2 , United States , Vaccination
2.
J Am Geriatr Soc ; 70(1): 19-28, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526377

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: After the first of three COVID-19 vaccination clinics in U.S. nursing homes (NHs), the median vaccination coverage of staff was 37.5%, indicating the need to identify strategies to increase staff coverage. We aimed at comparing the facility-level activities, policies, incentives, and communication methods associated with higher staff COVID-19 vaccination coverage. METHODS: Design. Case-control analysis. SETTING: Nationally stratified random sample of 1338 U.S. NHs participating in the Pharmacy Partnership for Long-Term Care Program. PARTICIPANTS: Nursing home leadership. MEASUREMENT: During February 4-March 2, 2021, we surveyed NHs with low (<35%), medium (40%-60%), and high (>75%) staff vaccination coverage, to collect information on facility strategies used to encourage staff vaccination. Cases were respondents with medium and high vaccination coverage, whereas controls were respondents with low coverage. We used logistic regression modeling, adjusted for county and NH characteristics, to identify strategies associated with facility-level vaccination coverage. RESULTS: We obtained responses from 413 of 1338 NHs (30.9%). Compared with facilities with lower staff vaccination coverage, facilities with medium or high coverage were more likely to have designated frontline staff champions (medium: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.6, 95% CI 1.3-10.3; high: aOR 2.9, 95% CI 1.1-7.7) and set vaccination goals (medium: aOR 2.4, 95% 1.0-5.5; high: aOR 3.7, 95% CI 1.6-8.3). NHs with high vaccination coverage were more likely to have given vaccinated staff rewards such as T-shirts compared with NHs with low coverage (aOR 3.8, 95% CI 1.3-11.0). Use of multiple strategies was associated with greater likelihood of facilities having medium or high vaccination coverage: For example, facilities that used ≥9 strategies were three times more likely to have high staff vaccination coverage than facilities using <6 strategies (aOR 3.3, 95% CI 1.2-8.9). CONCLUSIONS: Use of designated champions, setting targets, and use of non-monetary awards were associated with high NH staff COVID-19 vaccination coverage.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19/prevention & control , Nursing Homes , Nursing Staff/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Case-Control Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Motivation , Reward , United States
3.
IEEE Internet of Things Journal ; 8(21):15818-15828, 2021.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1494315

ABSTRACT

Assessments of postural control provide important insights into health. We created a smartphone App-based assessment of standing posture—completed with the phone placed in the user’s pocket—to enable remote monitoring of the function while minimizing the need for in-person assessment or contact. We tested the reliability of App-derived postural sway metrics, as well as their sensitivity to age and task conditions. Fifteen older and 15 younger adults completed two separate laboratory visits. They followed multimedia instructions provided by the App to complete three 30-s trials of eyes-open (EO), eyes-closed (EC), and dual-task (DT) standing. Sway data were recorded by the App and a force plate. Participants also used the App to complete the assessment in their homes on three separate days. Sway path length and root-mean square were derived from the angular velocity and acceleration acquired from phone’s internal motion sensor, and from the center-of-pressure signal from force plate. App-derived path length and root-mean-square of acceleration and angular velocity across conditions demonstrated moderate-to-excellent test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) = 0.69 − 0.97) for both younger and older adults. Reliability was comparable to metrics derived from the force plate (ICCs = 0.44 − 0.93). As expected, App-derived sway outcomes exhibited somewhat greater variability when tested across days at home (ICCs = 0.14 − 0.79). All App-derived metrics were sensitive to age ([Formula Omitted], [Formula Omitted]) and testing condition ([Formula Omitted], [Formula Omitted]) in both laboratory and home settings, revealing that the smartphone App enabled reliable and sensitive assessment of standing posture in both healthy younger and older adults.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL